THE
FORMING A CONTINUATION OF THE WORK ENTITLED
"THE PARLIAMENTARY HISTORY OF ENGLAND
FROM THE EARLIEST PERIOD TO THE YEAR 1803."
PUBLISHED UNDER THE SUPERINTENDENCE OF
T. C. HANSARD.
New Series:
COMMENCING WITH THE ACCESSION OF GEORGE IV.
VOL. VII.
COMPRISING THE PERIOD
FROM
THE TWENTY-FOURTH DAY OF APRIL,
TO
THE SIXTH DAY OF AUGUST, 1822.
LONDON:
PRINTED BY T. C. HANSARD, PETERBOROUGH-COURT, FLEET-STREET;
FOR BALDWIN, CRADOCK, AND JOY; J. BOOKER; LONGMAN, HURST, REES, ORME, AND BROWN; J. M. RICHARDSON; BLACK, KINGSBURY, PARBURY, AND ALLEN; J. HATCHARD & SON; J. RIDGWAY & SONS; E. JEFFERY & SON; RODWELL & MARTIN; R. H. EVANS; BUDD AND CALKIN; J. BOOTH; AND T. C. HANSARD.
1823.
THE
New Series,
VOL. VII.
All Communications for this Work, if forwarded to Mr. WRIGHT, No. 28, Panton-Street, or to Mr. T. C. HANSARD, Peterborough Court, Fleet-Street, will be carefully attended to; but as an early publication of the proceedings of each Session is extremely desirable, it is respectfully requested that such Communications may be forwarded with as little delay as possible.
Of the same Proprietors may be had, in Thirty-six Volumes,
THE
FROM THE EARLIEST PERIOD
TO THE YEAR 1803.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
NEW SERIES.
I. DEBATES IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS.
II. DEBATES IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS.
III. KING'S SPEECHES.
IV. PARLIAMENTARY PAPERS.
V. PROTESTS.
VI. LISTS.
I. DEBATES IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS.
Page
1822. Apr 29. Scarcity of Provisions in Ireland
141
1822. May 3. Scots Representative Peers
314
1822. May 6. Agricultural Distress, and the Measures for its Relief
325
1822. May 10. Scarcity of Provisions in Ireland
470
1822. May 17. Scarcity of Provisions in Ireland
671
1822. May 23. Irish Poor Employment Bill
725
1822. June 7. Bishop of Peterborough's Examination Questions
824
1822. June 13. Bankrupt Laws
1028
1822. June 14. The Marquis of Lansdown's Motion on the State of Ireland
1045
1822. June 17. Navigation Laws
1119
1822. June 18. Marriage Act Amendment Bill
1128
1822. June 19. Marriage Act Amendment
1143
Marriage Act Amendment Bill
1198
1822. June 21. Roman Catholic Peers Bill
1216
1822. June 25. Naval and Military Pensions Bill
1319
1822. June 26. Marriage Act Amendment Bill
1373
1822. June 27. Naval and Military Pensions Bill
1396
1822. July 2. Marriage Act Amendment Bill
1452
1822. July 5. Corn Importation Bill
1504
1822. July 10. Corn Importation Bill
1556
1822. July 16. Small Notes Bill
1661
1822. July 17. Greek Hostages at Constantinople
1665
1822. July 19. Irish Insurrection, Bill
1714
1822. July 29. Aliens Regulation Bill
1851
1822. Aug. 6. The Speaker's Speech at the Close of the Session
1867
II. DEBATES IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS.
1822. Apr. 24. Ilchester Gaol—Treatment of Mr. Hunt
1
Sir Francis Burdett's Motion to remit the remainder of Mr. Hunt's Imprisonment
2
1822. Apr. 25. Petition for a Reform of Parliament
49
Lord John Russell's Motion for a Reform of Parliament
51
1822. Apr. 29. Agricultural Distress
142
Scarcity of Provisions in Ireland
146
Agricultural Distress, and the Financial and other Measures for its Relief
150
1822. Apr. 30. Roman Catholic Claims
210
Roman Catholic Peers Bill
211
1822. May 1. Reform of Parliament
280
Naval and Military Pensions
280
1822. May 2. Alterations of the Currency
297
Lord Normanby's Motion respecting the Office of Joint Postmaster-General
298
1822. May 3. Joint Postmaster-General
315
Naval and Military Pensions
316
1822. May 6. Licensing Public Houses
327
Agricultural Distress Report
333
1822. May 7. Newspapers—Government Advertisements
365
Fees of Consuls
366
Agricultural Distress Report
371
1822. May 8. Complaint against "The Morning Chronicle"
421
Agricultural Distress Report
423
1822. May 9. Agricultural Distress Report
454
1822. May 10. Roman Catholic Peers Bill
475
Ilchester Gaol
518
1822. May 13. Salford Hundred Court Extension Bill
518
Agricultural Distress Report
520
1822. May 14. Ale-houses Licensing Bill
560
Mr. Hume's Motion respecting the State of the Ionian Islands
562
1822. May 15. Tithes on Potatoes in Ireland
597
Mr. Lennard's Motion respecting the Third Class of the Civil List—Diplomatic Expenditure
604
1822. May 16. Absentees
653
1822. May 16, Mr. Warre's Motion respecting the Embassy to the Swiss Cantons
659
Irish Poor Employment Bill
670
1822. May 17. Roman Catholic Peers Bill
673
West India and American Trade Bill
673
Colonial Trade Bill
674
Irish Poor Employment Bill
698
1822. May 18. Irish Linen Trade
701
1822. May 20. Marriage Act Amendment Bill
702
Navigation Bill
708
1822. May 21. Irish Payment of Rent Bill
721
Irish Civil List
722
1822. May 23. Welch Judicature
728
1822. May 24. Ale-houses Licensing Bill
735
Naval and Military Pensions
737
Ill Treatment of Cattle Bill
758
1822. May 30. Welch Judicature Bill
759
1822. May 31. Bank Charter
760
Poor Removal Bill
761
1822. June 3. Reform of Parliament—Remonstrance and Petition from Greenhoe
779
Naval and Military Pensions
782
Corn Importation Bill
788
1822. June 4. Sir James Mackintosh's Motion respecting the Efficacy of the Criminal Laws
790
Aliens Regulation Bill
805
1822. June 7. Yorkshire Elections Polls Bill
816
Irish Constables Bill
852
III Treatment of Cattle Bill
873
1822. June 10. Corn Importation Bill
874
1822. June 11. Mr. Western's Motion concerning the Resumption of Cash Payments
877
1822. June 12. Mr. Western's Motion concerning the Resumption of Cash Payments
928
1822. June 13. Irish Tithes Leasing Bill
1029
1822. June 14. Reform of Parliament—Kent Petition
1078
Aliens Regulation Bill
1092
1822. June 17. Labourers Wages
1122
Scarcity of Provisions in Ireland
1123
Scotch Burghs Accounts Bill
1126
1822. June 19. County Court of Middlesex
1145
Mr. Hume's Motion respecting Tithes; and the Church Establishment in Ireland
1147
1822. June 23. Canada Government and Trade Bill
1199
Scotch Juries Bill
1200
Irish Butter Trade
1210
1822. June 21. Warehousing Bill
1264
Irish Poor Employment Bill
1265
1822. June 24. Mr. Brougham's Motion respecting the Influence now possessed by the Crown
1265
1822. June 25. Mr. Abercromby's Motion respecting the Conduct of the Lord Advocate, with relation to the Public Press of Scotland
1324
1822. June 26. Mr. M. A. Taylor's Motion respecting the Vice Chancellor's Court
1374
Mr. Creevey's Motion respecting the Ministerial Pensions Bill
1381
1822. June 27. Ale-houses Licensing Bill
1397
Mr. Wilberforce's Motion respecting the Slave Trade
1399
1822. June 28. Mr. Saurin's Letter to Lord Norbury
1406
Salt Duties
1407
1822. July 1. The Budget
1413
Aliens Regulation Bill
1433
1822. July 2. Small Notes Bill
1456
Excise Licenses Regulation Bill
1457
Mr. Hobhouse's Motion for the Repeal of the House and Window Tax
1458
Irish Insurrection Bill
1498
1822. July 4. Chief Baron of Ireland
1500
Petition of the Calcutta Bankers
1502
1822. July 5. Maritime Rights
1511
National Monument in Scotland
1513
Army Extraordinaries
1514
1822. July 8. Small Notes
1521
Irish Insurrection Bill
1522
1822. July 9. Breach of Privilege—Complaint against Mr. Hope and Mr. Menzies
1548
1822. July 10. Mr. Nolan's Motion respecting the Poor Laws
1560
Mr. Western's Motion respecting the altered State of the Currency
1506
1822. July 12. Breach of Privilege—Complaint against Mr. Hope and Mr. Menzies
1634
Marriage Act Amendment Bill
1635
1822. July 15. Maritime Rights—Detention of The Lord Collingwood
1648
Cause of the Greeks
1649
Irish Insurrection Bill
1653
Consuls in the Brazils
1658
National Monument in Scotland
1660
1822. July 17. Breach of Privilege—Complaint against Mr. Hope and Mr. Menzies
1668
1822. July 18. Retail of Beer Bill
1692
Canada Government and Trade Bill
1698
1822. July 19. Steam Boats—Foreigners at Gravesend
1716
Aliens Regulation Bill
1717
1822. July 23 British Commerce—Piracy in the West Indies
1725
Canada Government and Trade Bill
1729
Mr. Lennard's Motion respecting the Recognition of the Columbian Republic
1731
1822. July 24. Poor Rates in Ireland
1736
Ancient Historians
1737
1822. July 25. Mr. Hume's Resolutions relative to the National Debt and Sinking Fund
1740
July 25. Slavery at the Cape of Good Hope
1783
Commission of Inquiry into the State of the Colonies
1801
1822. July 26. Superannuation Act Amendment Bill
1844
Colonial Commission of Inquiry
1850
1822. July 30. British Commerce—Piracy in the West Indies
1858
III. KING'S SPEECHES.
1822. Aug. 6. KING'S SPEECH at the Close of the Session
1870
IV. PARLIAMENTARY PAPERS.
FINANCE ACCOUNTS for the Year ending 5th January, 1822
App
V. PROTESTS.
1822. July 2. PROTEST against the Marriage Act Amendment Bill
1455
1822. July 10. PROTEST against the Corn Importation Bill
1557
1822. July 29. PROTEST against the Aliens Regulation Bill
1857
VI. LISTS.
1822. Apr. 24. LIST of the Minority on Sir Francis Burdett's Motion to remit the remainder of Mr. Hunt's Imprisonment
49
1822. Apr. 25. LIST of the Minority, on Lord John Russell's Motion for a Reform of Parliament
139
1822. Apr. 30. LIST of the Minority, in the House of Commons, on the Roman Catholic Peers Bill
278
1822. May 2. LIST of the Majority, on Lord Normanby's Motion for abolishing the Office of one of the Post-Masters General
312
1822. May 3. LIST of the Minority, in the House of Commons, on the Payment of the Naval and Military Pensions
324
1822. May 8. LIST of the Minority, on Mr. Wyvill's Amendment to the Resolutions on the Agricultural Distress
435
LIST of the Minority, on Sir T. Lethbridge's Amendment to the Resolutions on the Agricultural Distress
453
1822. May 9. LIST of the Minority, on Lord Althorp's Amendment to the Resolutions on the Agricultural Distress
469
LIST of the Minority, on Mr. Ricardo's Amendment to the Resolutions on the Agricultural Distress
470
1822. May 14. LIST of the Minority, on Mr. Hume's Motion respecting the State of the Ionian Islands
596
1822. May 15. LIST of the Minority, on Mr. Lennard's Motion respecting the Third Class of the Civil List—Diplomatic Expenditure
652
1822. May 16. LIST of the Minority, on Mr. Warre's Motion respecting the Embassy to the Swiss Cantons
669
1822. May 24. LIST of the Minority, on Mr. Hume's Amendment to the Resolutions respecting Naval and Military Pensions
758
1822. June 3. LIST of the Minority, in the House of Commons, on the Motion for receiving a Remonstrance and Petition for a Reform for Parliament, from Greenhoe
781
LIST of the Minority, on Mr. Hume's Amendment to the Report of the Committee on Naval and Military Pensions
785
1822. June 7. LIST of the Minority, in the House of Commons, on the Irish Constables Bill
873
1822. June 10. LIST of the Minority, in the House of Commons, on the Corn Importation Bill
877
1822. June 12. LIST of the Minority, on Mr. Weston's Motion respecting the Resumption of Cash Payments
1028
1822. June 14. LIST of the Minority, in the House of Commons, on the Aliens Regulation Bill
1119
1822. June 19. LIST of the Minority, on Mr. Hume's Motion respecting Tithes, and the Church Establishment in Ireland
1197
1822. June 21. LIST of the Majority, and also of the Minority, in the House of Lords, on the Roman Catholic Peers Bill
1262
1822. June 24. LIST of the Minority, on Mr. Brougham's Motion respecting the Influence now possessed by the Crown
1318
1822. June 25. LIST of the Minority, on Mr. Abercromby's Motion respecting the conduct of the Lord Advocate with relation to the Public Press in Scotland
1372
1822. June 26. LIST of the Minority, on Mr. Creevey's Resolutions respecting the Ministerial Pensions Bill
1395
1822. July 1. LIST of the Minority, in the House of Commons, on the Aliens Regulation Bill
1451
1822. July 8. LIST of the Minority, in the House of Commons, on the Irish Insurrection Bill
1547
1822. July 19. LIST of the Minority, in the House of Commons, on the Aliens Regulation Bill
1725
PARLIAMENTARY INDEX.
The Editor is preparing for the Press, to be comprised in Two Volumes:
I. A GENERAL INDEX to the Parliamentary History of England, from the earliest Period to the Year 1803: and
II. A GENERAL INDEX to the Parliamentary Debates from the Year 1803, to the Accession of GEOMOE THE FOURTH, in 1820.
The two Volumes will form a complete Parliamentary Dictionary, or ready Book of Reference to every subject of importance that has, at any time, come before Parliament. The great utility of such a Work, not only to Members of the two Houses, but to every Lawyer and Politician, must be self-evident. As many gentlemen, who have not been regular subscribers to the two Works, may nevertheless be desirous of possessing a General Index to the Parliamentary History of their Country, such gentlemen are requested to send in their names to the publishers; as only a limited number of Copies, beyond the usual impression, will be printed.
During the Third Session of the Seventh Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, appointed to meet at Westminster, the Fifth Day of February 1822, in the Third Year of the Reign of His Majesty King GEORGE the Fourth.
1822.
1
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Wednesday, April 24, 1822.
ILCHESTER GOAL—TREATMENT OF
The Marquis of Titchfield
presented a petition from Lynn, praying the interference of the House for a remission of the remainder of Mr. Hunt's imprisonment. The noble marquis read an extract from the petition, in which it spoke of "the unrelenting severity practised towards the victim of ministerial hate, by the petty tyrants in whose power be was placed." The petition then referred, as a precedent for the interference of the House on the present occasion, to their having interfered to procure the remission of the punishment of sir Manasseh Lopez, whose crime was ten thousand times greater than the one imputed to Mr. Hunt. The noble marquis said, he fully concurred in the prayer of the petition, but although he concurred in the prayer, he differed from the petitioners in the reasons which they assigned; for, notwithstanding all he felt upon this subject, it did appear to him that ministers had done no more than their duty in ordering the prosecution of Mr. Hunt. For courts of justice he had the highest respect, and he should not, therefore, be disposed to listen to any thing against their decisions, without the strongest grounds; but the same respect for them made him wish, that they should not become the innocent instruments of unnecessary severity. In looking at the sentence on Mr. Hunt, he certainly did think it a severe one; and it had been rendered much more so, by the great severity with
2
Ordered to lie on the table.
MOTION TO REMIT THE REMAINDER
Sir Francis Burdett
said, that after the numerous petitions which had been presented to the House on the subject respecting which he then rose to address it, and in favour of the motion with which he intended to conclude, and after the able manner in which those petitions had been supported, and especially that presented by a noble lord from Lynn, in Norfolk, he felt somewhat embarrassed regarding the manner in which he should address them, because he thought that the noble lord, though shortly, had strongly occupied all the grounds on which he felt it
3
4
5
minimum
inter minora delicta
minima inter minora;
"actus
6
non facit reum, nisi mens sit rea";
7
8
9
10
11
l
l
12
l
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
"Who, touch'd with human woe, redressive search'd
Into the horrors of the gloomy gaol,
Unpitied and unheard, where misery moans,
Where sickness pines, where thirst and hunger burn,
And poor misfortune feels the lash of vice:
While in the land of Liberty, the land
Whose every street and public meeting glow
With open freedom, little tyrants rag'd,
Snatch'd the lean morsel from the starving mouth;
Tore from cold wintry limbs the tatter'd weed;
Ev'n robb'd them of the last comforts, sleep;
The free-born Briton to the dungeon chain'd:
Or, as the lust of cruelty prevail'd,
At pleasure mark'd him with inglorious stripes"
20
21
22
23
Mr. G. Dawson
declared, that in the observations he was about to offer, he did not mean to defend the departure which had taken place from all principles of humanity, in the conduct of the late gaoler of the prison in question. At the same time he thought that the feelings of men might seduce their judgments. No man ever went to a dungeon where he witnessed the situation of an unhappy convict, without having his compassion highly excited. He proposed to examine into the charges of cruelty preferred on the part of Mr. Hunt. The hon. baronet had
24
25
26
27
Mr. Hobhouse
, from the temperate opening of the hon. under secretary, had not at al anticipated the heat and violence of his conclusion. If such men as Wooler and Carlile endeavoured to inflame the country, such men as the hon. gentlemen and his friends did their utmost to inflame the House, to excite its passions against an unfortunate individual, by mixing up his name with those with whom he was not in any way connected. In this attempt the hon. gentleman had shown far more skill than fairness, though the portion of skill, judging at least by its effect, was indeed scanty enough. He begged the hon. gentleman to show him, if he could, what Wooler or his "seditious artifices" had to do with this debate, or how Carlile and his "odious blasphemies" affected the question before the House? He had heard of no blasphemy of Mr. Hunt's, no impiety, no infidelity. He was not so well acquainted with the writings of Mr. Hunt as the gentlemen opposite seemed to be; but there certainly was nothing of these imputations against him there; there was no such crime on the record, and he protested against the associating Mr. Hunt's name with invidious topics, merely for the purpose of diverting them from the consideration of his claims on their justice. The hon. gentleman had failed to show that the statement of his hon. colleague was in any respect exaggerated. In endeavouring to discredit the testimony of Mr. Hunt, the hon. gentleman had discredited the commissioners. Every thing which the hon. gentleman alleged in defence of
28
29
trifling
30
Mr. Dickinson
thought, that he could not better begin the observations he intended to make, than by referring to an observation that had been made on this subject, by his worthy friend, the member for Norwich, who had said, that at the commencement of the Coldbath-fields examination, the magistrates had persisted with pertinacity in defending their gaoler. He wished the conduct of the magistrates of Somerset to be contrasted with this.
31
32
33
34
Mr. Peel
said, that the strong impression he felt, that this particular subject was not fit for the consideration of that House, was a sufficient guarantee, that he would not trouble them with many observations. He felt that he might almost put it to the House, whether, in the course of the hon. baronet's speech, he had laid down any thing like sufficient grounds to induce parliament to interfere with the exclusive prerogative of the Crown, and to depart from that which had been the unvaried practice of the House ever since the Revolution? That practice was, not to express any opinion as to the continuation of a punishment awarded to an individual by a court of justice. On the propriety of adhering to that wise and rational practice, unless compelled to depart from it by some overwhelming necessity, there could be but one opinion. But, if there were one man who, more than another, ought to entertain the opinion that this practice should not be departed from, the hon. baronet was that individual. With his avowed opinions of that House—with his recorded complaints of its encroachments on the peculiar province of the Crown—he conceived that the hon. baronet ought to be the last man to propose a precedent, which, if once established would arrogate to that House a power, than which none could be conceived more fatal to the constitution; since it would have the effect of enlarging the functions of the democratic part of that constitution far beyond its useful and natural boundary. The question was simply this—was there, in this case, circumstances of that overwhelming nature, which should tempt the House to interfere with this most important prerogative—that should induce them to meddle with that peculiar attribute of the Crown, which was wholly alienated from the powers of that House, and was unconnected with the ends for which it was instituted? Before he applied himself to the particular case now before the House, he would offer a remark or two on the observation with which the hon. baronet had prefaced his speech. The hon. baronet alluded to a communication which he had had some time ago,
35
inter minora crimina;
36
37
38
l
39
Sir J. Mackintosh
said, that, before he proceeded to state the grounds on which he would give his vote, he was anxious, on account of the tone which had been adopted by the right hon. gentleman, to declare the grounds on which his vote would not rest. It did not follow, as the right hon. gentleman seemed to suppose, that those who supported the present motion approved of the conduct of Mr. Hunt. He, for one, did not approve of his conduct; but he would support the motion on general principles, and not with reference to the course which Mr. Hunt had pursued. When the right hon. gentleman asked, "Who is Mr. Hunt?" he would answer "He is an Englishman!" He knew Mr. Hunt only in that capacity. On his behalf he made no claim of favour; but he demanded whether he had, or had not, a claim of justice on that House? He should despise himself if, on account of any displeasure he might feel at Mr. Hunt's conduct, he could be induced to abstain from defending those rights of justice which were as sacred in the person of Mr. Hen; as in that of any other Englishman. He did not underrate the charge brought against Mr. Hunt: he did not arraign the verdict, nor dispute the justice of the judgment. He did not take these points into consideration, because they were foreign to the question before the House.
40
41
42
43
44
45
Mr. Wynn
said, that in the case of White the House reversed its own decision, and therefore the precedent did not apply. In the case of the rebel lords, the House of Peers, who had tried them, interfered as a jury to recommend them to mercy, and the House of Commons, who carried up the impeachment, interfered as prosecutors in the same application. This, therefore, was not a similar case.
46
Mr. Fowell Buxton
said, that having on a former occasion fully stated his opinion with respect to Mr. Hunt's sentence and treatment whilst in confinement, he would not that night have said one word, had it not been for the pointed allusion which his hon. and learned friend had made to him. His hon. and learned friend had referred to him as a kind of witness to the good conduct of Bridle. He begged the House to understand that at the time he (Mr. Buxton) visited the prison, and made a favourable report of its management, none of the evils which had since been proved to exist prevailed. He would say a few words with respect to the question before the House. He dis-
47
Mr. Estcourt
adverted to some arrangements which had been made in the prison, all of which tended to afford additional convenience to the prisoners. Mr. Hunt had appealed to him, as one of the commissioners, to bear testimony to his conduct, and he must, in justice to that individual, now say that he had seen nothing improper in it; but, on the contrary, that there was direct evidence of its being perfectly correct.
Sir F. Burdett
said, that never, on any occasion, did he feel less strongly the necessity of replying; for nothing in the shape of argument had been offered in opposition to his motion. The vague and general declamation in which the right hon. secretary had indulged, he could look upon only as a kind of vapour which not unfrequently arose from that side of the House. The right hon. secretary had not condescended to support his declamation against the general conduct of Mr. Hunt by any proofs. Every person must feel how vague and indefinite a charge it was to say, that a man had an intention to subvert the principles of the constitution. Ministers would think every man liable to this charge who might attend a public meeting to endeavour to obtain redress for public grievances. The right hon. secretary had entirely overlooked all the hardships which Mr. Hunt had suffered. Another hon. gentleman had said, however, that some of those grievances had been redressed. But, what inference should be drawn from this circumstance? That Mr. Hunt ought to remain in prison? No; but that he had suffered inconveniences which he ought not to have suffered, during a great part of the term of his confinement, and should therefore receive atonement for the injury. If any, mea-
48
49
The House then divided: Ayes 84. Noes 223. Majority against the motion, 139.
List of the Minority.
Barrett, S. M.
Macdonald, J.
Benyon, B.
Mackintosh, sir J.
Bernal, R.
Martin, J.
Birch, Jos.
Maule, hon. W.
Brougham, H.
Milbank, M.
Bright, H.
Monck, J. B.
Bury, visc.
Moore, Peter
Buxton, T. F.
Marjoribanks, S.
Calvert, C.
Normanby, visct.
Chaloner, R.
Newman, R. W.
Concannon, Lucius
Newport, rt. hon. sir J.
Crompton, S.
Nugent, lord
Crespigny, sir W. De
O'Callaghan, J.
Davies, T. H.
Ossulston, lord
Denman, T.
Palmer, C. F.
Duncannon, visct.
Power, R.
Dundas, hon. T.
Pryse, P.
Ebrington, viscount
Rickford, W.
Ellice, E.
Ramsay, sir A.
Farquharson, A.
Ricardo, D.
Fergusson, sir R.
Robarts, A. W.
Folkestone, visct.
Robarts, D. G.
Farrand, R.
Robinson, sir G.
Grattan, J.
Rice, T. S.
Graham, S.
Smith, W.
Grant, J. P.
Sefton, earl of
Griffith, J. W.
Scott, J.
Guise, sir W.
Stanley, lord
Gurney, R.
Stewart, W.
Grosset, J. R.
Stuart, lord J.
Gaskell, B.
Sykes, D.
Heron, sir R.
Tavistock, marquis of
Hobhouse, J. C.
Titchfield, marquis of
Hornby, E.
Webb, Ed.
Hume, J.
Western, C. C.
James, W.
Whitbread, W. H.
Johnson, col.
Whitbread, S. C.
Jervoise, G. P.
Wilson, sir R.
Lamb, hon. G.
Wood, alderman
Lambton, J. G.
Wyvill, M.
Lennard, W.
Williams, sir R.
Lloyd, sir, E.
TELLERS.
Lushington, Dr.
Burdett, sir F.
Leycester, R.
Bennet, hon. H. G.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Thursday, April 25.
PETITIONS FOR A REFORM OF PARLIAMENT.
Mr. Pelham
rose to present a petition from the county of Lincoln, for, a reform in the representation. A noble
50
Sir R. Heron
said, that the meeting was most numerously and respectably attended. The population of Lincolnshire was almost exclusively agricultural. Formerly, contented with their lot, they were little inclined to interfere in political questions, but now, seeing around them the most severe and menacing distress—finding that the legislature was either unable or unwilling to look the state of the country manfully in the face, and administer those remedies by which alone their distresses could be mitigated they were convinced, that no relief was to be expected but from substantial and effective reform.
Lord Ebrington
presented a petition from Crediton in Devonshire, praying for an effectual and complete reform of parliament. It had been unanimously agreed to at a numerous meeting of the inhabitants regularly convened by the portreeve. This was the twelfth petition on this subject which he had presented from Devon, in the course of the present session and among the petitioners were a large portion of the most respectable gentry, clergy, and yeomanry, of that county. Many more would have petitioned but that feelings now existed, very generally, throughout the country, which discouraged the people from doing so. From the manner in which their petitions were treated they were becoming daily more and more convinced that it was utterly useless to petition that House. Although he was not surprised at this, it was to him matter of the greatest regret; and he could not but express his hope, that the people of England from one end of the kingdom to the other, would persevere in public meetings and in using every means which the law allowed them for the declaration of their opinions on the great and vital question of parliamentary reform. He hoped, too, that the conviction which was so universally prevalent among all ranks of persons out of doors, as to the necessity of correcting the present state of the representation, would, ere long, be enforced even upon the House of Commons itself.
The Marquis of Tavistock
presented a petition from the county of Bedford, agreed to at a numerous and respectable
51
The petitions were ordered to lie on the table, and to be printed.
REFORM OF PARLIAMENT.
Lord John Russell
rose and addressed the House as follows
*
*
52
53
54
55
l
56
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
57
l
58
l
In the year 1782.
In the year 1790.
In the year 1821.
In England
50
60
135
In Scotland
8
27
31
In Ireland
3
27
56
London daily
9
14
16
Twice a week
9
7
8
Weekly
0
11
32
British Islands
0
0
6
79
146
284
59
60
61
62
63
64
l
65
66
67
68
69
experimentum crucis:
70
71
72
73
74
caste.
75
76
77
78
79
80
"Thus, if you dine with my lord May'r.
Roast beef and venison are your fare;
But tulip leaves and lemon peel
Serve only to adorn the meal;
And he would be an idle dreamer,
Who left the pie and gnaw'd the streamer."
81
ludi maximi,
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
Mr. Horace Twiss
said, the House would not expect him to go through a tithe of the various matter adverted to, and the enormous theories by which it had been attempted to support this question. As to the objections urged by the noble lord against the influence of the Crown in that House, it appeared to him, that such influence could only be objectionable when the functions of government were completely exercised out of doors; but when the whole executive was, as it were, carried on in that House, the objection he thought did not stand upon such good ground. The same might be said of the interference of the Lords in that House. But, in advocating innovations upon the existing system of things, the advocates were not entitled to any benefit from the antiquity of any practice. They who opposed them had a right to follow such a course of argument; but surely not they who urged as the foundation of their argument the modern changes of time. But upon those silent changes he was willing to rest the issue of the question between them. And in reply to the augmentation of power in the house of Peers, he would urge the popular party, which in the lapse of time had insensibly grown up in that House, unknown to our ancestors. If bribery and corruption were found to exist in some of the details, it was not fair to charge the system with it. If the outrages of the Westminster mob had been attended with loss of life in the case of sir M. Maxwell, or if the attempt at drowning a candidate on a late occasion at Chester had succeeded, it would have been deemed murder by the law; but would it have been fair to charge these as evils upon the popular system? The noble lord, in his inducements for reform included the expense of boroughs. But, allowing the expense of a borough election to amount to 4,000
l
89
Lord Folkestone
said, that as this was the first time upon which he had risen to deliver his opinions in that House upon the great question which was involved in the motion of the noble lord, he claimed the indulgence of the House while he
90
91
92
93
l
l
94
95
96
"annuality
97
dictum,
98
s
d
d
s
s
communitas civitatum et burgorum
communitas,
99
100
Mr. Duncombe
said, that the plan of Mr. Pitt went to reduce the rotten boroughs, but that great statesman had strongly deprecated annual parliaments and universal suffrage. He could never consent to hazard the fate of the country upon wild theoretic plans, and would therefore oppose the present motion.
Mr. Wynn
rose amidst cries of "question." He said, that he should not trespass on the House at any length; but as, after a debate of five hours, not one half hour had been consumed by those who were desirous to oppose the motion, he thought it but fair that some opportunity should be allowed for the statement of their objections. He had also reasons of a more personal nature for wishing to occupy their attention, after the attack which the noble mover had thought proper to make upon him. The noble lord had said, that whether he went among Whigs or Tories, ministers or radicals, the Grenvilles were equally the abhorrence of the country. He was not disposed to shrink from a comparison with the noble lord—he was not ashamed to stand upon his own character, but would fearlessly oppose that character to the character of
101
102
103
104
Mr. Robinson
presented himself to the House, and continued on his legs, amidst loud cries for Mr. Canning. He could assure the House, that he would not have interposed between its natural impatience to hear his right hon. friend, and his right hon. friend's speech, had it not been for a personal explanation. The noble lord had adverted to some expressions of his in a former debate, and had adduced them as a motive for adopting the important change which he recommended in the
105
106
Several members then rose at the same time; but the cry for Mr. Canning was so loud and prevalent, that they gave way. Upon which,
Mr. Canning
rose and said
*
*
107
108
109
l
purchase
willing
110
de jure
111
112
113
not an uniform right of voting;
the right of voting is in too small bodies;
many great bodies are excluded from voting;
the protracted duration of parliaments.
*
114
*
rasa tabula,
uniformity
*
115
in time to come:
that,
then existing
116
117
118
immediately
immediate
119
beau idéal
120
for
from
If
If,
121
cherish and protect
if
if not
*Parliamentary History, vol. 30, p. 921.
122
"Os—sublime dedit: cœlumque tueri
"Jussit, et erectos ad sidera tollere vultus:"
123
124
dictum
125
my lord have
in the parliament
belong unto him,
menial servants
knights of the shire.
whom he would have knights of the shire,
126
perform my lord's intent.
*
my lady
to have in this parliament as for one of the burgesses
were towards my said lady;
were agreed,
to have
knew the appointment that was taken
s
d
*
†Paston Letters, Vol. 2. p. 99.
127
*
*
†Among the documents alluded to in this passage are the following letters from Robert Devereux, earl of Essex, to Richard Bagot, esq. high sheriff of the county of Stafford; of which the originals are in the possession of lord Bagot.
1.
Robert Devereux, Earl of Essex, to Richard Bagot, Esq.
particularly in my name,
for my sake;
"I persuade myself that my creditt is so good with my countrymen,
as the using my name, in so small a matter, will be enough to effect it:
2.
From the same to the same.
one of the knights of that shire
for the otter place;
use my name
128
which
join with you in election that I will most thankfullie requite their readines, and furtherance them by any good office I can. So I comitte you to God's best protection; from Hampton Court, the 9th of January, 1592." "Your assured Friend, "Essex."
"I should think my credite little in my owne countrie, if it should not afford so
small a matter as this.
as I have interest in your labours
3.
From the same to the same.
nomination and election
I have named unto them,
my kinsman
and my servant
my servant
for my sake,
"I send unto you the severall letters, which I praye you cause to be delivered according to their directions."
129
*
that
*
†"It is to be remarked that in those early days of our renovated constitution, the objecttion of lord Tavistock's age was considered merely in relation to himself, and as no ob-
130
right:
that
stacle to the success of his election. Mr. Montague, in his letter to the duke of Bedford, to obviate any scruple in the duke's mind, mentions that lord Godolphin's son was to be chosen in Cornwall, and lord Leicester's in Kent, who were neither of them older than lord Tavistock: and Mr. Owen, in a letter to lady Russell, tells her the duke of Albemarle's son had been allowed to sit in parliament under age." Ibid, p. 123.
131
on principle.
132
133
any
on principle,
any
on principle,
in principle
134
in degree.
135
"They would be free as nature first made man,
"Ere the base laws of servitude began,
"When wild in woods the noble savage ran."
—"O Quis me gelidis in vallibus Hæmi
"Sistat, et ingenti ramorum protegat umbrâ!"
136
Mr. Denman
observed, that the whole of the right hon. gentleman's argument was founded in fallacy. He, assumed that a quotation from a speech of Mr. Fox was correct, although, it was most likely the reverse; and, upon that, be founded an argument against the expediency of a reformed House of Commons. After quoting several papers of rather ancient date, he at last brought some bombastic lines of Dryden to bear against the reformers. The hon. and learned gentleman then commented upon the observations which the right hon. gentleman had made upon the subject of the sympathy which existed between the House of Commons and the people, and contended, that the general conduct of the House was opposed to the wishes of the people. The right hon. gentleman had himself furnished some proofs of this; and he could produce another in the case of the late queen. He did not think that the House should blindly obey the wishes of the people, whether they were proper or not; but, in such a case as that to which he had last referred, when not only
137
"Quorum Flaminia tegitur cinis, atque Latina."
138
"Mounts the tribunal, lifts her scarlet head,
"And sees pale Virtue carted in her stead."
139
Mr. Peel
merely rose to take some notice of an allusion which had been twice made, to an observation which had fallen from him last night. He did not rise to explain away or retract, but to repeat and uphold what he said with reference to the case of Mr. Hunt. He informed the House last night, that he had advised the Crown not to exercise what he considered the peculiar, exclusive, and almost sacred prerogative of mercy, in the case of Mr. Hunt. He had declared, at the same time, that if the House should determine unanimously to address the Crown in behalf of Mr. Hunt, he would not be the instrument for carrying such a recommendation into effect. This sentiment he now repeated. He did not use it as a menace. He felt himself called upon to make that declaration, from a conscientious conviction as to the merits of the case; and he should consider himself unworthy of the place he held, if any circumstances could induce him to become the instrument of carrying into effect a purpose which he felt to be inconsistent with his conscientious sense of duty.
After a short reply, the House divided: Ayes, 164; Noes, 269.
List of the Minority.
Abercromby, hon. J.
Buxton, T. F.
Althorp, visct.
Boughton, sir W. E. R.
Anson, sir G.
Bentinck, lord W.
Anson, hon. G.
Calvert, C.
Beaumont, J. W.
Chaloner, R.
Barnard, visct.
Calcraft, John
Barrett, S. M.
Campbell, W. F.
Becher, W. W.
Chamberlayne, W.
Bennet, hon. H. G.
Carew, R. S.
Benyon, B.
Carter, John
Bernal, R.
Cavendish, H.
Birch, J.
Cavendish, C.
Brougham, H.
Clifton, viscount
Burdett, sir F.
Coffin, sir I.
Bury, visct.
Coke, T. W.
Byng, G.
Colborne, N. R.
Boughey, sir J. F.
Concannon, L.
Benett, J.
Crespigny, sir W. De
Belgrave, visct.
Crompton, S.
140
Curwen, J. C.
Nugent, lord
Creevey, T.
O'Callaghan, J.
Calthorpe, hon. F.
Ord, W.
Calvert, N.
Osborne, lord F.
Davies, T. H.
Ossulston, lord
Denison, W. J.
Palmer, col.
Denman, Thos.
Palmer, C. F.
Duncannon, visct.
Pares, Thos.
Dundas, hon. T.
Pierce, H.
Dundas, C.
Pelham, hon. C. A.
Dickinson, W.
Philips, G.
Ebrington, visct.
Philips, G. R.
Ellice, E.
Power, R.
Evans, W.
Powlett, hon. W.
Ellis, hon. G. Agar
Prittie, hon. F. A.
Fergusson, sir R. C.
Pryse, P.
Foley, J. H. H.
Pym, F.
Erankland, R.
Ramsay, sir A.
Grattan, J.
Ramsden, J. C.
Graham, S.
Ricardo, D.
Grant, J. P.
Ridley, sir M. W.
Griffith, J. W.
Robarts, Geo.
Guise, sir W.
Robarts, A. W.
Gurney, R. H.
Robinson, sir G.
Gaskell, B.
Rowley, sir W.
Haldimand, W.
Rumbold, C.
Hamilton, lord A.
Russell, R. G.
Heathcote, sir G.
Rice, T. S.
Heathcote, G. J.
Rickford, W.
Heron, sir Robt.
Ramsbottom, J.
Hill, lord A.
Smith, W.
Hobhouse, J. C.
Smith, hon. R.
Hornby, E.
Smith, J.
Hughes, W. L.
Scarlett, J.
Hume, J.
Scudamore, R.
Hurst, R.
Sefton, earl of
James, W.
Scott, J.
Johnson, col.
Stanley, lord
Jervoise, G. P.
Stewart, W. (Tyrone)
Kennedy, T. F.
Stuart, lord W.
Lamb, hon. G.
Sykes, D.
Lambton, J. G.
Sebright, sir J.
Latouche, R.
Tavistock, marquis of
Lemon, sir W.
Talbot, R. W.
Lennard, T. B.
Tierney, rt. hon. G.
Lloyd, sir E.
Tennyson, C.
Leycester, R.
Titchfield, marq.
Lawley, F.
Townshend, lord C.
Langston, J. H.
Taylor, C.
Lester, B. L.
Warre, J. A.
Lushington, S.
Webbe, E.
Marryat, Joseph
White, Luke
Maberly, J.
Whitbread, S. C.
Maberly, W. L.
Williams, sir R.
Macdonald, J.
Wilson, sir R.
Mackintosh, sir J.
Wood, alderman
Martin, J.
Wyvil, M.
Maule, hon. W.
Wilberforce, W.
Maxwell, J. W.
Whitmore, W. W.
Milbank, M.
Williams, W.
Milton, visct.
TELLERS.
Monck, J. B.
Russell, lord John
Moore, P.
Folkestone, visct.
Marjoribanks, S.
PAIRED OFF.
Normanby, visct.
Baring, sir T.
Newman, R. W.
Cavendish, lord G.
Newport, R. hon. sir J.
Hutchinson, C. H.
141
Markham, J.
Wilkins, W.
Mostyn, sir T.
Western, C. C.
Taylor, M. A.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Monday, April 29.
SCARCITY OF PROVISIONS IN IRELAND.
The Earl of Darnley
expressed his surprise that no proposition had yet been submitted to the House respecting the state of Ireland. He did not now mean to enter into any discussion on the moral or political state of that country, but he thought himself bound to notice the great distress which, according to the best information, prevailed throughout Ireland. The noble earl opposite must be aware that there was an increasing distress in that country from the actual want of provisions. His object in mentioning this lamentable state of things was, to learn from the noble earl whether the attention of government had been called to the distress prevailing in Ireland, and whether any measures of relief had been adopted.
The Earl of Liverpool
said, he had no hesitation in stating, that government had received information that distress for the want of provisions was great in some parts of Ireland. The subject, however, had not been overlooked by government, and measures, conformable to precedents established on former occasions and found sufficient, had been resorted to. With regard to the general question of relief in such cases, he must say, that nothing, except in extreme cases, could be more improper than the interference of government with the subsistence of the country. Such interference was far more likely to cause famine, than to give relief in times of difficulty. What ought to be done by the government with respect to the whole country might be illustrated by the reply made to a foreigner who expressed his surprise that so great a city as London should be so well supplied without any regulations. He was answered, that the reason of its being so well supplied, was precisely because there were no regulations for that purpose. The course to be followed in the present case was the same which had been adopted on former occasions. He appealed to the noble peers who had lately returned from Ireland, whether they were not satisfied, that whatever could be done to relieve the present distress, would be done, and was doing?
142
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Monday, April 29.
AGRICULTURAL DISTRESS.]
Mr. Gooch
presented a petition from several considerable land owners in Suffolk, complaining of agricultural distress. The petitioners prayed, that such a reduction of public expenditure might be effected as would justify a further reduction of taxation; but they expressed an apprehension, that no immediate relief could be derived from that source. He viewed with great dismay the distressed state of the agriculturists. A remission of taxation he knew would assist them; and as far as a reduction of establishment could enable that to be done, he would do it. He had felt it his duty to move in the last session, that some notice should be taken of the numerous agricultural petitions on the table of the House. In the committee which was appointed, he was nominated chairman, and he would not flinch from any of the responsibility that might attach to him on that account. It had been thought proper that that committee should be re-appointed this year; but he was sorry to say, that their report contained nothing satisfactory to the country. It proposed no measures calculated to afford immediate adequate relief. It should, however, be borne in mind how difficult it was to discover any such remedy for the present evils. The markets were glutted to the extreme, and corn must either be removed from the market, or more money must be brought into it for that purpose. A prohibitory duty on the importation of corn was what would be most beneficial to the farmer. When the ports were opened in 1820, by means of a fraud, 700,000 quarters of oats were admitted; and with an average consumption of 30,000,000 a-year, it was surprising the effect which that importation had in lowering the prices. He agreed in the system of duties, but not as to the
quantum:
Mr. Hume
observed, that this was not the first time that the hon. member had I expressed his anxiety to relieve the dis-
143
Mr. Coke
presented a petition from the hundred of Earsham, in the county of Norfolk. He stated the distress in that part of the country to be such, that many formers were quitting their farms, and giving up agricultural pursuits altogether. He believed most firmly that no relief was to be expected from the noble marquis who had so long managed that House and the country. This was the opinion of the petitioners, all of whom went further than formerly, and called for reform in that House as the only remedy for the existing distress. He agreed with them that the only perfect remedy for the evil was to be found in a reform in that House, and he hoped the example set by these petitioners would be followed by every hundred in the country. If this were done, it would be impossible for the government to resist the public voice. Ultimately, the public voice would make itself heard; but he feared that it would be in some other way than through the medium of that House. He complained of the manner in which the complaints of petitioners had hitherto been treated. Some years ago, on a petition being presented, the noble lord opposite had remarked on the "ignorant impatience of taxation" which prevailed. Perhaps similar language might be held on the present occasion; but, whatever might be said, it was most afflicting to see the county to which he belonged, and which was so closely identified with that noble science to which his life had been devoted, reduced by the burthens under which it laboured almost to a state of beggarry. Relief ought to be given without delay. No attention, however, was paid to the
144
Mr. Wodehouse
said, that with respect to the report, he thought it right to say, that it had proved generally unsatisfactory, to the country. It did not protect the farmer against the importation of foreign grain; but he had no hesitation in saying, that effectual relief could not be afforded till the great pressure of the public burthens had been mitigated. As the language he held was thought inconsistent with his conduct in some instances, he was anxious to explain his reasons for voting in favour of keeping up the sinking fund, and for opposing the repeal of the salt-tax. Whether in the present state of the country it was wise to preserve the sinking fund was certainly questionable. But he could not make up his mind to dispense with it: as it was difficult to calculate what effect this might produce on public credit. When the question on the salt-tax was brought forward, he had looked at the peculiar situation in which the government was placed. They had lost by the malt-tax, which had been given up, 2,000,000
l.
145
146
Mr. Bennet
said, that he was present at the Surrey meeting alluded to, and would observe, that if lord King had not so spoken of Mr. Cobbett, he (Mr. B.) would have said, what he now declared, that Mr. Cobbett was entitled to the thanks of the country, for the able and clear manner in which he investigated many interesting subjects. But if lord King had thought proper to make such a statement, what right had the hon. member to condemn him in his absence? The opinion of the noble lord was as good as that of the hon. member. There was in that noble lord that quickness and acuteness of intellect which, while he was by birth a descendant of the great Locke, was a further proof of his claim to the honour of which he had so much reason to be proud.
Mr. Wodehouse
said, he believed the words used by lord King with respect to Mr. Cobbett, were to the effect, "that he was the most able and intelligent writer of this or any former time, on political subjects." Mr. Cobbett had been a good deal in the county of Norfolk of late. His exertions during the last year had been directed to persuade the people of England that the farmers were the greatest brutes in nature. To hear such a man held up as an object of admiration was shocking; and therefore it was: that he had made the observations which had fallen from him.
Ordered to lie on the table.
SCARCITY OF PROVISIONS IN IRELAND.
Sir E. O'Brien
said, that before the House proceeded to the important business of the day, he wished to point out to the gentlemen around him, the very dreadful and calamitous situation to which a great portion of his countrymen were reduce. There were at that moment thousands of persons in Ireland, who, in consequence of the failure of the late potatoe crop, were reduced to a single meal a day, and that meal generally consisted of oatmeal and water. It was well known that, generally speaking, the whole population of the South of Ireland lived, during a great portion of the year, upon potatoes; but, during the last year, the incessant rains which prevailed, had totally decayed and destroyed that vegetable in the ground. At the late assizes in his county, the distressed state of the people was taken into consideration, and a representation of that distress was made to the
147
148
l.
l.
Mr. Becher
corroborated the hon. baronet's statement, and expressed his fear that, in a very short time, even the scanty subsistence now on hand would be altogether expended.
Mr. Goulburn
expressed his surprise that the hon. baronet should have taken that premature opportunity of calling upon the House to enter into the consideration of the state of the peasantry in Ireland. He was the more surprised at this course, as the hon. baronet had been in daily communication with him upon the subject of this distress, and must have known that, if he had hitherto refrained from stating the views of the Irish government, it was not from any want of sympathy for the sufferers, nor from the slightest inclination to withhold whatever relief the government of Ireland could practically afford; but from a firm conviction, that the agitation of the subject would augment rather than alleviate the evils which the hon. baronet had so feelingly deplored. Supposing the distress to be as general in the south of Ireland as the hon. baronet had depicted it to be, and the condition of the resident gentry so reduced as to render them unable to mitigate the condition of their peasantry, to whom, the hon. baronet asked, but to the government, Could the
149
l.
s.
s.
s.
Sir E. O'Brien
disclaimed imputing the slightest neglect to the Irish government, but repeated that he thought parliament
150
AGRICULTURAL DISTRESS, AND THE
The House having resolved itself into a committee to consider farther of the Report of the Committee on the Agricultural Distress,
The Marquis or, Londonderry
rose and addressed the committee as follows:*
*From the original edition, published by Hatchard, Piccadilly.
151
l.
l.:
l.,
l.
152
153
first,
secondly,
thirdly,
154
155
156
157
l.
l.
l.
l.
158
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
159
160
161
162
163
l.
164
l.
165
l.
166
l.
l.,
sui
167
generis,
l.
l.,
l.;
l.;
168
l.
l.,
169
l.
l.,
170
l.,
l.,
l.;
l.
l.,
pro tanto,
l.
l.
171
l.;
l.,
l:
l.,
l.
l.
l.;
l.,
l.
l.
172
l.
l.
l.
173
l.
l.
maximum,
l.;
data
l.
l.,
l.
l.,
l.;
l.
l.
l.
l.,
174
l.
l.
175
176
177
178
179
quantum
180
quantum,
181
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
minimum
s.
s.
s.
182
s.,
s.
s.
s.
s.;
183
s.
s.
s.
s.,
s.
s.
s.;
s.,
s.,
s.
s.,
s.
s.
s.,
184
s.
s.
s.,
s.
185
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
186
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.,
s.,
187
s.,
s.,
s.,
s.,
s.,
188
189
s.
s.
s.
1. "This it is the opinion of this Committee, that his majesty be enabled to direct Exchequer bills, to an amount not exceeding one million, to be issued to commissioners in Great Britain, to be by them advanced under certain regulations and restriction, whenever the average price of wheat shall be under 60
s.
2. "That it is expedient to permit the holders of foreign corn now in warehouses, to have the same ground into flour, for the purpose of exportation, under such regulations as
190
pro formâ
191
may guard against the fraudulent introduction of any part of the said corn for home consumption.
3. "That whenever foreign wheat shall have been admitted for home consumption, under the provisions of an act made in the 55th year of his late majesty, the scale of prices at which the home consumption of foreign corn, meal or corn, is permitted by the said act, shall cease and determine.
4. "That foreign corn, meal or flour, shall be permitted to be imported into the United Kingdom, for home consumption, whenever the average prices of British corn shall be at or above the prices hereafter mentioned; that is to say, whenever wheat shall be at or above 70
s.
s.
s.
s.
5. "That whenever foreign corn, meal or flour, shall be admissible, there shall be levied and paid the duties hereinafter mentioned, whether such corn, meal or dour, shall have been imported and warehoused previous to its becoming so admissible for home consumption, or otherwise; that is to say,
When imported from any Foreign Country.
Wheat.
Rye, Pease, and Beans.
Barley, Bear, or Bigg.
Oats.
If under per quarter
80
s.
53
s.
40
s.
0
d.
28
s.
0
d.
High Duty
12
s.
0
d.
8
s.
0
d.
6
s.
0
d.
4
s.
0
d.
Additional for first 3 months
5
s.
0
d.
3
s.
6
d.
2
s.
6
d.
2
s.
0
d.
If at or above per qr.
80
s.
53
s.
40
s.
0
d.
28
s.
0
d.
But under do.
85
s.
56
s.
42
s.
6
d.
30
s.
0
d.
First low duty
5
s.
0
d.
3
s.
6
d.
2
s.
6
d.
2
s.
6
d.
Additional for first 3 months
5
s.
0
d.
3
s.
6
d.
2
s.
6
d.
2
s.
0
d.
If at or above per quarter
85
s.
55
s.
42
s.
6
d.
30
s.
Second low duty
1
s.
0
d.
0
s.
8
d.
0
s.
6
d.
0
s.
4
d.
Duty upon Wheat meal and flour, to be as follows:
Duty upon Oatmeal to be as follows:
First high duty per cwt. when Wheat is under
s. per quarter
3
s.
3
d.
High duty per boll, when Oats are under
s. per qr.
4
s.
10
d.
Additional, for first 3 months
1
s.
7d.
Additional, for first 3 months
2
s.
2
d.
First low duty, when wheat is at or above
s. per quarter, but under
s. per qr.
1
s.
7
d.
First low duty, when Oats are at or above
s.
s. per quarter
2s.
2d.
Additional, for first 3 months
1
s.
7
d.
Additional for first 3 months
2
s.
2
d.
Second low duty, when wheat is at or above
s.
0
s.
4
d.
Second low duty, when Oats are at or above
s. per quarter
0
s.
6
d.
Malt made of Wheat prohibited.
Rye ground or malt made of Rye, Pease ground and Beans ground prohibited.
Barley, Indian Corn, or Maize, Bear or Bigg, ground, and Malt made of Barley, Indian Corn or Maize Bear or Bigg Prohibited.
Malt made of Oats Prohibited.
6. "That it is the opinion of this Committee, that whenever the scale of prices at which the home consumption of foreign corn, meal or flour, is permitted by the said act, shall cease and determine, then the scale of prices at which corn, meal, or flour, being the growth, produce, or
192
193
manufacture, of any British colony or plantation in North America, is admissible for home consumption shall also cease and determine.
7. "That, corn, meal, or flour, the growth, produce, or manufacture, of any British colony or plantation in North America, shall be permitted to be imported into the United Kingdom, for home consumption, whenever the average prices of British corn, shall be at or above the prices hereinafter mentioned; that is to say, whenever wheat shall be at or above 59
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
8. "That whenever the prices of British corn shall be below the prices before specified, corn or meal, or flour, made from any of the respective sorts of corn before enumerated, the growth produce, or manufacture of any British colony or plantation in North America; shall no longer be allowed to be imported into the united kingdom for home consumption.
9. "That, whenever, corn, meal or flour, of the growth, produce, or manufacture, of any British colony or plantation in North America, shall be admissible for home consumption there shall he levied and paid the duties hereinafter mentioned, upon all such corn, mealy, or flour, when admitted for home consumption, whether such corn, meal or flour, shall have been imported and warehoused previous to its becoming so admissible for home consumption, or otherwise; that is to say,
When imported from the Province of Quebec, or the other British Colonies or Plantations in North America.
Wheat.
Rye, Pease, and Beans.
Barley, Bear or Bigg.
Oats.
If under per quarter
67
s.
44
s.
33
s.
0
d.
22
s.
6
d.
High duty
12
s.
0
d.
8
s.
0
d.
0
s.
6
d.
4
s.
0
d.
Additional, for first 3 months
5
s.
0
d.
3
s
6
d.
2
s.
6
d.
2
s.
0
d.
If at or above per. qr.
67
s.
44
s.
33
s.
0
d.
22
s.
6
d.
But under do.
71
s.
46
s.
35
s.
6
d.
24
s
0
d.
First low duty
5
s.
0
d.
3
s.
6
d.
2
s
6
d.
2
s.
0
d.
Additional, for first 3 months
5
s.
0
d.
3
s.
6
d.
2
s.
6
d.
2
s.
0
d.
If at or above per qr.
71
s.
46
s.
35
s.
0
d.
24
s.
0
d.
Second low duty
1
s.
0
d.
0
s.
8
d.
0
s.
8
d.
0
s.
4
d.
Duty upon Wheat, Meal or Flour, to be as follows.
Duty upon Oatmeal to be as follows:
First high duty per cwt. When wheat is under
s. per qr.
3
s.
3
d.
High duty per boll, when Oats are under
s.
d. per qr.
4
s.
10
d:
Additional, for first 3 months
1
s.
7
d.
Additional for first 3months
2
s.
2
d.
First low duty, when Wheat is at or above
s. per qr. but under
s. per qr.
1
s.
7
d.
First low duty, when Oats are at or above
s.
d. per qr. but under
s. ditto
2
s.
2
d.
Additional, for first 3 months
1
s.
7
d.
Additional, for first 3 months
2
s.
2
d.
Second low duty when Wheat is at or above
s. per quarter
0
s.
4
d.
Second low duty, when Oats are at or
s. per qr.
6
d.
Malt made of Wheat, prohibited.
Rye, ground, or Malt made of Rye, Pease, ground and Beans ground prohibited.
Barley, Indian Corn, or Maize, Bear or Bigg ground, and Malt, made of Barley, Indian Corn or Maize, Bear or Bigg, prohibited.
Malt made of Oats prohibited.
194
195
10. "That, foreign corn, meal, or flour, in warehouse, may be taken out of warehouse for home consumption, whenever the average prices of British corn shall be as follows; that is to say, whenever wheat shall be at or above 70
s.
s.
s.
s.
11. "That no such foreign corn, meal, or flour, in warehouse, shall be taken out of warehouse, unless there be previously paid upon such corn, meal, or flour, the several duties following; that is to say,
When imported from any Foreign Country.
Wheat
Rye, Pease, and Beans.
Barley, Bear, or Bigg.
Oats.
If under per quarter
80
s.
53
s.
40
s.
0
d.
28
s.
High duty
12
s.
0
d.
8
s.
0
d.
6
s.
0
d.
4
s.
0
d.
Additional, for first 3 months
5
s.
0
d.
3
s.
6
d.
2
s
6
d.
2
s.
0
d.
If at or above per qr
80
s.
53
s.
40
s.
0
d.
28
s.
But under do
85
s.
56
s.
42
s.
6
d.
30
s.
First low duty
5
s.
0
d.
3
s.
6
d.
2
s.
6
d.
2
s.
0
d.
Additional, for first 3 months
5
s.
0
d.
3
s.
6
d.
2
s
6
d.
2
s.
0
d.
If at or above per qr
85
s.
55
s.
42
s.
6
d.
30
s.
Second low duty
1
s.
0
d.
0
s.
8
d.
0
s.
6
d.
0
s.
4
d.
Duty upon Wheat, Meal and Flour, to be as follows
Duty upon Oatmeal to be as follows:
First high duty per cwt. when Wheat is under
s. per quarter
3
s.
3
d.
High duty per boll, when Oats are under
s.
4
s.
10
d.
Additional, for first 3 months
1
s.
7
d.
Additional, for first 3 months
2
s.
2
d.
First low duty, when Wheat is at or above
s. per qr., but under
s.
1
s
7
d.
First low duty, when Oats are at or above
s. per qr. but under
s. per qr.
2
s.
2
d.
Additional, for first 3 months
1
s.
7
d.
Additional, for first 3 months
2
s.
2
d.
Second low duty, when Wheat is at or above
s. per quarter
0
s.
4
d.
Second low duty, when Oats are at or above
s. per qr.
0
s.
6
d.
Malt made of Wheat prohibited.
Rye ground, or Malt made of Rye, Pease, ground, and Beans ground prohibited.
Barley, Indian Corn, or Maize, Bear or Bigg, ground, and Malt made of Barley, Indian Corn, or Maize, Bear or Bigg prohibited.
Malt made of Oats, prohibited.
12. "That any corn, meal, or flour, of the growth, produce, or manufacture of any British colony or plantation in North America, in warehouse, may be taken out of warehouse for home consumption, whenever the average prices of British corn shall be as follows: that is to say, whenever wheat shall be at or above 59
s.
s.
s.
s.
196
197
When imported from the Province of Quebec, or the other British Colonies or Plantations in North America.
Wheat
Rye, Pease, and Beans.
Barley, Rear, or Bigg.
Oats.
If under per quarter
67
s.
44
s.
33
s.
0
d.
22
s.
6
d.
High duty
12
s.
0
d.
8
s.
0
d.
6
s.
0
d.
4
s.
0
d.
Additional, for first 3 months
5
s.
0
d.
3
s.
6
d.
2
s.
6
d.
2
s.
0
d.
If at or above per qr.
67
s.
44
s.
33
s.
0
d.
22
s.
6
d.
But under do
71
s.
46
s.
35
s.
6
d.
24
s.
0
d.
First low duty
5
s.
0
d.
3
s.
6
d.
2
s.
6
d.
2
s.
0
d.
Additional, for first 3 months
5
s.
0
d.
3
s.
6
d.
2
s.
6
d.
2
s.
0
d.
If at or above per qr.
71
s.
46
s.
35
s.
0
d.
24
s.
0
d.
Second low duty
1
s.
0
d.
0
s.
8
d.
0
s.
8
d.
0
s.
4
d.
Duty upon Wheat, Meal or Flour, to be as follows:
Duty upon Oatmeal to be as follows:
First high duty per cwt. when Wheat is under
s. per quarter
3
s.
3
d.
High duty per boll, when Oats are under
s.
d. per qr.
4
s.
10
d.
Additional, for first 3 months
1
s.
7
d.
Additional, for first 3 months
2
s.
2
d.
First low duty, when Wheat is at or above
s. per qr. but under
s. per quarter
1
s.
7
d.
First low duty, when Oats are at or above
s.
d. per qr., but under
s.
do.
2
s.
2
d.
Additional, for first 3 months
1
s.
7
d.
Additional, for first 3 months
2
s.
2
d.
Second low duty, when Wheat is at or above
s. per quarter
0
s.
4
d.
Second low duty, when Oats are at or above
s. per qr.
0
s.
6
d.
Malt made of Wheat prohibited.
Rye ground or Malt made of Rye, Pease, ground, and Beans ground, prohibited.
Barley, Indian Corn, or Maize, Bear or Bigg, ground, and Malt made of Barley, Indian Corn, or Maize, Bear or Bigg prohibited.
Malt made of Oats prohibited.
13. "That whenever the ports of the United Kingdom shall be shut against the importation of foreign corn, meal, or flour, for home consumption, the said ports shall be also shut against the importation of corn, meal, or flour, the growth, produce, or manufacture of the islands of Guernsey, Jersey, Alderney, and Sark."
Mr. Western,
after observing that he thought the propositions made by the noble lord might be more advantageously considered in detail at a future period, confessed that he had been much astonished at the introduction in the noble lord's speech of many most important topics, which, in his opinion, were very much misplaced, and would have been much better in the hands of the chancellor of the exchequer. With respect to the resolution for issuing a million to be applied in advances on stored corn, he was per-
198
199
Mr. Ricardo
said, that, having a proposition which he wished to submit to the house, he offered himself thus early to the committee. He was desirous of laying his proposition before the House, as the noble lord had laid his, in order that the House might have an opportunity of judging of their several merits. The hon.
200
l.
l.;
s.
s.
s.,
s.
s.,
s.,
s.
201
s.,
s.,
1. "That it is expedient to provide that the foreign corn now under bond in the United Kingdom may be taken out for home consumption, whenever the average price of wheat, ascertained in the usual mode, shall exceed 65
s.
s.
s.
d.
s.
d.
s.
2. "That whenever the average price of wheat, ascertained in the usual mode, shall exceed 70
s.
s.
s.
d.
s.
s.
d.
3. "That at the expiration of one year from the time at which the above duties on corn imported shall be in operation, they be reduced as follows:—On wheat, 1
s.
d.
d.
d
4. "That a like reduction of duties be made in every subsequent year, until the duty on the importation of wheat be 10
s.
s.
d,
s,
s.
d.
5. "That a drawback or bounty be allowed on the exportation of corn to foreign countries, On wheat, 7
s.
202
s.
d.
s.
d.
s.
d.
Mr. Brougham
thought, that notwithstanding the very proper delay of the main question, it would not be improper to consider some of the minor points. He did not wish to argue whether the distress of which the agriculturists were complaining was peculiar to them, or whether it was less confined in its operation; whether it confined itself to them, or spread itself over the other classes of the community; whether, in short, the whole country was in a state of suffering, or that all which the agriculturists lost was gained by the other classes. He thought that the course of argument which he should adopt, when the great question came to be discussed, would be, that the whole country was suffering. The late events had shown this; and he could not help remarking, that no statesman, no government, could regard it in any other light. If the whole was suffering, then there was nothing to set off against the agricultural distress. He was not prepared to admit that the condition of any one class of the people was good. If the agriculturists were suffering more severely than the manufacturers and commercialists, still their distress was comparative. The others were not to be reckoned prosperous. Moreover, though wages were better, in reference to the high prices which had been formerly paid for provisions, yet the prospect for workmen was extremely precarious. The profits of those who employed workmen, was were extremely moderate. If, then, in this state of wages and profits, any increase of prices should take place, the altered state of things would reduce others to that distress to which the farmer had fallen. One project which the noble lord had brought forward was a kind of substitute for one which had been on the point of emanating from the agricultural committee. He alluded to the project for the hiring of corn. He knew not who was the author of it. It was not the author of last year's report, he was sure; but if he saw him opposite to him, he congratulated him on one of the most ridiculous contrivances which had ever been invented. It was this signal device: "Whereas there is a difficulty in obtaining a demand for corn, and the farmer cannot sell, God forbid the government
203
l.
l.
204
l.
l.
l.
l.
205
l.,
206
Mr. Huskisson
agreed with the hon. and learned gentleman, that the only real sinking fund was that which was composed of a clear excess of revenue over expenditure. He declared that he would object to the plan proposed, if he thought it in any way touched upon the principle of the sinking fund. Another part of his noble friend's plan, went to extend the period during which country bank notes, under the value of 5
l.
l.
l.
207
208
pro forma,
209
1. "That the ports of the United Kingdom were shut against the importation of foreign wheat, for home consumption, in the month of February, 1819, the average price being then 78
s.
d.
s.
d.
s.
d.
s.
d.
2. "That in the year 1819, the quantity of British wheat imported into the port of London was 300,416 quarters; in 1820, 399,009 quarters; and in 1821, 494,828 quarters; and that during the whole of this period of three years, the supply, in all the principal markets of the United Kingdom, appears uniformly to have exceeded the demand, notwithstanding the wants of an increasing population, and other circumstances, which have probably produced an increased annual consumption.
3. "That this excess of the supply above the demand must have arisen either from an extent of corn tillage more than commensurate to the average consumption of the country; or from a succession of abundant harvests upon the same extent of tillage; or from the coincident effect of both these causes.
4. "That in the fluctuation of se sons, the effect of the present corn law must be, to expose, sometimes the grower of corn to the losses incident to an over redundant produce, and at other times the consumer to the pressure inseparable from dearth; that the free importation of foreign corn (the remedy provided by the law for the latter evil), if wanted to a great amount, must be precarious in proportion as the demand is unusual; and that against the former evil the law affords to the grower no relief whatever.
5. "That the alternate evils of redundancy and scarcity cannot fail to be aggravated by the alternate excitement and depression to which the agriculture of the United Kingdom must be exposed, under the present system of our corn laws.
6. "That another evil effect of this system is, to convert farming into a hazardous and gambling speculation, which, however prudently managed, must occasionally involve great losses to the capitals engaged in agriculture.
7. "That a free trade in foreign corn, subject to certain duties on the importation thereof for home consumption, was at all times permitted, prior to the act of the 55th Geo. 3rd, c. 26.
8 "That since the passing of that act, by which such importation is prohibited until the average price of wheat shall have reached or exceeded, for a certain time, 80
s.
9. "That to obviate the prejudicial effects
210
10. "That in order to render this repeal safe to the grower of British corn, and gradual in its operation, under the present accumulation of foreign grain in the warehouses of this country and in the ports of the continent, it is expedient to provide that the foreign wheat now under bond in the United Kingdom may be taken out for home consumption, upon-the payment of a duty of 15
s.
s.
s
11. "That the trade in foreign corn shall thenceforth be permanently free; but subject to the following duties upon importation, or when taken out of warehouse for home consumption:— wheat, 15
s.
s.;
s.;
s.,
s.
d.
s.;
s.,
s.
d.
s.;
s.
s.:
The chairman reported progress, and asked leave to sit again.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Tuesday, April 30.
ROMAN CATHOLIC CLAIMS.
Mr. Peel
presented a petition from the university of Oxford against the Roman Catholic claims.
Sir T. Lethbridge
took that opportunity of declaring his opinion, that if the motion that night about to be made by a right hon. gentleman was carried, the whole object would have been accomplished. The reason why petitions had not been numerously laid on the table, was, that the great body of the people were so absorbed in the consideration of their own distresses as to be totally indifferent political subjects. He protested, however, against their silence being construed in favour of that motion. The people still continued decidedly hostile to the question. He trembled, however, at the probable effect the right hon. gentleman's (Mr. Canning's)
211
Ordered to lie on the table.
ROMAN CATHOLIC PEERS BILL.]
Mr. Canning
rose and said:
*
*
212
213
data,
214
215
both
apparently
216
argumentum ad hominem,
217
not
*
*
218
219
220
believe
*
*
221
222
*
*
223
now
now
now
now,
either
either
the more easy prevention of the danger with which religion was threatened, from the hopes conceived by the Papists of seeing the duke of York on the throne after his brother, who neither had, nor expected to have, any legitimate issue. This danger caused several members of the Commons to form the project of a bill for excluding the duke of York from the succession to the Crown: but this was done by degrees."—RAPIN, Vol. 2. (folio) p. 692.
224
225
by order of that House,
Lords
226
fitting at this time.
227
either
or,
228
229
could
of late,"
230
no
ecclesiastical or spiritual
any temporal or civil
"civil and temporal"
231
"ecclesiastical and spiritual"
"temporal and civil,"
"ecclesiastical and spiritual,"
232
233
Purpurea tollant aulæa Britanni,
234
duresse,
235
236
237
"Res dura, et regni novitas—"
one
now
now,
now
now
now
now
238
it is now manifest that the said late viscount Stafford was innocent of the treasons laid to his charge, and that the testimony whereupon he was convicted was false:
239
legal murder."
240
241
"In their own dimensions like themselves."
242
there
243
244
bonâ fide
245
246
The Hon. G. A. Ellis
seconded the motion, and said, that after the eloquent and convincing speech of his right hon. friend, it would be bad taste, and indeed presumptuous, in so humble an individual as himself to trespass long on the attention of the House. He was always of opinion that the general measure of removing the Catholic disabilities, was a measure of right and of justice. The part of that question which was then before them had an additional claim to their favour, inasmuch as it related to an exclusion which had its origin in a plot which was supported by perjury, and in the existence of which no one of the present day believed. He hoped the stain would be soon removed from the Statute-book. He recollected a saying of that spirited defender of the Protestant ascendancy, queen Elizabeth, who being advised to administer tests to the Catholics, replied, that she had better means of ascertaining the loyalty of the peers.
Mr. Peel
said, that if his right hon. friend knew to the full extent how sincerely he admired his great talents—if he knew the great delight which he uniformly felt and expressed on every occasion where he had the good fortune to have heard his right hon. friend, he would be able to understand the regret with which he rose to answer the eloquent speech with which the House had been that night delighted. With those who did not know him, he feared he should incur the charge of presumption; but with respect to the
247
248
249
250
eo nomine,
251
252
253
"Some truth there was, but dashed and brewed with lies,
To please the fools and puzzle all the wise;
Succeeding times will equal folly call,
Believing nothing, or believing all"—
254
l.,
l.,
255
duresse,
*
*
256
257
258
de rebus concernentibus Ecclesiam Anglicanam,
259
260
261
Lord F. Gower
could not hesitate to declare his sentiments in favour of the motion. So long as the restrictions were removed from the Catholics, he cared not about the anomalies so much dwelt upon by the opponents of the measure. He was anxious to do an act of justice, and he was clearly convinced of the justice of the claim of the Catholic peers. If the six Catholic peers were the rankest Jesuits that ever infested the Escurial, he should be ashamed of having a seat in that House if their admission to participate in all their just rights in the legislature could excite one moment's alarm in that House. He considered the fears of those who resisted the Catholic claims generally to be altogether chimerical.
Lord Nugent
said, he entertained certain opinions with respect to the whole question of Catholic emancipation, and feeling these opinions strongly and conscientiously, he approached the motion with considerable difficulty. He could not see how, in point of principle, the grounds on which they advanced to this question could be fairly severed from the case of the Roman Catholic body in general. The question was, whether there any longer existed a justification, or a semblance of justification, for excluding the Roman Catholics generally, on account of their religious belief, from those civil privileges of which they had been so long deprived? He thought that this subject could stand on no other parliamentary ground with advantage. On none, he was sure, could it be placed so plain and so direct; and, he for one, might be allowed to say, that on none could it be advocated so beneficially in parliament; because, by stating the question thus generally, the onus of making
262
263
264
Mr. Warre
could not agree with his noble friend in some of the arguments which he had urged against the motion. In the year 1813 it was not objected to the bill for removing the disabilities which excluded Catholics from the army and navy, that it was only a partial measure.
265
Mr. Martin,
of Galway, said, the Catholics of the county with which he spas connected, were most anxious for the success of the present measure. The speech of the right hon. secretary would apply with equal force to the times when the mitigation of the penal code was first under consideration, as to the present time, and even with greater; for surely it was unreasonable to refuse the small advantages that remained, when every thing of real magnitude was already in their possession. It mattered very little what
266
Mr. Plunkett
said, that the peculiar ground upon which the motion of his right hon. friend rested had been so completely exhausted by his luminous statement, that he should nut have trespassed on the House with a single observation, were it not that he had the petition of his Roman Catholic fellow-subjects in his hand. If, being so circumstanced, he had continued silent, it might have been supposed that he felt the present question as an interference with the motion which at a future period he was bound to bring forward. It was in order to negative that impression that he now rose. He agreed perfectly in the motion of his; right hon. friend, because he considered it as a step towards the general measure; but, even if he did not consider it in that light, he should still feel himself called upon to support it as an act of substantial justice, though not going to the full extent which justice demanded. Last session when the great question was before the House in all its parts and bearings—with all its qualifications and securities—considerable embarrassments were thrown in the way of those who supported It was finally carried, and received the sanction of that House; but, during its progress, it was involved in multifarious details, and accompanied by guards and securities which endangered its success. He did not complain that it was unfairly dealt with in the opposition which it had received from his right hon. friend (Mr. Peel); but that opposition, joined to the complexity of its details, occasioned its friends considerable embarrassment. Some of those members who supported the measure anticipated so little danger that they objected to the securities, while others thought all securities insufficient. It was, therefore, to him a great source of satisfaction to see a measure introduced so little liable to misconstruction, and so little connected with danger, as to relieve its friends from all those embarrassments. Nothing could be more simple than the object of his right hon. friend He proposed to repeal a part of an act which excluded a few Irish and British peers from their seats in the upper House, and to restore them to the enjoyment of this
267
268
269
270
271
Mr. Wetherell
rose amidst a loud cry for the question. He considered the proposition a novelty, and was desirous of making a few observations on some of its points. The right hon. mover had departed from the principle upon which the greatest authorities had supported the claims to Catholic emancipation. He might mention Pitt, Fox, Windham, and Ponsonby. Those distinguished characters had all declared, that no measure but a general measure should be brought before parliament. It was formerly held that concessions should be made on one side and security given on the other. By that arrangement Catholics and Protestants were to be reconciled. That was the proposition on which the bill of last session was founded; but the measure proposed by the right hon. gentleman was all concession on one side, and no security on the other. If Catholic peers were allowed to sit in the House of Peers, could that House say that Catholic commoners should not come to the House of Commons? If they were to be admitted, which they must be if the present proposition was adopted, what would become of Mr. Pitt's principle, that no concession could be made without securities for the preservation of the constitution. The right hon. gentleman proposed the intro-
272
273
Mr. Canning
rose to reply. After the full measure of indulgence which the House, in its kindness, had extended to him, he assured them that he reluctantly availed himself of that privilege which the forms of the House extended to those who had the honour of submitting any proposition to its deliberation. There were, however, some points in the speech of his right hon. friend (Mr. Peel), and in that of the hon. and learned gentleman who had just sat down, so peculiar, that he could not forego the opportunity or making a few observations upon them. If the measure he had introduced was of the singular character the hon. and learned gentleman had described it to be, he must say that it had been treated by its opponents with equal singularity. If they had not given him arguments, they were at least not sparing in admonitions—gentle indeed, but still admonitions against the course which he had pursued. All the speeches of these opponents, not excepting the speech of the noble lord, who was in the habit of presenting to the House the very petitions of those Catholic peers, whose restoration to their hereditary honours he was then advocating, dwelt not upon the impropriety of the measure itself, but on the imprudence of bringing it forward at the present time, and in its present shape. His right hon. friend (Mr. Peel) even—no doubt with that anxiety for the entire question for which he was so peculiarly distinguished—even he had pointed out the inexpediency of the measure, because, forsooth, it tended in its present shape, to defeat the success of the general question. He was free to confess that, when he entered the House that day, he entertained some doubts suggested by the inexpediency of the motion he was about to make. Since he had heard the speeches of the opponents of that motion, those doubts had vanished and he now with confidence felt, that its success was the certain harbinger of that larger and more comprehensive concession, which his right hon. friend, the secretary of state for the home department, no longer deprecated, but it would seem
274
275
276
277
278
The House then divided: Ayes 249; Noes 244; Majority for the motion 5.
List of the Minority.
A'Court, E. A.
Davis, R. H.
Alexander, J.
Dawkins, J.
Antrobus, G. C.
Dawkins, H.
Apsley, lord
Dawson, G.
Archdall, M.
Deerhurst, visc.
Ashhurst, W. H.
Dickinson, W.
Astell, W.
Divett, Thos.
Astley, sir J. D.
Dodson, John
Bankes, H.
Domville, sir C.
Bankes, G.
Dowdeswell, J. E.
Barne, M.
Downie, R.
Barry, rt. hon. J. M.
Douglas, J.
Bastard, E. P.
Drake, W. T.
Bastard, J.
Drake, T. T.
Bathurst, hon. T. S.
Dugdale, T. S.
Belfast, earl of
Duncombe, C.
Bentinck, lord F.
Duncombe, W.
Beresford, lord G.
Egerton, W.
Beresford, sir J. P.
Ellis, T.
Bernard, visct.
Ennismore, visc.
Blackburne, J.
Estcourt, T. G.
Blair, J.
Fairlie, sir W. C.
Boughey, sir J. F.
Fane, John
Bouverie, hon. B.
Fane, Vere
Bradshaw, R. H.
Farrand, R.
Bridges, G.
Fellowes, W. H.
Bright, H.
Fetherstone, sir T.
Bruce, R.
Fleming, John
Brudenell, lord
Forde, M.
Buchanan, J.
Forrester, F.
Butterworth, Jos.
Gascoyne, Isaac
Buxton, J. L.
Gifford, sir R.
Calvert, John
Gipps, Geo.
Cartwright, W. R.
Gooch, T. S.
Chandos, marq.
Gordon, hon. W.
Chaplin, C.
Gossett, col.
Cheere, E. M.
Goulburn, rt. hon. H.
Cherry, G.
Grant, A. C.
Chetwynd, G.
Greville, sir C.
Childe, W. L.
Graves, lord
Cholmeley, sir M.
Grosett, J. R.
Claughton, Thomas
Handley, H.
Clements, hon. J. M.
Hart, general
Clinton, sir W.
Harvey, sir E.
Clinton, H. Fynes
Heber, R.
Clive, hon. R.
Heygate, W.
Clive, H.
Hill, rt. hn. sir G. F.
Cole, sir G. L.
Hill, Rowland
Collett, E. J.
Hodson, J.
Congreve, sir W.
Holford, G. P.
Cooper, E. S.
Holmes, W.
Cooper, R. B.
Horrocks, S.
Copley, sir J. S.
Hotham, lord
Corbett, P.
Houldsworth, T.
Cotterell, sir J. G.
Howard, hon. F. G.
Cripps, J.
Hudson, H.
Curteis, E. J.
Innes, John
Curzon, hon. R.
Irving, John
Cust, hon. W.
Jervoise, G. P.
Cust, hon. P.
Keck, G. A. L.
Cust, hon. E.
King, sir J. D.
Cuffe, col.
Kinnersley, W. S.
Davenport, D.
Knatchbull, sir E.
279
Langston, J. H.
Rowley, sir J.
Lascelles, hon. W. S.
Russell, J. W.
Legh, Thos.
Ryder, rt. hon. Rd.
Leigh, Francis
St. Paul, sir H.
Leigh, J. H.
Scott, Samuel
Leslie, C. P.
Scott, hon. W. H. J.
Legge, hon. H.
Shelley, sir J.
Lethbridge, sir T.
Shiffner, sir G.
Lewis, Wyndham
Smith, T. A.
Lindsay, lord
Smith, Ch.
Lindsay, hon. H.
Smith, Abel
Long, right hon. sir C.
Sneyd, N.
Lopez, sir M.
Somerset, lord E.
Lowther, visc.
Somerset, lord G.
Lowther, hon. H.
Sotheron, F.
Lowther, John
Stanhope, hon. J. H.
Lowther, J. H.
Stewart, sir J.
Lucy, G.
Stewart, W.
Lushington, S. R.
Stopford, lord
Luttrell, J. F.
Strathaven, lord
Lygon, hon. H.
Strutt, J. H.
Maberly, John
Stuart, W.
Magennis, R.
Sumner, G. H.
Manners, lord C.
Suttie, sir James
Manners, lord R.
Taylor, G. W.
Macnaghten, E. A.
Taylor, sir H.
Mansfield, John
Thynne, lord
Martin, sir T. B.
Tompson, W.
Maxwell, J. W.
Townshend, lord J.
Miles, P. J.
Townshend, hon. H.
Mitchell, John
Tremayne, J. H.
Monteith, H.
Trench, F. W.
Morgan, sir C.
Tulk, C. A.
Morgan, G. G.
Vansittart, rt. hon. N.
Mount Charles, earl
Vaughan, sir R.
Mundy, G.
Ure, M.
Musgrave, sir P.
Walker, J.
Newman, R.
Wallace, rt. hon. T.
Nicholl, R. H. sir J.
Walpole, lord
Nightingall, sir M.
Wells, John
Northey, W.
Wemyss, J.
Ommanney, sir F.
Westenra, hon. H.
O'Neill, hn. J. R. B.
Wetherell, C.
Onslow, Arthur.
Whitmore, Thos.
Osborne, sir John
Wildman, J. B.
Owen, sir John
Wigram, Wm.
Palk, sir L.
Wilbraham, E. B.
Paxton, W. G.
Williams, Rt.
Pearse, John
Willoughby, H.
Pechell, sir T.
Wilson, sir H. W.
Peel, right hon. R.
Wilson, Tho.
Peel, W. G.
Wilson, W. W. C.
Pellew, hon. P. B.
Wodehouse, hon. J.
Pennant, G. H. D.
Worcester, Marquis
Percy, hon. W.
PAIRED-OFF.
Pitt, W. M.
Ancram, lord
Pitt, Jos.
Beauchamp, visc.
Pole, sir Peter
Burrell, sir C.
Pollen, sir John
Campbell, A.
Pollington, visct.
Cawthorne, J. F.
Powell, W. E.
Cole, sir C.
Raine, Jonathan
Crawley, S.
Rice, hon. G.
Curtis, sir W.
Rickford, W.
Dalrymple, A.
Robarts, A.W.
Hope, sir W. J.
Robertson, Alex.
Jenkinson, hon. C. C.
Rogers, Edward
Jocelyn, hon. J.
280
Lennox, lord G.
Swann, H.
Mundy, E. M.
Smith, Samuel
Price, Rich.
Vivian, sir H.
Rochfort, G. H.
Ward, R.
Seymour, Horace
Yarmouth, earl
Skeffington, hon. T.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Wednesday, May 1.
REFORM OF PARLIAMENT.]
Mr. James
presented a petition from Carlisle, praying for a speedy Reform of Parliament. He attributed the present distress to excessive taxation. The hon. member for Portarlington had said, that the variation in the currency, occasioned by the cash payments bill, did not exceed 10 per cent. He differed from him. That hon. member had differed from himself at various times. He had at one time said, that the difference between the value a gold and paper did not exceed three per cent, then 3½ then 4, and so on till he now stated it at 10; but whoever took the trouble of reading Mr. Cobbett's little pamphlets on the subject (and they were to be had at a cheap rate), would be convinced that the hon. member knew nothing at all about the matter [much laughter!]. The hon. member had also said, that the prices depended on the supply and demand; but if he had read Cobbett, he would have found that the prices also depended upon the quantity of the circulating medium in the market; and that when the circulation was much limited; the result would be to double the weight of taxation.
Ordered to lie on the table.
NAVAL AND MILITARY PENSIONS.]
The House having resolved itself into a Committee on the Naval and Military Pensions,
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
proceeded to call the attention of the committee, not to the general plan which his noble friend had laid before the House a few night ago, but to that detached part of it which related to the commutation of the expenses of the country in the items of half-pay, fixed annuities, or civil allowances. By adopting the plan of his noble friend there would be a saving to the country of between 2,000,000
l
l
281
282
l
l
l
l
283
284
l
l
l
l
l
285
The first resolution being put,
Colonel Davies
thought, that the project was a covert attack upon the sinking fund: it was relieving ourselves at the expense of posterity. He thought that the public would be exposed to considerable loss, calculating upon a payment annually of 2,800,000
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
Mr. Bright
contended, that the whole scheme was a delusion, designed to direct the eye of the public from what ought to be the great object of parliament—a reduction of taxation. The salt-tax and the duty on leather might hereby be removed; but the country would eventually pay dear for it. Was it to be supposed, that a contractor who would receive no benefit until the expiration of 16 years, and whose term would not expire for nearly half a century, would be satisfied with any thing less than a very extravagant interest? This plan affected the whole system of superannuations. Many most illegal allowances had been made; and if this project were carried, these allowances could never be revised.
Sir J. Newport
insisted, that the principle of the scheme was directly in contravention of the sinking fund. If the sinking fund was to be abandoned, would it not be more rational to allow the commissioners for the redemption of the national debt to become the contractors? Thus, the double machinery now contemplated would be avoided, as well as the large bonus which the contractor
286
Mr. Beaumont
said, it had been observed that this proposition would divert the attention of the public from the necessity of reducing the weight of taxation. If it were likely to have such an effect, he would so far be hostile to the measure; but he thought it would not be a probable consequence of the proposition. He entirely agreed with those who were of opinion that the taxes should be diminished; and, for that very reason, he looked upon this measure as desirable, because, to a certain extent, it would relieve the public burthens. He admitted that the proposition was not consistent with what the chancellor of the exchequer had so often said relative to the sinking fund: but he did not find fault with that inconsistency since it enabled parliament to relieve those who had already made great exertions, and left posterity to bear some portion of the burthen. If his project even went to remove the whole of the sinking fund, he would not object to it.
Mr. J. Martin
said, that if this proposition had been made by any of those who were hostile to the sinking fund, it would not have surprised him; but that those who expressed so much partiality to the sinking fund system should propose a motion like the present was indeed extraordinary. If the principle were admitted, why might they not convert the long annuities of 38 years into much longer annuities? Why might they not, in the same manner, convert the tontine and other annuities into long annuities also?, Now, it was remarkable, that at the present day, government were granting life annuities. The fact was, that ministers adopted this new plan, because they were determined not to reduce the expenditure. They had made up their minds to continue the employment of useless postmasters-general and expensive clerks. He thought it was absolutely necessary for the credit of the country that a sinking fund should exist beyond the expenditure; land as this measure militated against the principle of that fund, he would give it ' every opposition in his power.
Mr. Hudson Gurney
said, the charge for half-pay and pensions was that of a debt of five millions a-year, which debt
287
Mr. T. Wilson
would support the proposed plan, because all the benefit would accrue from it which had been predicted from the infringement of the sinking fund, without the evils arising from such a course. It had been said, that if they did not change their measures willingly, they would be forced to do so by the taxes becoming unproductive. It. was for this reason that he wished to preserve the sinking fund, which might be useful in supplying deficiencies in case of such an event occurring. This plan, too, offered that relief for the agricultural distress which gentlemen had been calling for.
Mr. Ricardo
was astonished how ministers could come down with grave faces, and propose such a measure, after all the anxiety they had expressed on the subject of the sinking fund. This plan was nothing more nor less than an invasion of that fund. The chancellor of the exchequer had said, that these annuities were a part of the debt of the country. This he (Mr. R.) admitted. But, supposing the object of ministers was, to relieve the country from taxation to the amount of 2,200,000
l
288
l
l
l
l
l
l
Mr. Huskisson
did not mean to controvert the indisputable proposition of his hon. friend, that a debt of 5,000,000
l
289
l
l
l
l
l
290
Mr. Hume
said, that the noble marquis had promised a plan by which the public was to be relieved from a part of the dead weight for naval and military pensions. Now, the resolution before the committee applied no more to that dead weight of naval and military pensions than to any of the ether charges with which the nation was loaded. The boasted plan which
291
l
l
l
l
l
l
292
l
l
l
293
l
l
The Marquis of Londonderry
could not
294
sui generis
295
Mr. Grenfell
did not disapprove of the plan, nor did he think it interfered with the sinking fund. The whole question was, whether or not we should contract with person to pay 5,000,000
l
l
Lord Ebrington
considered the present plan to make against the principle of the sinking fund, as it went to relieve ourselves by throwing part of the present burthens on posterity. If acted upon, he thought it would be better to contract with the commissioners of the sinking fund. He wished to see the country relieved immediately from its present weight of taxation by means of that fund. If he could not get all that he wished for, that was no reason why he should not Like all he could get. He therefore felt bound to support the present measure. He was convinced that in the next session of parliament more taxes must be taken off; and he thought much had been gained on the present occasion by the admission of the principle, that we were justified in dividing the burthens so severely felt with posterity. In another session he hoped the sinking fund would be dealt with more largely; indeed, he trusted that it would be wholly given up to the public.
Mr. Maberly
contended, that this country had in reality had no sinking fund at any time. The course pursued by government was a perfect delusion. They first took five millions for a sinking fund, and now they came down with a proposition which amounted to a new loan. Was it not a plainer and better course, to take the sum directly out of the sinking fund, and by that means avoid the large expense, which they must incur by the present measure? The present plan struck
296
Mr. W. Williams
was favourable to the maintenance of a real sinking fund, operating a reduction of the public debt. We had, in fact, never possessed one. The fund that went by that name had increased instead of diminished the debt, and all our plans of finance had led to a similar result. It was vain to say that the resolutions would lead to a diminution of the public debt. At the end of 45 years the public debt would be less diminished than if they had taken the sum directly out of the sinking fund. Reduction of taxation was the only effectual relief that could be afforded.
Mr. Benett, of Wilts,
expressed his satisfaction at the admissions implied in the proposed scheme, that the sinking fund was a delusion. He would support the present measure, as he had always been for applying the sinking fund to the relief of taxation.
Mr. Monck
thought the present scheme was directly opposed to the principle of the sinking fund. He, however, would support the measure as a wise measure, because it went to effect a reduction of taxation. He, however, thought it might be more advantageous to purchase the annuities enjoyed by young military officers. This might prove beneficial to those individuals, as well as advantageous to the country.
Mr. Brougham
said, that nothing had tended to alter the impression which he had formed on the first assumption of the plan. Ministers had not even attempted to disguise that this plan was in direct contradiction to the sinking fund. Every pound which it affected to save was so much taken from that fund. The noble lord had got hold of the sinking fund in one quarter, and in another the chancellor of the exchequer was to pay it away. Thus, the sum came from the same purse: the public always paid the piper: it was the same operation under different names. The present scheme was a commutation of an annuity on lives, into a fixed annuity for the period of 45 years. Government were to pay 2,800,000
l
l
297
After some further conversation, the resolutions were agreed to.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Thursday, May 2.
ALTERATIONS OF THE CURRENCY.]
Mr. Denison
presented a petition from a Mr. C. A. Thompson. The petitioner stated, that he had, in 1811, laid out in purchases of land 150,000
l
l
Mr. Serjeant Onslow
observed, that these speculations, by which individuals suffered, were entered into during the suspension of cash payments, but with the knowledge that those restrictions would be at a future period removed.
Mr. Western
said, it was true, that at that period the currency was in a very unnatural state; and yet it was in that very year that the House recorded the resolution, that a one pound note and a shilling were equal in value to a guinea. The case of the petitioner was the case of thousands who were now the victims of that fraudulent vote.
Mr. Brougham
said, that the House of Commons, which, in May, 1811, recorded
298
Mr. Monck
said, that all these distresses were the frightful results of tampering with the circulation; at one time, by artificial means increasing its quantity; and, then, without notice, contracting its issues.
Ordered to lie on the table.
POSTMASTER GENERAL.]
Lord Normanby
said, that he rose on the present occasion with less reluctance than formerly, having so fully experienced the indulgence of the House, to the dry detail into which he had felt it his duty to enter. If the question rested now on the same grounds as when he last addressed the House, he should not trespass upon their patience further than by making his motion. But, if he had now a stronger claim than before to the attention of the House, it was the conduct of those who opposed the motion, and not of those who supported the motion, on which he rested it. It was their arguments, not his, on which he rested his claim. It was their arguments, not his, which had rendered the question important. It was their arguments, not his, which had made the matter a subject of conversation from one end of the kingdom to the other. It was their arguments, not his, which, at every public meeting that had since taken place
299
300
301
l
302
303
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that the noble lord had taken a very unusual course in bring the same subject before the House twice in the course of the same session. Although the motion had been so framed that it did not immediately go against the standing order of the House, yet in substance and in object it was unquestionably the same. This was inconvenient, not as regarded the present question, but as it affected the general business of the House; for if the practice were to become common, the same subjects might be brought forward day after day, and the time thus consumed might obstruct the progress of measures which were of importance to the interest and safety of the country. The former motion had not been rejected solely on the ground that it was desirable the Crown should have at its command such appointments as that at which it was aimed to reward merit. The office had been defended as one that it was desirable to keep up for the protection of the revenue, and the superintendance of the concerns of the post-office. Would it be nothing, that a revenue of 2,000,000
l
304
Mr. Bankes
thought his right hon. friend must be convinced that the public derived no benefit whatever from the appointment of two individuals to the office of joint-post-master-general. If, indeed, a board was necessary in that department, then there should be an umpire, or third person, to give the casting vote. But here there were only two noblemen, men equal in authority, and, it was to be presumed, in tenacity of opinion; and therefore, instead of being a convenience to the public, they were likely to clog the wheels of every mail-coach which ran through the kingdom, and bring the whole business of the office to a stand still. In a discussion on the navy estimates, a case had been mentioned, where there were two storekeepers employed in one office. They were equal in authority, and had a common key to the desk. One of them fell sick, and the other, who had the use of the key, in his absence robbed the till. He was far from applying this case to the noble postmasters-general, but he did it to show how absurd it was to expect any additional security from having two persons in office. If the amount of the revenue was to be looked to as a reason, then the office of paymaster-general, which was regulated by the bills of 1812 and 1813, was of tenfold importance. This office had been previously held by two persons: but what did parliament do?
305
Mr. Huskisson
said, his hon. friend had referred to the proceedings on the bill to abolish useless sinecures, but he had left an important blank in the history which it was important to supply. Having for several sessions brought forward the subject and failed, his hon. friend had, in 1817, been fortunate enough to find it favourably entertained by a committee. That committee investigated the matter with great diligence. It was suggested, that the office of joint-postmaster-general came within the denomination of useless sinecures; but the committee, after due
306
Sir J. Sebright
said, that since he had sat in parliament, he never had heard language which tended so much to degrade the House as had been used on this occasion. He never could consent, that the Crown should enjoy a corrupt influence. The arguments on the other side must have the effect of degrading the higher orders of society; for they induced a belief, that situations were given to men of exalted rank in the state, for the purpose of securing their support to the existing system. Was it not disgusting to be told that great and illustrious names could not be induced to do their duty to their king and country, unless they received 2 or 3,000
l
Mr. Sumner
said, that though there seemed good ground for supporting the two offices for the sake of the revenue, he fairly owned his reason for formerly having opposed a motion like the present was a different one. He had observed previously to, and during the session, that county meetings had been held professedly to take into consideration the distress of the country, though at very few of them the professed object of the meeting had been gone into; that designing men were traveling over the country to excite disaffection; and that the senti-
307
Mr. Bright
contended, that the House was perfectly competent to decide on the subject, and ought not, therefore, to delegate their power to any commission. They were bound to show the people, by a strict performance of their duty, that they really were the guardian of those interests which were committed to their care.
Mr. Tremayne
said, a pledge had been given, on the passing of the pension bill, to reduce all sinecures—a pledge which he should never consider redeemed, while the two postmasters general remained.
Mr. Stuart Wortley
said, he had, on a former occasion, given his vote on this subject with considerable hesitation. If it had been a simple question, whether the situation of second postmaster-general should be abolished, he would have given up the point. But, when he saw that the House had the day before addressed the Crown to remove two public officers; when he observed that a motion, attacking an entire board, stood for a succeeding day, and when he coupled these circumstances with the tone and temper of the country, which laboured under the delusion that these alterations would afford relief, he considered it hid duty to negative that motion. The Crown to perform its duties properly, must have influence; and the only question was, what portion of influence was necessary for the efficient execution of those duties? He asked for no more than what he conceived to be the due proportion of influence which the Crown ought to possess in the
308
The Marquis of Londonderry
said, he had beard nothing that evening which had in any degree altered the view he had previously taken of the subject. Whether he looked at it in an administrative, a financial, or a constitutional view, his original opinion remained unchanged. The question was, in what course ought this subject to be put, to ensure a just and sound consideration of it? If this point were fairly argued, the hon. member for Corfe-castle would find, that those who opposed him stood on the 'vantage ground. Ought the office to be continued or not? The authority of his hon. friend (and surely he could not object to his own opinion) was in favour of continuing the office. It was true, in the parliament of 1813, he expressed a different opinion; but that opinion was reversed by a subsequent parliament: he participated in the sentiment, and therefore it was fair to infer that his calmer and more matured judgment was in favour of the office. Except that one objection of his hon. friend, which was afterwards removed, the whole stream of parliamentary proceeding was in favour of those who urged the necessity of keeping up the office. His hon. friend stated, that this, amongst other offices, was last year included in the address to the Crown. The question then was, had that address had no effect? It had pro-
309
Mr. Wilberforce
agreed with an hon. baronet, that this motion became of far greater importance in consequence of the arguments by which it was resisted. It was alleged, that the office was necessary for the influence of the Crown. What! Preserve offices for the exclusive purpose of influence? What was this but what was called in plainer terms corruption? Avowedly, the ground of continuing the office was to induce members of parliament to support government, right or wrong. He admitted the distinction between accepting office because a person agreed with ministers in their views, and supporting those views because they obtained office; but the public were not always ready to make that distinction. This appeared to him to be a proper time
310
Sir F. Blake
would cordially support this motion, and after it should be carried, he would maintain, that a great deal more remained to be done. If the House understood the state of the country, they would pass such motions by acclamations. His real opinion was, that the hon. member for Montrose did as much good as all his majesty's ministers put together. The hon. member had made those see who could not see before; or, if they could see, would not see. Like the weight of a clock, the hon. member had made ministers go better and better by winding them up. He had not heard one single reason for continuing two postmasters. It was said, that the two postmasters must be continued in order to preserve the influence of the Crown. Against whom? Against themselves; and not only against the present, but against every future House of Commons. Was it not preposterous to call upon them to commit suicide on themselves?
Mr. R. Martin
condemned the conduct of the opposition, which, he contended, was rather dictated by a desire to annoy the government, than by any consideration of the abstract merits of the question. Even if it could be demonstrated on abstract principles, that one postmaster-general was enough, he would oppose the motion, if it had a tendency to shaker-the present administration.
Mr. James Macdonald
congratulated his noble friend on having returned to the charge with a spirit, perseverance and talent which augured well for the public cause. Now that ministers had had leisure for reflection, and an opportunity of col-
311
quantum mutatus ab illo Hectore!"
"Tis neither bad, simpliciter, nor good, But merely as 'tis understood."
Mr. Money
defended the office of joint postmaster-general. When he found that, within the last year, 2,000 reports had-been referred to them, on each of which they gave their opinion, he could not think the office without considerable duties and great responsibility. When he like-
312
Lord A. Hamilton
wished to ask the hon. gentleman, what length of time one of the postmasters, lord Clancarty, had been absent from the country? He believed he was away about two years; and this was a complete answer to the hon. gentleman's speech.
Mr. Mansfield
said, he would rather give 10,000
l
l
After a short reply, the House divided Ayes, 216. Noes 201. Majority for the motion, 15.
List of the Majority
Allen, J. H.
Crespigny, sir W. De
Althorp, visct.
Crompton, S.
Anson, hon. G.
Creevey, T.
Anson, sir G.
Chaplin, C.
Acland, sir T.
Chetwynd, G.
Archdale, Gen.
Crawley, Sam.
Astley, sir J.
Calthorpe, hon. F.
Baring, sir T.
Cooper, R. B.
Barnard, visct.
Corbett, P.
Barrett, S. M.
Cole, sir C.
Beaumont, T. P.
Curteis, J. E.
Becher, W.
Davies, T. H.
Belgrave, visct.
Denman, Thos.
Bennet, hon. H. G.
Dundas, hon. T.
Benyon, B.
Denison, W. J.
Bernal, R.
Dugdale, D. S.
Birch, J.
Davenport, D.
Bright, H.
Doveton, Gabriel
Brougham, H.
Ebrington, visct.
Boughey, sir J. F.
Ellice, E.
Burdett, sir F.
Ellis, hon. G. Agar
Bury, visct.
Evans, W.
Byng, G.
Farquharson, A.
Bagwell, rt. hon. W.
Fergusson, sir R. C.
Butterworth, Jos.
Fitzroy, lord C.
Blair, J.
Fitzroy, lord J.
Bankes, H.
Foley, T.
Benett, J.
Folkestone, visct.
Blake, sir F.
Frankland, R.
Boughton, sir C. R.
French, Arthur
Bastard, E. P.
Fellowes, W. H.
Carter, John
Forbes, C.
Chamberlayne, W.
Fane, John
Calvert, C.
Farrand, R.
Carew, R. S.
Grosvenor, R.
Cavendish, lord G.
Graham, S.
Cavendish, H.
Grant, J. P.
Cavendish, C.
Grattan, J.
Caulfield., hon. H.
Grenfell, Pascoe
Chaloner, R.
Griffith, J. W.
Clifton, viscount
Guise, sir W.
Coffin, sir I.
Gurney, H.
Coke, T. W.
Gipps, G.
Colborne, N. R.
Gaskell, B.
Concannon, L.
Hamilton, lord A.
313
Haldimand, W.
Patten, sir John
Heathcote, G. J.
Robinson, sir G.
Heron, sir Robt.
Ramsden, J. C.
Hobhouse, J. C.
Ramsay, sir A.
Hornby, E.
Rice, T. S.
Hughes, W. L.
Ricardo, D.
Hume, J.
Rickford, W.
Hurst, R.
Ridley, sir M. W.
Handley, H.
Robarts, A.
Hutchinson, hon. C. H.
Rumbold, C.
Harvey, sir E.
Russell, lord J.
Hotham, lord
Russell, R. G.
James, W.
Rowley, sir W.
Johnson, col.
Rogers, E.
Jervoise, G. P.
Ramsbottom, J.
Kennedy, T. F.
Stanley, lord
Knatchbull, sir E.
Scarlett, J.
Keck, G. A. L.
Scott, J.
Latouche, R.
Scott, James
Lamb, hon. G.
Scudamore, R.
Lambton, J. G.
Smith, R.
Langston, J. H.
Smith, J.
Lemon, sir W.
Smith, W.
Lloyd, sir E.
Smith, G.
Lennard, T. B.
Stewart, W. (Tyrone)
Lushington, S.
Stuart, lord J.
Leycester, R.
Sykes, D.
Lockhart, W. E.
Scourfield, W.
Lucy, G.
Sebright, sir J.
Lester, B. L.
Shelley, sir J.
Lawley, F.
Sotheron, Frank
Lethbridge, sir T.
Tavistock, marquis of
Maberly, J.
Taylor, C.
Maberly, W. L.
Taylor, M. A.
Macdonald, J.
Tierney, rt. hon. G.
Mackintosh, sir J.
Townshend, lord C.
Markham, admiral
Tynte, C.
Martin, J.
Tulk, C. A.
Manic, hon. W.
Talbot, R. W.
Maxwell, J. W.
Tremayne, J. H.
Milbank, M.
Titchfield, marq.
Monck, J. B.
Whitbread, S. C.
Moore, P.
Warre, J. A.
Marjoribanks, S.
Webbe, E.
Marryat, Joseph
Western, C. C.
Mahon, hon. S.
Williams, Owen
Newman, R. W.
Williams, T. P.
Neville, hon. R.
Williams, W.
Newport, rt. hon. sir J.
Williams, John
Nugent, lord
Wilson, sir R.
O'Callaghan, J.
Wilmington, sir T.
Ord, W.
Wood, alderman
Osborne, lord F.
Wyvil, M.
Ossulston, lord
Wilberforce, W.
O'Brien, sir E.
Wortley, J. S.
Palmer, col.
Whitmore, T.
Palmer, C. F.
Whitmore, T. W.
Pares, Thos.
Wells, John
Pierce, H.
Wodehouse, E.
Pelham, hon. C. A.
Wilson, John C.
Philips, G. R.
TELLERS.
Philips, G.
Duncannon, visct.
Power, R.
Normanby, visct.
Powlett, hon. W.
PAIRED OFF.
Prittie, hon. F.
Abercromby, hon. J.
Pryse, P.
Curwen, J. C.
Plumber, John
Dundas, C.
314
Ellison, Cuthbert
White, Luke
Ford, M.
Wilkin, W.
Westenra, hon. H.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Friday, May 3.
SCOTS REPRESENTATIVE PEERS.]
The Earl of Rosebery
reminded their lordships, that he had last session introduced a bill for regulating the election of the representative peers of Scotland, which had gone through two of its stages. It was proposed to be enacted by that bill, that no person claiming to be a peer of Scotland, except the son or lineal descendant of a deceased peer, should vote at the election of the sixteen representative peers. This proposition was received with approbation by their lordships in general. Only one noble lord urged any objection to the measure, and that noble lord suggested that it would be better to attain the object in view by a resolution of their lordships' house, than by a legislative enactment. It was also thought advisable that a communication should be made to every individual peer of Scotland, in order to obtain his opinion. In consequence of these suggestions, the bill had been withdrawn, and a communication of the kind referred to had been made. The result of the correspondence had confirmed him that it was necessary for parliament to interpose its authority on this subject. Nearly all the peers of Scotland had expressed their complete approbation of the proposed measure, and none had objected to it. One had thought it not necessary. Another had qualified his assent by observing, that he apprehended such an arrangement might not be the wish of all the peers. Another, again, was of opinion, that a resolution of the House would be preferable to an act of parliament. The evil of which the Scotch peers had to complain was, that from the Union down to the present time, it had been in the power of any person claiming to be a peer, though he possessed no right to such dignity, to vote at the election for the sixteen peers to sit in parliament; there being no provision in the act of Union requiring that the right of the claimant to a title should be proved before he was allowed to vote. That any body of men should be subject to such an intrusion, must appear very extraordinary; but to the peers of Scotland it was a particular hardship; for, excluded as they were from becoming members of the House of
315
The resolutions were referred to the committee of privilege.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, May 3.
POSTMASTER GENERAL.]
The Marquiss of Londonderry
reported his Majesty's answer to the Address of yesterday, as follows:
316
"The king having been attended with the address of the House of Commons of yesterday, acquaints the House that he will give directions that the salary of one of the postmasters-general shall forthwith be discontinued:—His majesty only postpones the abolition of the office of one of the postmasters-general, until he shall have had the opportunity of considering what permanent arrangement may be advisable for the conduct of the business of that department."
NAVAL AND MILITARY PENSIONS.]
On the order of the day for receiving the report of the committee on the payment of the Naval and Military Pensions,
Mr. Bernal
said, he considered the proposition simply as a loan; but was at a loss to understand how the same security could be obtained from the contractors for the performance of the conditions of such a loan as for those of a fixed loan. If no such security could be afforded, in what a situation of loss might the country be placed. Some contingency might render the contract so oppressively burthensome, that the contractors would abandon it. There were contingencies also that might give the contractors an undue advantage.—If a war should occur in the course of four or five years, many of the officers at present on half-pay would immediately be put on full-pay; and that full-pay would be charged on another fund. In that event the terms of the contract would be unduly improved to the benefit of the contractor.
The report was brought up, and the four first resolutions agreed to. On the fifth resolution being put,
Mr. Hume
said, that to this resolution he should move an amendment. The object of it was to burthen posterity and to relieve ourselves—a direct violation of the principle of the sinking fund. But, besides other objections, the operation was so complex that it was almost unintelligible, and the perplexity spread over a period of 45 years. The project was so novel, and the amount so large, that it would be found very difficult to find contractors. For sixteen years they would not receive a single shilling, and would be paying many millions in advance. It was clear, also, that the public must be losers by the transaction, if private parties entered into the speculation with government; but if the loan (for it was nothing else) were taken by the com-
317
Mr. Cripps
thought the noble marquis had conferred a benefit on the country by adhering to the sinking fund. He admitted, nevertheless, than the plan now proposed militated in a slight degree against it. But it was necessary that some relief in the shape of taxation should be given, and he knew of no better mode of giving it than the present. The whole of the leather-tax, a moiety of the salt-tax, and a large portion of the House and window-tax, would thus be removed. He did not see any of the complication of which the hon. member had spoken, and had no doubt that if the terms were proposed, contractors would be found for the whole before to-morrow night.
Mr. Whitmore
thought it would be more economical to borrow the money of the sinking fund than of contractors. He had voted for preserving the sinking fund at the beginning of the session, because a great financial project was then before the country—the payment of the 5 per cents; but now that that object had been effected, it became the duty of the House to consider the best means of affording relief to the country. If the contract were made according to the amendment, all complexity would be avoided.
Mr. J. Martin
felt it his duty to oppose the proposition of the chancellor of the exchequer. The bargain would be made upon most disadvantageous terms. The right hon. gentleman was daily in the habit of selling annuities on the lowest terms: while, his present plan went to purchase them at the highest.
Mr. Ricardo
said, that the proposition of the hon. member for Montrose was the same as that of ministers, only he wished the contract to be made on the most advantageous terms. Whatever
bonus
318
Mr. T. Wilson
contended, that at the present moment, whole the 3 per cents were at 78 or 79, ministers could make a more advantageous bargain than at a subsequent period when they might be lower. Besides, they would thus avoid the contingencies of war. It was just as proper now to support the sinking fund, as in the beginning of the session; because the period might not be far distant, and he hoped it was not, when ministers would be prepared to pay off the 4 per cents. The present amendment was an attack upon the sinking fund by a side wind. Though relief from taxation was very desirable, it was even more desirable to keep faith with the public creditor. If that faith were not kept, the agricultural interest might suffer even more severely than they did at the present moment.
Mr. Brougham
said, it now appeared that all sides were for a reduction of taxes, though, at the beginning of the session, reduction was declared to be impossible, on account of the preservation of the sinking fund. It was hardly necessary to congratulate the House, that the chancellor of the exchequer had thus yielded to the necessities of the country, and was willing to relinquish taxation to the extent of 1,800,000
l
l
l
l
319
l
l
l
l
l
l
320
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
321
l
l
l
l
322
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
323
l
l
l
The chancellor of the Exchequer
observed, that on the question of the sinking fund, gentlemen had long been much divided, members on the Opposition benches wishing to take it away altogether, and those on his side preferring to keep it inviolate. That principle of sacredness, to which he considered the faith of parliament to be pledged, and upon the strength of which this country had been enabled to execute such vast achievements in the course of the late war, [Cheers] he hoped that House never would depart from. It was upon this principle that government had just been enabled to perform one of the greatest financial operations that had been of late years attempted, and by which they would be enabled to remit very speedily taxes to the amount of nearly 1,500,000
l
l
324
Mr. J. P. Grant
said, that nothing but a remission of taxation could save the country. As to the sinking fund, as it was now placed, its operation was quite delusive.
Mr. Jones
approved of the plan, and thought the amendment would, if acted upon, suspend the operation of the sinking fund, and prove disadvantageous to the country. It was said, that to effect this plan, the contractors must get a bonus, the amount of which would be lost to the public. He did not concur in that opinion. The speculators might gain, but it was equally possible they might lose.
Mr. Denis Browne
expressed his surprise that gentlemen opposite should feel averse to any proposition which went to the reduction of taxation; that having been the theme of their speeches during the session.
Mr. Bennet
said, the ground of complaint was, not that taxes to the amount of 1,800,000
l
The House divided: For the amendment, 56. Against it, 135.
List of the Minority
Althorp. viscount
Grant, J. P.
Boughey, sir J. F.
Griffith, J. W.
Bright, H.
Hamilton, lord A.
Bernal, R.
Hornby, E.
Blake, sir F.
Hughes, col.
Brougham, H.
Heron, sir R.
Clifton, viscount
Hutchinson, hon. H.
Coffin, sir Isaac
Jervis, G.
Calvert, C.
Kennedy, T. F.
Concannon, L.
Langston, J. H.
Crespigny, sir W. De
Lloyd, sir E.
Crawley, S.
Leycester, R.
Crompton, S.
Lemon, sir W.
Dundas, Charles
Maberly, J.
Davies, col.
Maberly, W. L.
Evans, W.
Marjoribanks, S.
Grattan, J.
Milbank, M.
325
Monck, J. B.
Scarlett, J.
Newman, R. W.
Stanley, lord
Newport, sir J.
Tierney, G.
O'Callaghan, J.
Webbe, col.
Palmer, C. F.
Whitmore, W. W.
Ramsden, J.
Williams, J.
Rice, T. S.
Wyvill, M.
Ricardo, D.
Wilson, sir R.
Rickford, W.
TELLERS.
Smith, W.
Hume, J.
Sykes, D.
Bennet, hon. H. G.
Sebright, Sir. J.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Monday, May 6.
AGRICULTURAL DISTRESS, AND THE
Earl Grey
said, that previous to the holydays, he had given notice of his intention to bring the distressed state of the country under their consideration, with the view of relieving that distress by a reduction of taxation. He had also put a question to the noble earl opposite, the object of which was, to ascertain whether any measures were to be proposed by government, in addition to those which had already been brought before parliament. The noble earl had referred him to the committee of the House of Commons which was then sitting, and which had since made its report, observing, that he did not know what might be done by the House of Commons, in consequence of that inquiry, but that government had no further measures to propose. Shortly after this, the report of the agricultural committee appeared. Of that report it would be impossible for him, consistently with the respect due to the quarter whence it came, to speak in the terms it deserved. But this he would say, that he did not think it had disappointed the expectations of the country; for he did not believe that any body had entertained the slightest hope of benefit from the labours of the committee. Few, however, could suppose that any body of men, having before them all the materials of information on a given subject, could have produced a document so utterly deficient in every character of wisdom and practical utility as that report. With regard to the measures which had been proposed as means of relief, they were all inadequate to their object, and totally inconsistent with sound and rational views of policy. The presenting of that report would not therefore, have occasioned the least possible delay in his intention of bringing
326
The Earl of Liverpool
said, he had never looked to the report of the agricultural committee as likely to give origin to any measure capable of relieving the existing agricultural distress. If, how, ever, there were defects in the existing law, he was not disposed to adopt the opinion that no prospective remedy ought to be applied, because he could not expect from any measure immediate relief. But the noble earl had particularly dwelt on what he called the inconsistency of ministers, who had declared that no relief was to be obtained from the reduction of taxation, and had yet proposed a measure, the object of which was to reduce taxation in an improper manner. Now,
327
pro tanto
government taxes
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Monday, May 6.
LICENSING PUBLIC HOUSES.]
Mr.
328
presented a petition, which, if the party subscribing it had taken his advice, would, he said, have been committed into other hands, but which, as the petitioner pressed it, he thought it his duty to present it to the House. It was stated in the petition, that the petitioner, Robert Churchward, a builder, undertook some years ago, to build about four or five hundred houses in the county of Middlesex, in the neighbourhood of Mile-end, near the Commercial-road: that after having built about one hundred or rather more, the inhabitants of this newly created town remonstrated against the inconvenience which they sustained from not having any public house in the neighbourhood. In consequence the petitioner built a house expressly constructed for a public house, at the expense of 1,500
l
l
329
l
l
l
Mr. Fowell Buxton
perfectly concurred in the opinion of the right hon. gentleman, that if the allegations in the petition were well-founded, a case of grievance was made out, to which parliament ought to apply a remedy. He felt himself much obliged to the right hon. gentleman for having given him an opportunity of seeing the petition before he presented it to the House, as it had enabled him to inquire into the subject; and he could now positively declare, that all the substantial allegations of the petition were not borne out by the fact. The petitioner said, that in 1817 he had taken a piece of land for building. In the same year he made his first application to the magistrates for a license. Under those circumstances, the magistrates might probably have thought such an application premature. The following year the petitioner made a second application; but it was refused, because the greater part of the houses which he had built were untenanted. In the following year it seemed, the magistrates had licensed the house. Now, as the petitioner complained that the house had not been licensed during the first two years, he certainly could not complain of
330
331
332
Mr. Calvert
believed, that the right hon. gentleman was satisfied with but competition existing in the country, but not with the degree in which it existed in the large towns. He (Mr. C.) thought the reverse was the fact. In many parts of the country he knew that brewers commanded an entire monopoly in their own neighbourhood, shutting out competition entirely. He had himself frequently communicated with magistrates upon the subject, and had suggested that such extensive influence ought to be restrained. If he were one of the magistrates, he should feel it his duty to see that a competition really did take place. The licensing system was open to many abuses, and he would lend any assistance in his power to remedy them.
Sir J. Sebright
said, that the licensing system, as it existed, produced the worst effects, not only on the public-houses themselves, but on the morals of those who frequented them.
Mr. Bennet
felt himself bound to acknowledge, that he received the most liberal assistance, in 1819, from Mr. Buxton. In performing this act of justice to his hon. friend, he should take the opportunity to state, that he fully agreed with him as to the effects of competition. At the same time, he must express his belief, founded upon evidence, that a great part of the metropolis was portioned out among the brewers, and that brewer applying for a licence in it destroyed every thing like fair competition. Indeed, it appeared, that when a brewer and another party applied for license, the brewer obtained it from his rival, on the ground of being a known and responsible person. With regard to the introduction of a clause into any future act, prohibiting brewers from purchasing public-houses, he deemed it to be totally impracticable; inasmuch as public-houses might still be purchased for them on trust. The point principally to be attended to in London, was the prevention of disorder in the different houses and the placing them under some specific control. With regard to the country, he must say that there was scarcely a free house in any village. They were all in the power of the brewers, who drenched their
333
Mr. Calvert
trusted that his hon. friend would do the same justice to him as he had done to the hon. member for Weymouth.
Mr. Bennet
had great pleasure in stating, that nobody had been more anxious to correct the abuses of the licensing system than the hon. member.
Mr. S. Whitbread
defied any man to say, that the firm with which he was connected had ever used any improper means to obtain licenses. He could assure the House, they would willingly consent to any prospective measure that would tend to keep the trade open. He thought that any act of parliament would be advantageous to the public which should prevent brewers from holding the licences of public houses.
Mr. Monck
was an advocate for having the trade in beer more open, at the same time, he would not deprive the brewers of any of their existing rights and interests. He thought that the magistrates ought to be deprived of a great portion of the discretionary power which they exercised at present in the licensing of public houses, inasmuch as it was in consequence of that discretionary power that so many people were obliged to drink bad beer, and at the same lime to pay a most extravagant price for it. He had that morning received a letter from a physician at Bath, whom he had known for 30 years, in which that gentleman imputed most of the diseases prevalent there, and especially the colic, to the bad beer drunk there. He was glad to find that the licensing system had attracted the attention of the hon. member for Shrewsbury; and still more glad to find that the House generally seemed, to be of opinion that it stood in need of amendment and alteration.
Ordered to lie on the table.
AGRICULTURAL DISTRESS REPORT.]
On the order of the day for going into a
334
Mr. Ellice
assured the House and the noble lord, that after what passed on this subject on a former evening, he would not have interrupted the course of these proceedings, if he did not feel himself called upon, after the most mature consideration of the various resolutions on the table, to take the opportunity of protesting against them all, by now opposing the motion for the Speaker leaving the chair. He certainly would have abstained from this opposition, if he conceived there was the slightest chance of any amendment, or modification of the propositions in the committee, according to the prevailing opinions, or he would rather say prejudices on this important subject; but as no improvement was likely to result from them, in the present system of the corn laws, the wisest course, appeared, to him, not to touch that which it was not intended, to improve, and which there was in some quarters a pretty obvious disposition to render more injurious to the public interest. The noble marquis proposed to debate first in the committee, his resolution relative to the advance of a million on bonded grain, protesting against going into the general discussion; but this opened the leading points in the general question, and those to which evidently the greatest importance was ascribed by ministers and the committee—the effect of the proposed advance from the Bank on the currency, and the price of grain. It was not now disguised, the sole object sought to be obtained was, a forced advance in the value of agricultural produce. On the appointment of the select committee he had stated his apprehensions, that all other considerations would be neglected. When he found his apprehensions realized, on their report he ventured to recommend to the House the greatest caution, before they embarked in the senseless and desperate expedients proposed in it. After having listened with the utmost attention to all that had fallen from the noble lord on the former evening, and the different gentlemen who had spoken in the course of this debate, his conviction, if possible, was confirmed, that no possible good could arise to the agricultural petitioners, and infinite mischief might be inflicted on many other interests, by the adoption of the measures before them. His duty, therefore, compelled him to attempt, at least, to arrest the course taken by ministers, by opposing this further progress of the committee.
335
s
336
s.:
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
337
s
s
s
s
s
s
d
s
d
s
s
s
d
338
s
s
s
d
s
s.:
d
s
s
d
s
s
s
339
s
s
s
l
s
s
s
s
340
341
l
s
d
342
dictum
d
343
344
345
346
s
347
348
s
s
349
s
350
351
Mr. Benett,
of Wiltshire, said, that as he had originated one of those propositions
*
s
d
s
*
1—"That it is expedient to provide, that the foreign corn now under bond in the United Kingdom may be taken out for home consumption, whenever the average price of wheat, ascertained in the usual mode, shall exceed 80
s
Wheat
24
s
Rye, pease, and beans
16
s
Barley, bear, and bigg
12
s
Oats
8
s
2d.—"That a drawback or bounty be allowed on the exportation of corn to foreign countries:
On wheat of a marketable quality
18
s
Rye, pease, and beans, quality
12
s
Barley; bear or bigg quality
9
s
Oats, quality
6
s
"And that such drawback or bounty, in like manner as the importation duty, be fixed."
352
d
353
l
l
l
354
s
s
d
l
s
d
l
s
d
s
d
s
d
l
s.:
l
s
l
s
d
s
d
s
d
355
s
d
s
l
l
l
l
356
Mr. Monck
contended, that the distresses of the country were mainly imputable, not to low prices but to high taxes. None of the recipes of the five or six state physicians made, therefore, an approximation to the true remedy. Every corn bill was intended to benefit the agriculturists at the expense of the other classes; and instead of looking at the present low price of grain with dismay, it afforded him sincere satisfaction, because it would compel country gentlemen to do their duty to their constituents. The existing corn bill gave a complete monopoly. What were called its defects did not injure the farmers, and were a great benefit to the consumers. Dr. Paley had considered the uncertainty of crops and seasons as a providential ordinance, because it prevented the landowner from extracting the last farthing from his tenant. He (Mr. M.) was, however, decidedly of opinion that there were no bad seasons: one county or one country might produce less than another, but the gross produce of the world was always the same, and a perfectly free trade in grain ought therefore to be established.
The House having resolved itself into the committee,
The Marquis of Londonderry
rose to call the attention of the committee to his first resolution. He should do injustice to the agricultural committee, and injustice to his own opinions, if he did not desire it in the outset to be understood that he was not prepared to justify the proposition upon general principles: it was only to be tolerated as an exception to them, and employed as a temporary law. It would, he conceived, be nothing but pedantry, to say that no case had arisen, or could arise, in which they might not be relaxed. The hon. member for Taunton (Mr. Baring), in a former session,
357
358
359
s
Mr. Curwen
felt that there were great objections to the measure in point of principle, but he did not see why it might not be adopted as a permanent means of relief in times of distress, as he conceived that much advantage might result from it. A time could scarcely arrive when the demand and the supply would be equal; and in years of abundance the scheme would hold out an important inducement to speculators in grain. It was quite idle to hope, that a time would arrive when there could be an export trade in grain, the growth of this country. As a measure of relief the proposed plan could do no possible harm, and might be productive of some good. It had been stated, that all these measures were intended to benefit one part of the community at the expense of others. Now, he would ask what could be done to assist the grower of corn that would not be useful to all classes of the community? These measures were not intended for any particular class. The effect of them would be, to induce the cultivator of the soil to sow a sufficient quantity of corn for the use of the population, which was by far the cheapest mode of subsisting the country. The production of corn ought to be viewed with reference to the real wants of the country. If they did not proceed on a system of protection, they would destroy their own agriculture; and then the country would be at the mercy of a few interested merchants. The great object of parliament ought to be, to render the country independent of foreign corn, and at the same time to afford the consumer an opportunity of purchasing it at a cheap rate. He would always support the principle, that they ought to rely on their own produce for consumption, instead of depending on foreign states for the necessary
360
l
l
Mr. Leycester
said, there never was a more zealous friend to the agricultural interest than he was. He commiserated their distress, but he was quite convinced that it would not be alleviated by the plan of the noble lord. The measure was contrary to all legislative rule. Was it not most unjustifiable to expend the public money, for the purpose of raising the price of bread against that very public from whom the money was taken? Was it not most unjustifiable to raise the price of bread against those manufacturers, whose chins were merely kept above water by the existing low prices? The principle of the measure was most flagitious; and he did not think that the badness of the principle was redeemed by
361
Mr. Huskisson
said, he would state the grounds on which he objected to this resolution. Looking to this as a temporary measure, his objection to it was, the time to which it was to be applied. His noble friend had stated that, since the last harvest, corn had been brought into the market to nearly double the quantity which had ordinarily been introduced at antecedent periods of similar extent. The reason his noble friend gave for this was, that the farmers were called on to pay their rents; and, from the difficulties which pressed on the landlords, the occupiers of land, in order to meet their demands, were compelled to thresh out their corn, and to send it to market at an earlier period of the year than usual. Now, if this reason were well founded, it followed, that many of the farmers were no longer in the market as sellers of this commodity, but as purchasers for their own support, and for the maintenance of the poor in the parishes to which they belonged. The consequence then must be, if this measure had the effect of taking out of the market any considerable quantity of corn, and thereby of raising the price, that it would bear hard on the lower class of farmers, and render the maintenance of the poor more onerous. He believed, if any practical man asked who were the most distressed? the answer would be, "look at their stack-yards." The yards of the wealthy farmers were well stored, while those of the lower class were emptied. How, then, could they be relieved by this measure? This plan did not accord with the general principles which governed the subject. The fact was, they were in an artificial state, which required frequent revision. With respect to the general principle, if there was any one article on which go-
362
s
s
d
s
d
s
Sir J. Sebright
said, he had had conversations with various farmers on this subject, and they all declared that the plan was of no value whatever. Legislative interference with the corn trade must, he was convinced, be productive of harm.
Sir J. Shelley
thought the measure would not only not be beneficial, but that it was calculated to do a great deal of injury.
363
Mr. Whitmore
said he had obliged to thresh out his corn immediately, and carry it to market to prevent it from mouldering on his hands; and this had been the case with most of the farmers in his neighbourhood. The corn of the last year would be perfectly unsaleable after the next harvest, and the measure would consequently be wholly inoperative.
Mr. D. Gilbert
thought the proposition would be a violation of sound principle, without any corresponding benefit. None but bad corn would be warehoused, if it were adopted.
Mr. Cripps
could not look forward with satisfaction to the operation of this plan. The little farmer had, in a great measure, got rid of his property; and, therefore, with respect to him, it was too late. The damaged corn could not be dried, and kept in warehouses without great loss in weight and in other respects. He was quite persuaded that they could not get one without a fixed and permanent protection.
Sir E. Knatchbull
thought, that the agricultural interest, were much indebted to ministers, and especially to the noble marquis. He appealed to the agricultural committee, and asked them, what situation they would find themselves in, if in this instance their recommendation and plan of relief should be thrown overboard. In justice to his constituents, himself, and the noble lord, he felt himself called upon to support the resolution.
Mr. Wodehouse
did not think he should act right if he were to leave the noble lord in the lurch; although he regretted that a measure less exceptionable in its principle had not been brought forward. This measure, however, came a little too late, and was accompanied with so much doubt and hesitation, that many would be prevented from adopting it.
Mr. Bankes
said, he bad been of opinion that government should directly interfere and expend one million in purchasing corn. The present measure was a modification of that plan, but much less efficacious. As a general principle he was ready to allow the impropriety of such interference; but in circumstances of particular exigency, relief should be given according to the nature of the exigency.
The Marquis of Londonderry
said, his hon. friend the member for Norfolk had been so good as to say that he would not leave him in the lurch. His hon. friend should rather take care that he did not
364
Mr. Irving
said, that the reluctance and diffidence he always felt in addressing the House, was his reason for not having before avowed, that he was the originator of the measure, and offered such reasons as he had given for this measure in the committee above stairs. He still continued to think it was calculated to be useful, although it had been ridiculed so severely by his hon. and learned friend. He had not proposed this measure in ignorance of the true principles of political economy. It was one of many expedients; and he had supported it as the least exceptionable. He was not more responsible for it than the committee. It was the measure of the committee, not his. He thought the scheme could be carried into effect without danger; and it was the duty of the House to adopt measure which had the least tendency to relieve a class at once so important and so distressed as the agriculturists.
Mr. T. Wilson
considered this the only practical measure which had been recommended by the committee. It was asked, what advantage could be proposed by advancing prices? The answer was—they would encourage farmers to keep in cultivation lands which would otherwise be thrown out of cultivation. The merchants had received advances in consequence of their goods lying by them. What danger was there in making similar advances to farmers? He was astonished to hear it said, that it was too late now, for that one half the benefit of it was lost. In God's name, was not the other half worth saving? We had now had a series of good harvests, and it was not unnatural to suppose that a bad harvest was not far distant. Therefore, they ought to accept this, the best measure the committee had offered to them. It was desirable to have cheap bread; yet they must not, for the
365
Mr. Brougham
said, he would be the last man who would be slow to interfere for the relief of agriculture at the expense of principle. Least of all would he be slow to interfere thus in their case, when be well knew that general principles had not been attended to with respect to the other classes. He alluded to times when the mercantile, the colonial, and the manufacturing interests, had been suffering, and the House had interfered for their relief. Though there was this material difference, that in those cases there had been no deposit. It was clear the measure could only tend to raise the price, or keep it up when raised. Now, the persons who had the most need of relief were not those who had grain to sell, and who could take advantage of the high prices: they were those whom distress had already forced to sell all their produce for the payment of their rents; and, as they would have to come into the market, to purchase produce for the maintenance of themselves and their labourers, that would add to their distress. He would ask one question. How was the corn to be protected in the depots? Could that be done without expense. The farmers were called upon to give their property for the money which was to be advanced to them; but the fact was, that they would soon have no property to give, and thus, for the repayment of the loan, they would be exposed to a hardship far more severe than any which they now felt—an extent in aid—the only misery from which they were now free. For these considerations, as well as for others which had been stated, he would oppose the measure as mischievous, as at best ineffective in its result, and painful in its consequences.
The Marquis of Londonderry
said, that after the discussion which had taken place, and seeing that the resolution was not supported by those who brought it forward, he would with the leave of the House withdraw it.
The resolution was withdrawn. The chairman then reported progress, and obtained leave to sit again to-morrow.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Tuesday, May 7.
NEWSPAPERS—GOVERNMENT ADVERTISEMENTS.]
366
Mr. Hume
said, that during the last session the House had made an order for a return of the number of advertisements from the different public offices inserted in the English newspapers. That return had not yet been made. It appeared, that some of the papers published in London greatly exceeded their contemporaries in circulation. Now, it was evident, that if the intention of government in inserting advertisements in the newspapers was to give publicity to them, that object would be best effected by sending them to those papers which had the most extensive circulation.
"The Times"
"The Times"
FEES OF CONSULS.]
Mr. Hume
rose to move for certain returns respecting the fees of British consuls abroad. It would be admitted, that the officers appointed to superintend our commerce and protect our commercial interests abroad, should be men acquainted with our commercial relations—men a experience, diligence and activity; and that is should be a duty with the government at home to make such regulations as would prevent the support of the consuls from becoming a vexatious burthen to the trade of the country. It was, however, curious to observe, that, though the greatest commer-
367
l
l
l
s
d
l
s
d
l
s
d
l
s
d
l
s
d
l
s
368
l
l
l
l
369
The Marquis of Londonderry
allowed that the subject was one of great importance. It had for some time been under the consideration of the board of trade, who were endeavouring to frame a law to regulate the fees of all the consular establishments. Although the consular system was in his (lord L.'s) department, yet it was always administered under the advice and recommendation of the board of trade. It was certainly highly desirable to arrive at some equalization of the fees, or rather, that the individuals in question should be paid by salary, and not by fees. The theory was excellent, but the practice was difficult; for to carry the theory into practice, it would be necessary very much to enlarge the present allowance for salaries, which was only 30,000
l
370
Mr. Robinson
could assure the hon. member that he had never encountered greater difficulties in the investigation and arrangement of any subject, than in those of consular fees. They were at present levied by an authority, against which he certainly felt much disposed to protest. Conceiving it necessary that some more general and equal system should be adopted, be, with his noble friend, had gone through the various establishments with a view to ascertain how far it would be practicable to diminish the fees, and to substitute such moderate and properly apportioned salaries as would afford a sufficient remuneration. This, however, was a very difficult matter; as it became extremely difficult to ascertain the exact amount of duty performed and expense incurred by each individual. He (Mr. Robinson) trusted, however, that some arrangement might yet be made of a satisfactory nature, without any additional burthen on the country. Part of the expenses of the consuls was paid out of the civil list. The question was, how the
371
The motion was agreed to.
AGRICULTURAL DISTRESS REPORT.]
On the order of the day for going into a committee of the whole House, to consider further of the Report of the Committee on Agricultural Distress,
Mr. Attwood
rose and said, that, entertaining the opinions he did respecting the utter inefficacy, as to any advantage to the petitioners, from the resolutions intended to be moved in the committee, and more particularly in consequence of what they had witnessed the preceding night, he thought it his duty to call their attention to a consideration of the general subject before them, and of the whole system of measures which they had pursued on that subject. The House, he said, had then before it, bodies of petitioners more numerous and important, and a statement of distress more urgent than had been at any former period brought under their consideration; and the complaints oldie petitioners were marked with a general and an increasing spirit of discontent and dissatisfaction, arising out of the manner in which their representations had been disposed of by the House. Undoubtedly, the whole of the measures they had adopted on this subject had been founded on a settled conviction previously entertained that the distress complained of was out of their power to relieve; but whilst the House acted on a conviction like that, it was essential, not only that they should ha themselves well satisfied of its justice, but that their measures should, if it were possible, satisfy the petitioners themselves, that the evils they suffered were out of the reach of parliamentary interference; and the House ought, in his opinion, to be cautious that it did not add to the other calamities of the present times, that of causing to be withdrawn the confidence of the people from parliament under the present circumstances in which they were placed. He would request them to review for a moment before they proceeded further, what their measures hitherto had been. They had delegated their duties to three successive committees, the proceedings of which committees had produced no other effect than this, that they
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
s
d
s
d
d
s
s
s
383
384
385
386
s
s
s
s.?
387
388
l
l
389
s
d
s
s
390
s
s
s
s
s
391
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
392
Mr. Ricardo
said, he rose, impressed with great admiration for the speech which the House had just heard. He thought the hon. gentleman had shown a very considerable degree of talent, much research, and great knowledge of the subject upon which he had spoken. [Hear.] Notwithstanding these circumstances, he could not help thinking, that the hon. gentleman had committed a great many errors. The hon. gentleman had spoken of him (Mr. Ricardo) as if he had always been a favourer of a paper circulation [cries of "No, no"]—as if, in fact, he had not been one of the first to point out the evils of a currency, in the estimation of which the House could have no guide, and which was at all times liable to be increased or diminished, as it might suit the convenience or the pleasure of the Bank. The hon. gentleman appeared to have founded the whole of his speech upon a passage in a pamphlet that he (Mr. Ricardo) had written, respecting what were called "remunerating prices." To the test of the doctrine and reasoning of that pamphlet, he should be very willing to trust the whole of the argument in this case. It could make no difference to the farmer how he obtained those remunerating prices, provided he got them; although it was very true (as had been asserted by the hon. gentleman), that in order to obtain such prices, he must be content to be paid in money or value of very different descriptions. But the important fact was, that it was' impossible a man could long go on, producing any one particular commodity, unless he could obtain for it a remunerating price.—The hon. gentleman had spoken as if he (Mr. Ricardo) were alone responsible for the alteration which
393
394
395
s
s
396
Mr. Attwood,
in explanation, observed, that he had fallen into no mistake respecting the price of corn in the former part of the last century. He was perfectly aware of the fall which then took place, and he would remind the hon. member, that Adam Smith had ascribed it to an alteration in the value of money. He was aware also that, about the middle of the century, corn had recovered from that depression, from whatever cause, and had reached its former price, but had never exceeded it till the French war. If the hon. member would refer to the price for 20 years before the war, he would find no advance whatever in that time, and it was a period when much additional land was brought into cultivation, when importation above exportation was insignificant, and when population was rapidly increasing.
The House having resolved itself into a committee,
The Marquis of Londonderry
said, that no individual listened with more satisfaction than he did to displays of talent, coming from any part of the House, on any question connected with the great interests of the country, but he must say, that if they did not confine themselves to some one practical view of the question before them, they would sacrifice the interests of the country. The hon. member (Mr. Attwood), whom he should have listened to with great pleasure on a more suitable occasion, had entered into the wide field of the bullion question, and he had naturally brought forward the hon. member for Portarlington, as the gladiator on the other side of the question. He humbly suggested to the hon. member; that if be was disposed to consider the effect of taxation on the country, he might have taken the occasion when the proposition was, to take off some of the taxes; and that if he chose to consider the state of the currency in its largest sense, he might have taken the opportu-
397
s
s
398
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s.
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
399
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
400
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
401
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
402
Sir T. Lethbridge
began by returning his thanks to the hon. member for Callington (Mr. Attwood) for one of the most able speeches he had ever heard in that House—a speech which would carry conviction to the heart of every man in the country. He agreed with that hon. member, that it was the duty of the House to legislate with a view to the benefit of the whole community, and he admitted, that he must be mistaken in the grounds on which he supported his present opinions, if they were opposed to that principle. The distinguishing feature in his proposition was, that it imposed a protecting duty on all agricultural produce. He was aware of the delicacy of legislating upon the food of man. In this commercial and manufacturing country this was always a delicate subject of legislation. But, if ever there was a period when it was incumbent on the House to look firmly at the question, this was that time. It was said, that a duty of 35
s
s
s
s
s
d
403
d
s
s
404
"That it is expedient, for the protection of the agriculture of the united kingdom against foreign competition, that the following rate of duties shall be payable, and paid, on the import of any productions of foreign countries similar to those of our own, soil; and that, subject to such rates and duties, the import of all such productions shall, whenever the ports shall open under the present law, thereafter remain free for the import of all such productions, viz.:—
Wheat
40
s
Hemp
15
s
Meal
10
s
Hides
2d. lb.
Flour
14
s
Tallow
20
s
Rye
26
s
d
Seeds
28
s
Oats
13
s
d
Butter
56
s
Pease
26
s
d
Cheese
37
s
d
Beans
26
s
d
Poultry, 33
l
ad valorem
Barley, Bear or Bigg
20
s
Apples
5
s
Wool
1
s
Pears
7
s
Flax
20
s
l
ad valorem."
Sir F. Burdett
said, he felt no inclination to agree to any of the propositions which had been submitted to the House. With regard to the proposition of the hon. baronet for imposing an import duty on the various articles of our produce, for the sake of keeping up the prices, it was, in his opinion, a matter of minor importance, if not of total indifference. The hon. baronet appeared to complain, very unnecessarily, of an attempt to put him down; seeing that his opinions, whether they were right or wrong, had been listened to with attention by the House. There was one point in which he agreed with the hon. baronet, namely, the utter futility of all the projects and resolutions which had been proposed to the House. The view which the hon. baronet had taken of this subject, such as it was, was at least clear and intelligible. Its object was, that such a duty should be imposed as would pre-
405
s
406
407
408
l
l
l
409
410
l
411
412
413
habes confitentem reum;
Lusisti satis, edisti satis, atque bibisti;
Tempus abire tibi est.——
414
Mr. Robinson
began by stating, that the party invective in which the hon. baronet had indulged, seemed to him ill placed on a debate of this nature. If a specific motion were brought forward involving the conduct of ministers, be should feel no difficulty to meet and answer it. Even if he were to admit the propositions of the hon. baronet, that the present distresses were occasioned by taxation and the late change in the currency, and that the only remedy for them was the reduction of taxation on one hand, and on the other the abrogation of the law which compelled cash payments, yet, as it was not contended that any immediate benefit could result from either of those measures, whatever their remedial effect might ultimately be, he could see no: reason why, on the present occasion, the. House should not take into consideration, the mode in which acknowledged defects in the existing laws relative to the trade in corn could most conveniently be removed. He had always taken this view of the question—that an alteration in the corn laws, either in the shape proposed by his right hon. friend, or the hon. members for Somersetshire and for Wiltshire,, could not operate any immediate relief. The immediate pressure upon the agricultural interest arose, it must be admitted, from extreme depression of price, which, was partly occasioned by superabundant production. The hon. baronet had ridiculed this argument which had been urged, by his noble friend; but he, thought he must have done so from misunderstanding its nature. Nobody had ever said that abundance generally was an evil; but, on the other hand, nobody who thought upon the subject at all could deny, that if the quantity of any article produced, exceeded the demand for it, so that the price in the market fell below the cost of its production, the producer must suffer from that circumstance. He had never contended
415
416
Sir J. Newport
was of opinion, that it
417
Mr. Ricardo,
being of opinion that the sufferings of the agriculturists were in a great degree owing to the corn laws, considered the present a fit opportunity for saying a few words upon that subject. Even if he were fully to agree with gentlemen who ascribed the present distresses to the change in the value of the currency and the weight of taxation, still he thought those gentlemen must admit that the corn laws, considered abstractedly without any reference to those two questions, were calculated to produce great evils. One of the principal of these evils was, the unnaturally high price of corn in this country over all other countries. The hon. baronet had admitted, that superabundance would occasion a great fall in the value of corn as well as all other articles. And here he must observe, that there appeared to be a little inconsistency in the arguments of the hon. baronet. In one part of his speech the hon. baronet admitted that a superabundant production of corn would occasion mischief to the extent in which it was at present experienced. [Sir. F. Burdett dissented.] The hon. baronet now said he did not admit this; but he certainly understood him to do so, and to apply the argument to the change in the value of the currency; for he said that those who contended, that the increase of an article beyond a certain limit, would occasion a fall in price greater in proportion than the increase which had taken place, must admit that an alteration in the value of the currency will produce a change in the value of commodities, greater in proportion than the alteration in the value of money. Although he (Mr. R.) was of opinion, that a superabundant supply of an article produced a sinking in the value of the article greater than in proportion to the additional quantity, yet he did not apply this argument to money. He would put a case to the House, to show how a superabundant supply of an article would produce a sinking of its aggregate value much greater than in proportion to the surplus supply. He would suppose, that in a particular country a very rare
418
l
419
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
420
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
l
s
s
l
s
s
s
s
s
s
421
s
s
l
l
l
The chairman then reported progress, and obtained leave to sit again to-morrow.
HOUSF OF COMMONS.
Wednesday, May 8.
COMPLAINT AGAINST THE MORNING
Mr. Hume
said, he rose to complain of a gross misrepresentation which had that morning appeared in a newspaper, relative to a motion which he had made yesterday for a return of the sums paid to the different newspapers by government for advertisements, &c. So far from finding fault with the animadversions of a public journal, he thought it its province to advert to all public subjects, but, at the same time, as the character of a public man was public property, the writer should take care that his animadversions were not founded on a gross
422
423
AGRICULTURAL DISTRESS REPORT.]
The order of the day was read for going into a committee of the whole House, to consider further of the Report of the Committee on the Agricultural Distress. On the question "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the chair,"
Mr. Wyvill
rose. He said, that the distress of the country was so paramount at the present moment, that no consideration should deter him from doing what he conceived to be his duty. Two committees had been appointed; but the result of their labours had been any thing rather than satisfactory. It appeared to him, that the resolutions now before the House were likely to do any thing rather than afford relief; and, indeed, the noble marquis who had brought forward some of them, admitted that they were not calculated to give relief immediately. With such a view of the subject, he proposed to take the sense of the House upon the only resolution which to him seemed capable of meeting the difficulty. Two courses only presented themselves of relief. The first was, the repeal of Mr. Peel's bill; the second was, a reduction of of taxes. Now, to the repeal of Mr. Peel's bill he was, averse. The country had proceeded so far with the difficulty, that he, for one, was prepared to go
424
l
l
Mr. Lockhart
said, that a reduction of taxes would, in his opinion, be tantamount to a breach of national faith; for with such a reduction, it would be impossible to pay the interest of the national debt. No one of the 500 petitions from the agricultural classes went the length of this motion of the hon. member. He had heard the distress ascribed to a superabundant produce; but of this he was not satisfied. The notion appeared to owe its origin to the early sales of corn at low prices; but if he were to see in a pawnbroker's shop an unusual quantity of wearing apparel, he should not therefore believe that there was a superabundance of that article, though, assuredly, he should believe that the consumers were distressed. But, whatever was the cause of the distress, he conceived the proposition of the hon. member for Portarlington was altogether unsound. It would have the effect of throwing much of the poor land out of cultivation; a measure so destructive to those interested in it, that had he not known the amiable disposition of that hon. member, he should be disposed to question his motives. The persons engaged in the cultivation of these lands could not successfully look for employment in any other direction, as the manufactures were already overstocked. The
425
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
426
Lord Althorp
said, he entirely agreed in the principle of the amendment, and referred, as a proof of his assertion, to the various votes which he had given during the present session. At the same time he wished the House to go into the proposed committee—not that he looked upon the inquiry in which it was engaged as calculated to afford immediate relief, but that he thought the present corn laws so bad, that any of the proposed resolutions would be much better.
Mr. Monck
said, that the only mode of relieving the present agricultural distress, was by an immediate repeal of taxes to a very considerable amount. He had heard much respecting low prices; yet even under these low prices, bread was 100 per cent dearer in England than it was in France. In 1792, and for the nine years previous, the price of wheat was 44
s
s
s
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
Sir R. Wilson
said, he had not hither to remained silent on this momentous question of agricultural distress from any want of sympathy in that distress, but from the hope that hon. gentlemen would see the fallacy of attempting to relieve that distress by partial measures. Finding, how-
427
l
l.,
l
s
Mr. Hudson Gurney
said, that he could not vote for the motion of the hon. gentleman In the present situation of the frances of the country, it was obviously impossible that the taxation could be
428
s
429
could
Mr. Western
agreed, that the most effectual relief for the distresses of agriculture would be found in a reduction of taxes, and his hon. friend's motion should therefore have his decided approbation. But he was equally anxious to press upon their consideration, a repeal of that act (Mr. Peel's bill) which had increased that distress beyond any thing contemplated at the time by the promoters of the measure. Until they had fully grappled with that bill, it would be in vain to seek any remedy. To discuss any scale of prices or measure of duty, without looking steadily at that bill, was to place the subordinate before the primary consideration. To talk of price until they had ascertained the measure of value they had to give, was quite delusive. The price they had first to settle, was the price of money [Hear, hear], and that would regulate all the other measures. Did the House think the industry of the country could bear this oppressive accumulation arising out of the act of 1819? The noble marquis had said, that the price of Dantsic wheat was 45
s
s
s
s
430
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, that the hon. member had objected much to the bill in 1819. Now, as it was the intention of the hon. member to bring that measure separately under the consideration of the House, he should feel it at unnecessary to say any thing further upon it at that moment. The question involved so many important considerations that it might not to be mixed up with the agricultural question. It was obvious that any alteration in the existing standard must go to alter all the contracts that had been entered into since 1819; and the consequent mischief must be evident to every one. If it was correct that under such an accumulation of burthens and privations, the taxation which bore upon the agricultural interest, had increased in the ration of 40
l
Mr. John Williams
addressed the House for the first time. He said, that if he thought that in now presenting himself to the notice of the chair, he was at all interfering with, or delaying the consideration of, the relief to be extended for those distresses which the House was called upon to remedy, he should think himself without excuse. But, it was only because he believed that his duty obliged him to assign his reasons for supporting the motion of his hon. friend, and that by such a
431
432
433
Mr. Philips
said, that because the motion went to recommend a reduction of taxes, he would give it his support. The ground upon which he had felt, at the close of his hon. friend's speech, that he could not vote for his motion was, that he had supposed him (Mr. W.) to have insisted upon such a reduction of taxation as could not be effected without defrauding the public creditor. As his hon. friend appeared to disclaim these intentions, he would support his motion. An hon. friend had recommended a return to a depreciated paper currency. Now, the country having most wisely adopted a metallic currency, it would be worse than inexpedient to go back to one of paper. The present agricultural distress arose from the charges which now fell on the farmer which be had not formerly to sustain. These made the prices which would formerly remunerate him insufficient. His tithes had increased—wages had increased—poor-rates had increased—and his taxation had enormously increased. Tithes and wages had in some measure settled themselves; and poor-rates had been reduced in something like a proportion to the diminished price of provisions. To him, therefore, it appeared, that the only way which the agricultural interest, could be relieved by parliament, was, by the remission of taxes. The circumstances of the country were such, that the public expenditure must be reduced. That House ought not to rest satisfied with voting against the continuance of two lords of the admiralty, or with doing, away one of the post-masters-general. They ought to carry retrenchment and economy into every department.
Sir I. Coffin
said, that a gallant member seemed to consider that Frenchmen were
434
Mr. K. Douglas
said, that diminution of taxation, though good in itself; would, if carried to too great an extent, prove very injurious. He disapproved of a motion which sought the attainment of a particular object by a side wind.
Mr. Curwen
would vote for the motion, because it called for a remission of taxes. He feared the period was not very remote, when the only means that would remain for saving the agricultural interest would, be, to call on the monied interest to bear a part of the burthen. He should, therefore, infinitely regret that any remedy should have been omitted to be applied for the purpose of averting such a calamity.
Mr. Denis Brown
rejoiced in the motion having been made, as it would, afford the House an opportunity of proving in what light it beheld a proposition which would go to prevent the dividends from being paid, and lead to a revolution.
Mr. Beaumont
said, the only way to prevent a revolution would be, to relieve the country from the distress under which it laboured; and how were those difficulties to be removed but by the repeal of oppressive taxes?
Mr. Brougham
would support the motion, not because it had a tendency to prevent the House from going into a committee, but because the motion put in issue a principle of great importance.
The Marquis of Londonderry
wished the House to bear in mind the general principle for which the hon. mover was disposed to contend, namely, a remission of taxes to the amount of 20,000,000
l
Mr. Tierney
said, he was quite as much averse to revolution as the hon. gentleman. The motion did no more than establish a principle; and he could have no objection to it, unless it had the effect
435
Mr. Bright
thought, that a great reduction of taxes was necessary, might be made, and would afford very considerable relief.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, it was generally understood that those who voted for a motion acquiesced in the arguments by which it was supported—[Cries of "No, no!"]. Those who did not do so would do well to avow their motives; and he was glad that so many had done so, to avoid being thought favourable to a proposition which was revolutionary in its tendency.
Mr. Powlett
supported the motion, but wished to qualify his vote as to the amount of taxes which it was practicable to reduce.
Mr. Benett
, of Wilts, did not concur with the hon. mover in any thing but the vote he should give. As the greatest relief might be afforded by lessening the weight of taxation, he was, almost against his will, compelled to support the amendment.
Mr. T. Wilson
was disposed to vote for the remission of taxation to the utmost extent to which it could with safety be carried; but the, present motion was brought forward under circumstances so deeply affecting the honour and good faith of the country, that he felt it to be his duty not only to vote against it, but to call upon every reflecting man to pause before he gave a vote for a proposition, which might be productive of infinite mischief.
The House divided: For the amendment 37. Against it 120.; Majority 63.
List of the Minority.
Allan, J. A.
Brougham, H.
Barret, S. M.
Blake, sir F.
436
Beaumont, T. W.
Hume, J.
Birch, J.
Lennard, T. B.
Bright, H.
Maule, hon. W.
Benett, John
Monck, J. B.
Bernal, R.
Philips, G.
Coffin, sir I.
Power, R.
Creevey, T.
Powlett, hon. W.
Crespigny, sir W. De
Palmer, C. F.
Chaloner, R.
Sykes, D.
Curwen, J. C.
Sebright, sir J.
Denman, T.
Tierney, right hon. G.
Dundas, hon. T.
Williams, John
Fitzroy, lord C.
Western, C. C.
Fergusson, sir R.
Webbe, colonel
Guise, sir W.
TELLERS
Griffith, J. W.
Wyvill, M.
Graham, S.
Wilson, sir R.
Hornby, E.
PAIRED OFF
Heron, sir R.
Gurney, R. H.
The House then resolved itself into the committee; and the adjourned debate being resumed,
Mr. Benett,
of Wilts, addressed the committee. He said, that the act which had restored cash payments had virtually added 35 per cent to the taxes and to the private debts of individuals. He thought it would yet be necessary for them to retrace their steps, or the country could never recover from its present depression. It was said, that the present corn bill had given the agriculturists a monopoly; but he could never discover that it had benefitted the landed interest. It, indeed, prevented the importation of grain for a time, till the price rose to 80
s
s
437
l
s
s
d
l
s
s
s
s
l
s
s
s
l
s
d
s
s
d
438
s
s
439
440
Mr. Cripps
said, that amongst the number of plans which had been submitted to their consideration, it was impossible to find one that could be wholly approved of. They were, therefore, called on to decide which of these six evils—for he believed there were six sets of resolutions—was the least. Much had been said about the good effects which would be produced by a remission of taxation. Now, a reduction of 8
s
s
441
Mr. Brogden,
the chairman, suggested, that it would tend to simplify the proceedings of the committee, if the several propositions were submitted to them
seriatim
Mr. Bankes
said, that the hon. baronet (sir T. Lethbridge) thought the present period peculiarly favourable for legislating on the corn laws; because the price of corn being very low, there was no danger of any person opposing the agricultural interest. But, he requested those who entertained this opinion to read the resolution of the committee of last year, and say, what there was in the present system of the country which should induce the House to form a different opinion from that which they then entertained? The House had received a specific recommendation from that committee not to legislate at all upon the subject. The only circumstance that could induce him to legislate, would be, if there was any prospect of the price of wheat reaching 80
s
s
442
s
l
s
d
443
444
Mr. Huskisson
said, he would state very shortly the course which he had taken during this session, and his motives in tendering the resolutions which he had offered. It was known, that he had abstained altogether from attending the agricultural committee this year. He felt great satisfaction in hearing his noble friend say, that, after the treatment he had experienced from several members of the committee of last year, he was fully justified in abstaining from its duties this year. Of the report of this year he would
445
Lord Althorp
could not agree with those who thought that the present was not a proper time to legislate on the corn laws; for if, as had been recommended, they were to prevent the importation of foreign corn till the 25th March, the consequence must be that the price would rise next year, and that the subject would then come under discussion with greater inconvenience. He had looked at the evils of our agricultural interests; and the
446
s
s
s
s
s
s
447
Mr. Gooch
said, he had unfortunately given offence by stating that the report of the agricultural committee was a mystification. He really considered that report drawn up with talent; but it was not a report which could afford much instruction. He lamented that any party spirit should pervade the House on this subject, yet the abandonment of one resolution by the noble lord was certainly ground for the attack made by an hon. baronet. He wished the first resolution moved by his noble friend had been agreed to, as it would have relieved the country from the glut in the markets. As to any sweeping measure for the relief of agriculture, he did not believe there was any possible chance of giving relief in that way. All they could do was, to stem the torrent of mischief, which was inundating the country. All they could do was to prevent a fluctuation in the prices of corn which kept the farmer always in a panic. He agreed in the third resolution, which declared that the ports ought not to be open till wheat came to 75
s
Sir T. Lethbridge
repeated, that a protecting duty of less than 24
s
448
Mr. N. Calvert
did not think that any immediate relief to the agricultural interest could result from the present measure. It was necessary, however, to alter the existing law in order to prevent the great fluctuation of prices that would proceed from opening the ports. The protecting duties might effect that object. He had no great favour for any of the plans; but he thought that of the hon. member for Cumberland preferable to any other.
Mr. Irving
said, he would support the resolution, as he was not disposed to leave the noble lord in the lurch. But he left it to the noble lord to prove his consistency, by distinguishing between the principle of the resolution which he had called on him (Mr. I.) to acknowledge, and that which he had himself submitted. The only difference between them was, that the resolution of the noble lord was inadequate, and ought never to be resorted to at all, while the other would have relieved the existing pressure of distress. If his resolution had been absurd, he was not chargeable with its absurdity, but the committee. He did not think it was absurd, and would submit it again. Though it might be in opposition to the principles of political economy, yet it was justified by the circumstances of the times. He did not approve of any of the plans proposed, but he thought that of the noble marquis the least objectionable, and would give it his support.
Sir N. Colthurst
observed, that there were other kinds of agricultural produce, which were entitled to protection, besides corn. He would mention butter, and meant to propose a resolution to that effect.
Sir W. W. Wynn
expressed himself in favour of protecting duties, because without them he conceived, if the ports should open at 80
s
Mr. Griffiths
wished to know whether, according to the popular doctrine of superabundance of corn, there was likewise a superabundance of all other articles of agricultural produce; seeing that live stock had fallen in price proportionably to grain. If there was not likewise superabundance of these latter—a proposition
449
l
Mr. Brougham
said, that the question before the committee was, whether any and what changes ought to be made in the existing corn law? Now, among all the various opinions delivered to the House, he had heard but one in favour of the law as it stood. All who had spoken thought that nothing could be more injurious in its consequences than the act in force. The two objections to it were, that it prohibited importation till a certain price was attained and then permitted unlimitted supply, and that it likewise embraced the system of averages. The question was, did any of the propositions before them get quit of these objections, and what ought to be substituted in the place of regulations so condemned? The noble lord's plan was liable to both objections; for it fixed an importation price, and required the striking of averages. The right hon. gentleman's plan was open only to one. He fixed no importation price, allowing the trade to be free on paying duties; but he established averages. His hon. friend, the member for Portarlington had proposed a plan which was liable to neither of those objections. He proposed, that as soon as the price of corn should reach 70
s
s
s
s
450
s
s
s
s
s
451
l
ultimum remedium
452
The Marquis of Londonderry
agreed with the hon. and learned gentleman that the measures which had been proposed to the House, were calculated rather to protect the country against future danger, than to afford it immediate relief. He could not, however, agree that the reduction of taxes would benefit the farmer; because, although such a measure would be advantageous to him, in his character of consumer, it would be detrimental to him, in his character of grower of corn, by depressing the price of his produce. He regretted the observations that had fallen from the hon. and learned gentleman on the subject of the currency. The hon. and learned gentleman admitted all the evils that would result from any change in the decision which parliament
453
The Committee then divided on sir T. Lethbridge's Resolutions [See p. 404], The numbers were: For the Resolutions 24: Against them 243. Majority 919.
List of the Minority.
Bastard, J.
King, sir J. D.
Browne, D.
Leigh, J. H.
Browne,—jun.
Lockhart, J.
Chandos, marq. of
Milbank, M.
Chichester, A.
Nugent, sir G.
Curteis, E. J.
O'Callaghan, col.
Cotterell, sir J. G.
Stanhope, hon. J. H.
Dundas, C.
Shelley, sir J.
Drummond, J.
Shiffner, sir G.
Fane, John
Wemyss, J.
Harvey, sir E.
Wells, John
Hudson, H.
TELLER
Jocelyn, hon. J.
Lethbridge, sir T.
After this division, Mr. Benett's resolutions [See p. 351] were negatived without a division. Mr. Huskisson's Resolutions, joined to the two last Resolutions of Mr. Ricardo, who had withdrawn his previous resolutions in favour of the
454
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Thursday, May 9.
AGRICULTURAL DISTRESS REPORT.]
The order of the day was read for going into a committee to consider further of the Report on the Agricultural Distress. On the motion, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair,"
Mr. Denison
said, that none of the proposed resolutions had a tendency to remove the existing evil, which arose out of unbounded taxation, and the rapid restriction of the circulating medium. Taxation was pressing agriculture down to utter ruin. He was persuaded that government might keep faith with the public creditor, and yet repeal two millions and a half of taxes. He was sorry to see a prevalent disposition in all classes, the land-owners, the fund-owners, and the ship-owners, to shift, the burthen from their own shoulders upon the shoulders of others. If ministers would give relief by a remission of taxation, all classes would more willing bear their remaining burthens.
The House having gone into the committee,
Lord Althorp
rose, to offer a few reasons for the amendment which he had proposed late last night. His hon. friend behind him (Mr. Ricardo) had proposed a series of resolutions which fixed an import duty upon wheat of 20
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
455
Mr. Ricardo
was surprised at his noble friend's proposing such an amendment. He could not see upon what principle his noble friend could justify raising the bounty on exportation to 18
s
s
456
s
s
s
s
457
458
s
s
s
s
s
459
s
s
s
s
460
461
Mr. Benett
, of Wiltshire, said, he had never stated that foreign corn could be purchased at 25
s
s
s
s
s
s
Mr. Curwen
reminded the House, that in the memorable year 1799, when a scarcity was felt, an importation to the extent of a six weeks supply was immediately called for. That supply was provided at great expense, and not without some difficulty, from America and the Cape of Good Hope, and some rice was imported even from India. In times of danger he admitted the necessity of importing foreign corn; it ought to be then liberally received, but not permitted to remain here and accumulate to the injury of the home grower. When he objected to the duty fixed by the hon. baronet, it was not because he thought it beyond the scale of protection really due to the home grower, but because he thought it would be impossible to maintain it against the probable feeling of the country. He denied the accuracy of the calculations upon which the rates of protecting duty mentioned were framed. The noble marquis's, though intended to reconcile the wishes of all parties, were founded upon erroneous data. The price of production in foreign countries was not fairly given. Mr. Solly had informed the committee, that corn at Odessa could be had, and at a remune-
462
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
463
s
s
s
s
Mr. W. Burrell
said, that, all things considered, he was disposed to prefer the proposal of the noble lord; and, if it were accompanied with another suggestion mentioned in the report, he should consider it liable to very little exception. It was, that a duty of from 12
s
s
s
Lord Eastnor
believed that the proposition under discussion could not effect the relief of the people, and was calculated only to excite false hopes. He felt inclined to support the proposition of the noble marquis, but thought it did not go far enough.
Lord Cranborne
thought, that a duty of 12
s
s
s
464
The Marquis of Londonderry
said, that from what he understood to have been the views of the hon. member for Cumberland in the committee, he was astonished at the views which he now seemed to take. The hon. member had said, that the markets were depressed in consequence of the quantity remaining of foreign corn since 1819. When the ports were open, and where there were no restraints, he admitted the markets were always liable to be glutted with foreign corn. The noble lord here minutely detailed the terms of his propositions. It was to be observed, that a few years ago, instead of foreign importations being viewed with alarm, the prevalent fear was that there would not be enough corn to import from Europe, and America was looked to with satisfaction as a resource. A return to that state of things might be contemplated. He denied also that 8
s
s
s
s
s
s
465
s
Mr. D. Browne
approved of the import price as well as of the duty proposed by the hon. member for Cumberland. He was an advocate for the prohibition of the importation of foreign grain, on the ground that if the farmer was secured in the possession of the home market, the united kingdom could produce corn sufficient for the consumption of its inhabitants.
Mr. Robertson
entered into some historical details relative to the state of France previous to the seven years war, and to the change that took place during that war, by which France became a country importing, instead of exporting, grain. While she was a flourishing commercial state she ceased to pay the same attention to her agriculture. He compared with this the state of Great Britain, which had exported grain until she took from France her colonies in both the hemispheres. She then became an importing country. After the breaking out of the American war, when France and Spain united against Great Britain, when she was no longer mistress of the channel, and her commerce was crippled and reduced, her agriculture revived, and, from 1780 to 1784, she again became a country exporting grain. On the re-establishment of peace, her trade recovered; her revenue, of only 10 millions, augmented one fifth in the space of two years; she once more imported grain and so she continued until the end of the last war. The hon. gentleman concluded with calling upon government to protect and advance commerce, as the best mode of securing the welfare of all classes, and of giving the farmer a remunerating price for his production.
Mr. Lockhart
said, he did not desire
466
Sir C. Burrell
was not disposed to give protection to agriculture beyond what was just to the other interests of the country. But he had alway seen that in proportion as agriculture nourished, the other interests were also prosperous. To support agriculture would be to support the country; he should therefore vote for the resolution of the noble lord.
Sir H. Vivian
said, he was not one of those who attributed the distressed state of agriculture to taxation. The hon member for York had, on the preceding evening, proposed a reduction of taxes to the amount of 20,000,000
l
467
Sir J. Shelley
thought the proposition of the noble marquis would do some good, and that it was at all events better than the existing state of the corn laws.
Mr. Whitmore
conceived the great cause of the present distress to be overproduction. Not that he imagined, when a country stood in a natural situation, that an abundant crop could be considered an evil. In ordinary cases, where there was a large growth of corn in one part of the world, there was a defective crop in another, and the prices in consequence equallized themselves. But this was not at present the case. The circumstances of the war gave a considerable stimulus to agricultural speculations; corn was grown, at an immense expense, on poor soils; it produced very high prices; and the price of every article connected with farming was raised in proportion. The amount of capital employed, when prices were high, was, therefore, much greater than when prices were low. The capital employed in cultivating 100 acres of land in 1790, 1803, and 1813, was widely different. The amount of capital employed in the last period, as compared with the first, was no less than double. Large quantities of corn were grown during the war at a great expense. The effect of the bill of 1815 was, to keep up the stimu-
468
Mr. Western
said, the more he considered the question, the more he was convinced that this was not the proper time to legislate upon it. No member had clearly comprehended the whole bearing of the actual circumstances of the court, try, or the consequences of enacting a permanent law in our present unsettled state. The most vague ideas prevailed on the subject of our difficulties. He would take the premises of those who supported the resolutions, and would show that they did not warrant the conclusion to which they had come. If, as they asserted, every country of Europe teemed with a superabundant produce, and if the markets were in an unnatural state of depression, was this the time to proceed to the forma-
469
Mr. Alderman Heygate
thought the proposed measures of the noble marquis would do more mischief to the agriculturists than that under which they now laboured. Something, however, should be done, and it was only in consideration of the necessity of the case that he could be brought to vote in favour of any protecting duty. The propositions before the House were so numerous and so complicated, that it was difficult to understand them. He was most inclined to the plan of the hon. member for Cumberland; but he would vote for no plan which did not Contain a clause to remit the duty in the event of the price of corn rising so high as to indicate the approach of scarcity.
Mr. Ricardo
denied that the price of corn on the continent was liable to the fluctuations of our currency.
The committee then divided on lord Althorp's Amendment, to fix a permanent duty of 18
s
List of the Minority.
Boughey, sir J. F.
Dickinson, W.
Burrell, sir C.
Gordon, hon. R.
Bankes, H.
Griffith, J. W.
Bennet, hon. H. G.
Guise, sir W.
Buxton, J. J.
Hudson, H.
Brougham, H.
Knatchbull, sir E.
Byng, G.
Lockhart, W. E.
Barham, J. F.
Leycester, R.
Calvert, N.
Ossulston, lord
Curwen, J. C.
Robinson, sir G.
470
Shelley, sir J.
TELLER
Webb, Ed.
Althorp, lord
Western, C.
A second division took place on Mr. Ricardo's propositions for a duty of 20
s
s
s
s
s
List of the Minority.
Althorp, lord
Langston, J. H.
Birch, Jos.
Marjoribanks, S.
Brougham, H.
Maberly, J.
Barnard, lord
Newport, rt. hon. sir J.
Beaumont, T. W.
Phillips, G.
Becher, W. W.
Rumbold, C. E.
Carter, J.
Robinson, sir G.
Davies, col.
Smith, G.
Denison, W. J.
Scarlett, J.
Evans, W.
Thompson, W.
Haldimand, W.
Whitmore, W. W.
Hume, J.
TELLER
Lamb, hon. G.
Ricardo, D.
Lamb, hon. W.
The committee then divided on the marquis of Londonderry's third resolution. [
See p
List of the Minority.
Attwood, M.
Heygate, Ald.
Bankes, H.
Hudson, H.
Byng, G.
Lambton, J. G.
Barham, J. F.
Lockhart, J. I.
Calvert, C.
Monck, J. B.
Campbell, hon. G. P.
Monteith, H.
Campbell, A
Normanby, visct.
Curwen, J. C.
Ossulston, lord
Calvert, N.
Rickford, W.
Cavendish, hon. H.
Sumner, H.
Cheere, C.M.
Tavistock, marquis of
Dickinson, W.
Whitbread, J. S.
Dickinson, W
Whitbread, J. S.
Duncannon, visct.
Williams, J.
Ellice, E.
Wigram, W.
Fitzory, lord C.
Wilson, sir R.
Griffith, J. W.
Wood, alderman
Gaskell, B.
Wells, John
Gladstone, John
TELLER
Guise, sir W.
Bennet, hon. H. G.
The Marquis of Londonderry stated, that it was not his intention to found any proposition upon his second resolution, relative to the grinding of foreign corn in warehouse. The rest of the resolutions were agreed to.
HOUSE OF LORDS,
Friday, May 10.
DISTRESS IN IRELAND.]
The Earl of Darnley
said, that their lordships and the public now knew, and minister ought
471
The Earl of Liverpool
trusted that the explanation which he had to give would
472
The Marquis of Lansdown
, though agreeing with the noble earl as to the inexpediency of interfering with the supply of provisions to the markets, was still of opinion, that the case of the suffering poor, in the part of Ireland alluded to, formed an exception to any general rule, and that it was incumbent upon their lordships to take care that every thing was done that could be done for the relief of the unhappy sufferers. That the distress was most afflicting, the accounts from the south-west of Ireland agreed in stating, and the information he
473
The Earl a Blesinton
supported the address. He stated the number of the starving population in the county of Clare to be 28,507. The distress was of no recent origin. It had been going on for a considerable time, and so strongly was it felt, that when he applied in 1819 to the archbishop of Tuam for his subscription to defray the expense of a statue to be erected to the memory of his late majesty, his grace answered, that he rather wished the money to be applied to the relief of the starving people of Ireland. Distress was not exclusively felt in the south and west of Ireland. In the county of Donegall there was no want of food, but of money to buy it. Money and capital were the things wanted. If the people were fed, without being provided with employment, mischief would ensue. If it were wished to do good to Ireland, a large sum must be given, at least five millions; two of which should be dis-
474
Lord Ellenborough
said, it would be satisfactory if the noble earl would state how long it was since the government began to afford relief to the suffering population of Ireland, and to what extent that relief had been afforded.
The Earl of Liverpool
said, be was unable to state to what extent the relief had been afforded; but it was some weeks since that money had been sent for the purpose of purchasing provisions for those who were destitute; and measures had also been taken to provide seed, in order to prevent, as far as possible, a recurrence of the distress.
The Earl of Limerick
observed, that any ministry who could have neglected the consideration of the distressed state of Ireland, would have been deserving of public execration. But the contrary was the fact in this instance. The noble earl had stated, that measures had been re, sorted to, and were now in progress for the relief of the distress, and relying with confidence upon that declaration, he should oppose the address.
Earl Grey
, could not discover any ground for that confidence which the noble, earl was so disposed to place in ministers. They had authentic accounts, the truth of which could not be disputed, that the population of Ireland, from whence large supplies of grain were drawn to England, were, a great part of them at least, in state of distress bordering upon famine, and yet there was no trace of any aid furnished by government for the mitigation of this dreadful calamity. What a picture of a government! Hundreds and thousands of-the population of Ireland dying in the streets and highways for want of food, in the midst of plenty, mitt we were merely told by the king's ministers, that measures were in contemplation to afford relief! Was this a ground, for refusing support to the address? On the contrary, that House ought to be informed of what had been done (if any thing had been done) for the alleviation of this dreadful distress; and if it should turn out that nothing effectual had beet done, they should wrest from the hands of incapable men that power which they knew not how to use for the advantage of the country.
Lord Ellenborough
trusted that his noble friend would carry his motion to a division.
475
The Duke of Wellington
said, it had been distinctly stated by his noble friend; that money had been sent to supply food, in order to obviate the, present distress, and that seed had been provided for the purpose of preventing the recurrence of that distress.
Lord Holland
said, that the information alluded to by the noble duke was unsatisfactory, inasmuch as no dated were mentioned by which alone the House could be enabled to judge whether the proper means had been adopted in proper time for the relief of the distress.
The Earl of Liverpool
said, he could not at, the moment recollect the dates but it was some weeks since that the relief was afforded in money to purchase food; and, subsequently, seed had been supplied, in order, to prevent a recurrence of the distress.
The Earl of Lauderdale
contended, that the admissions of the noble earl were sufficient to induce him to vote for the address; as it was evident that the relief was not afforded in time, especially with regard to seed, which ministers ought to have known was long since required, and that the time they had chosen for supplying it was too late to be of any real use.
The House divided; For the Address 17. Against it 35.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, May 10.
ROMAN CATHOLIC PEERS BILL.]
On the motion of Mr. Canning, the order of the day was read for the second reading of the Catholic Peers bill.
Mr. T. A. Smith
said, he felt if his duty to address a few observations to the House on this particular measure, but on the general question he would not say one word. With all the respect which he had for the wonderful talents and splendid eloquence of the right hon. member who had introduced the bill, he could not help looking on this measure as a most extraordinary one. He thought the measure most unfair, most unjust, towards the great body of the Catholics: he thought it most aristocratic in its principle; for
476
instanter
Mr. Wetherell
said, that upon all former occasions he had been an opponent of the measure, termed Catholic emancipation; and whatever objections, founded upon what he conceived to be the just and wise policy, and the real principles of the constitution, had upon former occasions appeared to him to be fairly available against
477
shapes
478
479
480
passibus œquis
sparsim
481
482
"Some truth there was, but dashed and brewed with lies."
"was the strength of the Catholic Party in England:"
483
origin
484
qua
a priori
485
"competency or ability
a priori
486
religion
487
penal laws
by which Roman Catholics are shut out of both Houses of Parliament
488
489
temporal, being Protestants."
490
sub silentio
491
492
causa causans
493
ipso facto
effete
inert
494
495
496
497
498
an unwarrantable
499
Mr. Wilmot
said, that though he had voted before for concessions to the Catholics, he had never stated his opinions
500
501
502
Mr. Foster
said, that until the penal laws were totally repealed, the peace and tranquillity of Ireland would never be restored. But, in repealing those laws, parliament should take care to carry the mind the country with them. He denied that the mind of the Protestants was with the present measure. He would support the general measure; but be thought at present that the country was taken by surprise, and that the question of securities was evaded. He would therefore vote against the bill.
Dr. Phillimore
observed, that upon former occasions, the supporters of measures tending to remove the disabilities of the Roman Catholics had been met with such remarks as these—"Deal not with us in general propositions; give us some specific measure." It could not, on the present occasion be objected, that a specific measure was brought forward. He was ready to admit that the general question was one that had been ever nearest his heart; but the present measure, standing as it did on peculiar and very favourable grounds, had his most hearty support. The experience of every page in our history, since the period at which disabilities were first imposed upon Roman Catholics served to prove the claims which the peers of that persuasion had, to an act of justice like that which the legislature were now called upon to pass. The learned gentle-
503
Mr. W. Courtenay
thought the hon. and learned member for Oxford had not addressed his arguments to the true question before the House. That question was not whether these disabilities were or
504
Mr. W. Peel
did not believe that the supporters of the bill were aware of the consequences that would ensue if it were passed into a law. The question was not merely whether six or eight Catholic peers of high character should be admitted into the other House; but, if this partial measure was successful, Catholic commoners ere long would be introduced into this House, and there would be no reason why other sects should be excluded. What, became of the security of the Pro-
505
Mr. Wynn
, after complimenting the hon. member for Newcastle (Mr. Wilmot) on the liberal view he had taken of the subject, expressed his concurrence in the opinion, that the passing of this bill could have the effect of tranquillizing Ireland. In every view it was most important, but in this view it was incalculably so. Without it, all future measures of conciliation would want half their grace, and every measure of coercion would acquire additional severity. He saw no reason for not carrying a partial bill of relief, if the general measure could not at present be advantageously brought forward. After referring shortly to the proceedings in 1813, and regretting the vote he had then given, the right hon. gentleman went on to contend, that no danger could result from the admission of Catholic peers into the other House. If, as the hon. member who last spoke apprehended, this bill should be followed by others to admit commoners, then was the proper time to object. At the present moment, other sects were not excluded. The learned member for Oxford also dreaded much from the votes and influence of six or eight individuals, and had contended, that if Catholics were admitted into the legislature, the king ought to be released from the obligation not to marry a Catholic. There was, however, a most decided difference between the cases: the Catholic peer would be controlled by the Protestant
506
Mr. Martin
, of Galway, said, the hon. and learned member for Oxford had come forward on the present occasion as one of the Horiatii. [A laugh.] He begged pardon of the House if he had not pronounced the word correctly. He trusted the bill would carried. It wan not connected with the general question, and had not been brought forward by his
507
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, that after having stated his sentiments to the House so fully on a former evening, it was not his intention at present to occupy much of their attention. He rose rather for the purpose of removing some misconceptions and misapprehensions. He did not object to the measure, because it was a partial measure, nor did he solicit the vote of any gentleman who might concur with him in his objections to the particular measure, under the impression that when the general question came to be discussed, his (Mr. P's) opposition to it would be relaxed. It was impossible, after the House had so recently passed a bill removing the disabilities affecting the Roman Catholics, that he could anticipate so decided an opposition to the general measure, as might have been expected in former times; but he would not relax his opposition to the measure, because he foresaw the probability of its ultimate success. He apprehended that it was in the true spirit of the constitution that members of that House should maintain their opinions to the last, notwithstanding overwhelming majorities against them. If it were probable that the general measure would be carried, the argument for the particular measure was,
pro tanto
508
509
"Quo teneam vultus mutantem Protea nodo?"
510
a priori
"adversus Martinum Lutherum,"
The Marquis of Londonderry
agreed, with many of his hon. friends in thinking that the present moment was not the most favourable for the introduction of the general measure. He would admit that the great tendency in the disposition of the country was, to view this subject with less of alarm, and with more favourable sentiments than on former occasions; but still he did not think it would be politic to press that disposition too much. But though this was his opinion as to the general measure, still he could understand
511
512
Mr. Canning
began by observing, that if in the reply which he had made on the former night to his right hon. friend (Mr. Peel), he had dropped a word, or let slip an expression, which could be supposed to convey to his right hon. friend's mind, that he thought he had met the question unfairly, his right hon. friend had entirely mistaken his meaning; for he would declare, that whatever difference of opinion subsisted between them, it was impossible in his conception, either with reference to the question in its wider range, or to the narrow basis on which he had placed it, to have encountered a fairer adversary. If he had said, that his right hon. friend had not touched the justice or expediency of the case, he meant the justice and expediency of that part of it which he had introduced, and not the general question. He was glad that his noble friend's speech had intervened between that of his right hon. friend and his own; for, in his latter remarks, he had very ably developed the views and the policy to which the discussion of this question should be referred. To bring the merits of this partial motion more clearly to their attention, he would beg of honourable gentlemen to recollect what had been the progress of the discussions: on the measure before parliament. To go no farther back, he would begin with the discussion which the House of Commons entertained in 1812. On that occasion, he had had the honour of submitting a resolution, the first successful one on that point which had engaged the attention of parliament. In that resolution the House pledged itself to consider the subject early in the ensuing session, with the view of bringing the question to a secure, conciliatory, and permanent adjustment. What was the fate of that measure? It was well known that it was one which did not meet the concurrence of the other House. In the next year, and in redemption of its pledge, the subject was introduced, and submitted for consideration in its most comprehensive sense. The bill had passed two of its stages, but it failed in the committee, owing to the introduction of a clause
513
514
515
516
517
"—Vicisti, et victual tendere palmas
"Ausonii videre: tua est Lavinia conjux."
518
The question being put, "That the bill be now read a second time," the House divided: Ayes 235. Noes 223. Majority 12. The bill was then read a second time.
ILCHESTER GAOL.]
Mr. Alderman Wood moved, "That an humble address be presented to his majesty, praying that he will order to be forthwith laid before this House the Magistrates' Journal and Keeper's occurence book, from 1808 to the present time." The motion was opposed by Mr. Dickinson, on the ground of its being an interference with private property; and supported by Mr. Bennet, sir. F. Burdett, and Mr. Denman. Mr. Secretary Peel stated, that he had given orders for a prosecution against Bridle, the late keeper of the prison, and that he had also directed eminent surveyors to examine and report upon the present site and state of the prison. He therefore hoped the alderman would, withdraw his motion, as well as the general one for inquiry which stood for Wednesday next. Mr. Dawson and Mr. Estcourt spoke to the same effect; and Mr. Tynte vindicated the conduct of some of the magistrates, against whom he thought so general a charge ought not to be made, as he was convinced that many were not implicated in the transactions complained of. The motion was withdrawn.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Monday, May 13.
SALFORD HUNDRED COURT EXTENSION BILL.
On the order of the day for the third reading of this bill,
The Attorney General,
upon general principle, objected to the bill. He thought it highly improper, that the lord who had the whole patronage of the court should be allowed to participate in the fees taken by the officers whom he appointed. If the fees were more than sufficient to meet the necessary expenses, their amount ought to be abated. He complained that a measure so important to the public should have been attempted
519
Lord Althorp
said, that petitions in favour of the bill, had been presented from Manchester, Bolton, Bury, and Rochdale; and that, in fact, the whole population of that immense district expected advantage from it. With respect to the fees, the question was, not as to their disposal, but whether they were such fees as ought to be taken. Upon the principle that the bill tended to give the people of Lancashire that invaluable blessing, a cheap administration of justice, he should vote in its favour.
Mr. B. Wilbraham
could not help setting his face very strongly against the measure. He, objected, to it upon public grounds, and upon the ground of its being obnoxious to some parts of the county. The bill, if passed, would be followed by others, of the same description; and there was one clause to which he particularly objected, as trenching upon the jurisdiction of the Insolvent Debtors' Court, providing, that persons found guilty of having improvidently, contracted debts might be imprisoned, for a limited period, by order of the court. It was a strong measure to give such powers to a tribunal which had served only originally for the recovery of debts under 40
s.
Mr. Brougham
said, that the object of the bill was, to enable persons to obtain legal redress upon reasonable terms—to enable a creditor to recover 50
s.
l.
General Gascoyne
was convinced that the principle of the bill was good, and that if it was adopted with regard to Manchester, its advantages would soon be extended to other parts of the country.
Mr. Scarlett
said, that the chief objection to the measure was, that it
520
Mr. Philips
said that the whole hundred of Salford was in favour of the bill, and that the people of Manchester were particularly friendly to it.
Mr. P. Moore
said, that only one individual had petitioned against the bill, and that was the under sheriff, who was apprehensive he should not receive as much in the nature of fees as he used to do.
Mr. C. Wilson
said, that the primary object of the bill was to aggrandize an individual, (lord Sefton), and throw a considerable sum of money yearly into that nobleman's hands. The question in fact was, whether the Houses would sanction the transfer of from 4,000
l.
l.
The House divided: For the third reading, 70. Against it, 96. Majority against the third reading of the Bill, 26. The third reading was accordingly put off for six months.
AGRICULTURAL DISTRESS.]
The Marquis of Londonderry having moved the order of the day, for bringing up the Report of the Committee of the whole House on Agricultural Distress,
Colonel Davies
rose, to submit the resolutions of which he had given notice. In thus offering himself to the attention of the House, he felt it necessary to guard against being misunderstood. It was not his intention to oppose the resolutions of the noble marquis; on the contrary, he meant to support them as far as they went, as he conceived them better than the existing law; but he should propose a set of resolutions, which the House might pass conjointly with those of the noble lord, or they would reject the one or the other, or both, as to them might seem fit. When this question was first introduced, he had determined not to offer a word upon it; but when he found that six different sets of resolutions, not drawn up with a view to immediate relief, but of providing against
521
s.
s.,
l.;
l."
l.
l.,
l.
l.
522
l.
l.,
l.
l.
l.;
l.
523
l.
l.;
l.,
l.,
l.
s.
d.
l.
s.
d.
l.
s.
d.
l.
l.,
l.
l.,
524
l.
l.
l.,
l.
l.;
l.
l.
The Speaker
suggested that it was impossible that the question could be put in he shape proposed. The resolutions of the hon. colonel could not be made part of the report of the committee.
Sir Sebright
said, he was in favour of very practicable reduction, but he felt pound to vote against the resolutions for his simple reason, that. they had nothing to do with the question before the House. He returned the noble marquis his thanks or what he had done. As far as he could judge, the resolutions of the noble marquis were an improvement upon the existing corn laws.
Colonel Davies
expressed his readines
525
On the question, that the report of the committee be brought up,
Mr. Western
said, he was firmly persuaded that the noble marquis's resolutions would, neither directly nor indirectly, contribute to the welfare of agriculture; but that they would even add to the load of distress which already burthened the farmer. The question mainly, if not altogether, depended upon the price of grain in the foreign market; and he contended that the noble marquis had made his calculations upon the evidence before the committee, which was given in British currency, and not according to the price of gold. If hon. gentlemen would refer to the testimony of Mr. Solly, they would find this to be the fact. Thus, the price of grain was made to appear higher abroad than it really was; and the noble marquis had, in consequence, felt warranted in proposing a duty proportionably lower. That important subject had by no means been sufficiently investigated, either by the committee of the present or of the last year; and the House was consequently legislating in the dark. At Hamburgh, wheat was now selling at from 26
s.
s.
s.
s.:
s.
s.;
s.
d.
s.,
s.
s.
Mr. John Smith
said, it was his opinion that the distress of the agricultural body proceeded in a great measure from a
526
527
l.
528
529
Mr. D. Browne
expressed his conviction that the resolutions would neither benefit the agricultural interest, nor satisfy the country.
Sir W. W. Wynn
deprecated any breach of faith of faith with the public creditor. He approved of the resolutions, because they formed a medium between those which proposed a very low, and those which called for a very high protection. He could, however, have wished, that the protecting duty had been higher.
Lord Althorp
said, he would not answer the argument which his hon. friend (Mr. J. Smith) had adduced to shew that a national bankruptcy would be mischievous, but he thought it highly unfair that it should be insinuated, that all persons who voted for a reduction of taxes contemplated a national bankruptcy. He had not voted for the resolution of the hon. member for York, not because he disapproved of it (on the contrary he should support it whenever it might be again brought forward), but because it tended to interrupt an adjourned debate.
Mr. Chaloner
said, his hon. friend and colleague did not state 20,000,000
l.
530
Mr. Philips
said, he had not heard the whole of he speech of the hon. member for York, when he made his motion. He did, however, hear something said about 20,000,000
l.
s.
s.
d.,
s.
d.
531
532
533
Mr. Sykes
contended, that the proposition for the reduction of taxation was so obviously a remedy, and the only remedy for the great distress which was now felt, that he was surprised that there could be any difference of opinion upon the subject. No proposition could be more clear to his mind. His hon. friend (Mr. J. Smith) had been conjuring up a chimera, and then destroying his own creation. No one in that House had said, that national credit was not to be maintained. The reduction of taxation was the best ground on which national faith could be fixed. He had not voted on any one of the resolutions brought forward, because he had not been able to bring his mind to agree with any one of them. It was, in his opinion, the change in the currency which had caused the distress. He agreed in the main with the hon. member for Callington, (Mr. Attwood.) If they succeeded in raising corn to a high price it would be by oppressing other classes; and they would throw a burthen on the manufacturing interests which they could not bear.
Mr. Ricardo,
in explanation of the allusion which had been made to his statement of the average prices of foreign corn, by the hon. member for Essex, begged the House would bear in mind, that there were two authorities on that subject that were quoted from, who differed much in their items. The calculations of Mr. Solly were made in conformance with the variations of our paper currency, and were, therefore, always higher than those of Mr. Grade, who made his calculations upon a fixed exchange. He had built his argument on the latter, and it would be found that whilst he was quoting from one paper, the hon. gentlemen was quoting from another, and thus the misunderstanding arose. He therefore hoped he should be acquitted of any intention to mislead.
Mr. Attwood
said, he rose in consequence of what had fallen from the hon. member for Wootton Basset on the subject of the prices of foreign grain, and from other hon. members on the same subject, in the course of the debate. The present measure rested for its details, altogether on the information they possessed respecting those prices. They took the price of grain in foreign markets,
534
535
s.
d.
s.
s.,
s.;
s.
s.
536
s.
s.
d.
537
s.
d.
s.
s.,
s.
s.,
s.,
538
539
540
541
542
s.
s.
543
544
545
The Marquis of Londonderry
said, he would not follow the hon. member through a great part of the arguments which he had used, many of which did not apply immediately to the question. But he must protest against the endeavour of the hon. gentleman to suspend the operations of the legislature, and to adjourn the business of the country, until he could bring about a change in the standard of the currency. Whether the hon. member fixed upon corn, gold, or any other settled unit as the sign of value, it was difficult to form an idea of his standard by which all contracts were to be adjusted. The. declamation which he had mixed up with his political economy, respecting the in-crease of salaries by the change in the currency, was unwarranted by the state of the fact. When he called upon ministers to reduce their incomes on account of the restoration Of cash payments,
546
s.
s.
547
s.
s.
s.
s.,
s.
s.
l.
Mr. Hume
said, that the words of his hon. friend's motion were, that relief was only to be expected from "a large remission of taxation." Now, in that resolution he fully concurred, as did every man in the country, except perhaps the noble marquis. In 1817, the taxation of the country amounted to 60,000,000
l.
l.
548
l.
l.
l.
Mr. Secretary Peel
was surprised, that the hon. member for Callington (Mr. Attwood) should have entered on the present evening into a discussion, on, the state of the currency, when he knew that the hon. member for Essex had given notice of a motion which would bring that subject fairly before the consideration of the House. As the hon. member had made several pointed allusions to him (Mr. Peel), he could not allow the present opportunity to pass without making some observations upon them. And here he must be permitted to express his surprise at the applause with which a part of the hon. member's speech had been received by gentlemen on the other side. When he heard the bill which he had had the honour of introducing in 1819, called an iniquitous measure, and found that appellation of it cheered by many gentlemen who had at that time supported it—when he recollected that the concluding resolution of Mr. Horner in 1811 contained the principle on which that individual stated that the currency ought to be conducted, and that that principle was, that within two years the Bank should return to cash payments—when he remembered that strong fact, and contrasted it with the cheers which had burst from hon. members when the act of 1819 was stigmatized as an iniquitous bill, he could not sufficiently express the surprise which he felt, or prevail upon himself to submit to such an epithet in silence. He would here take the liberty of asking, whether the principle on which that bill was founded did not receive the support of the other side in 1816? The House must recollect well that it did receive the approbation of hon. gentlemen opposite; and that circus stance made their cheers of this evening more extraordinary than they otherwise
549
l.
s.
550
Mr. Attwood
said, he alluded to Staffordshire.
Mr. Peel
contended, that the disturbances in that county did not arise out of any distress. As a proof of it, he would state one fact:—The master manufacturers had offered their labourers 3
s.
Mr. Attwood
said, there was not employment for those labourers. The wages were probably as stated; but the men had not employment for more than four days in the week.
Mr. Peel
said, he would leave it to his
551
552
l.
l.
s.
s.
Mr. Attwood
said, in explanation, that he did not recognize any opinions that had been expressed by him, amongst those which the right hon. secretary had so preposterously ascribed to him. He would request the right hon. gentleman to take his opinions from himself, and neither to form, nor collect systems for him, nor imagine that he was to be responsible for them, when collected from whatever sources. With respect to the long extract of evidence which had been read he was at a loss to know what conclusion the right hon. gentleman meant to draw from it: but as he seemed to think he had established by it, some inconsistency in him (Mr. Attwood), he begged to inform him that he had never even read, and did not know of the existence of such evidence, till the right hon. gentleman was pleased to read it to him; and all he had then to say upon it was, that the answers seemed to him at least as correct as the questions.
553
Mr. Ellice,
in answer to the observations of the right hon. gentleman, maintained he had always been a strenuous and consistent opponent of the paper system, but, unlike the right hon. gentleman, he had never ceased to warn the House of the ruinous and unjust consequences of the measure of 1819. The right hon. gentleman had taunted him with cheering his hon. friend (the member for Callington), for whose luminous and able statements he was, in common with the rest of the House, so much indebted, when he had called the bill of the right hon. gentleman a fraud on all creditors. He was not aware, that the observation of his hon. friend was applied exclusively to that bill, but he had no hesitation in expressing his entire concurrence in the opinion, applied, as he understood it, to the various measures adopted since the first conclusion of the war in 1814. These had been equally fraudulent on the part of government towards creditors, as the bill of 1797 had been before to all debtors. The right hon. gentleman recalled to the recollection of the House his (Mr. E's) support of the bill of 1819, and stated he rather outran the proposers of that measure, than fell short of their endeavours to restore the standard. The right hon. gentleman might also have been candid enough, to admit the principles, on which he then advocated the necessity of fixing some standard. He would not say he had been able sufficiently to explain those principles, for it was the first time he had ever addressed a public assembly, but he appealed to those who attended the discussions in 1819, whether he did not qualify his support of the bill, preferring it as the only alternative to a further perseverance in the existing system, which was then before them. The country had been too long subject to the experiments of the chancellor of the exchequer and the Bank directors, who had complete control over its circulating medium, without the most remote acquaintance with any of the common principles on which a paper currency could safely be regulated. We had had first, on the cessation of the war in 1815, a sudden contraction, and then in 1817 an immense over-issue of paper, apparently without the least reflection, and certainly without any knowledge of the necessary results of such opposite and contradictory proceedings. On the report of the committee, he entirely concurred in their recommendation that a definite standard should be
554
l
s.
d.,
l.
s.
l.
s.
d.
l.
s.
555
l.
s.
s.
556
557
Mr. T. Wilson
observed, that when the measure of 1819 began to operate, the depreciation of our paper currency, did not exceed five or six per cent. There was no ground, therefore, for the assertion of his hon. friend (Mr. Attwood), on this point. Neither could he agree with his hon. friend, that they had not how sufficient information to enable them to legislate on this subject. He had on doubt that the measure before them would prove beneficial.
Mr. Littleton
confirmed the truth of the right hon. secretary's statement, that the disorders in Staffordshire did not originate in distress. It was actually true, that the miners had refused an offer of 3
s.
Mr. Brougham
asked, upon what principle he was required to exculpate himself, on account of the vote he had given in favour of the motion of his hon. friend the member for York? He must protest against a practice, which would have the effect of cramping members in the votes which it was their duty to give on public questions; and must, also declare, not only that he made use of no argument in favour of a remission of taxes to the amount of 20,000,000
l.,
The question being put, "That the report be now brought up," the House divided: Ayes, 153; Noes, 22. The report was then brought up and read. On the motion that, the said Resolutions be read a second time,
558
Mr. Huskisson
rose, for the purpose of submitting his resolutions, not with any view of opposing them to those of his noble friend, but he wished to have them recorded on the Journals. He thought the House had, in approving the resolutions before them, attended too much to one inconvenience—that of the danger of too great an influx of foreign grain from the warehouses; while they overlooked another—that of the want a steady remunerating price to the farmer. It was his opinion that the safest mode would be, a free trade in corn, with a fair protecting duty. Without this, the farmer would in time of dearth be inundated with foreign corn without an adequate protection. The time, he was convinced, would come, when we should have such a trade, by which the British grower would be protected in a degree equivalent to the disadvantages under which he laboured. The right hon. gentleman then moved his resolutions by way of amendment. [
See p.
The Marquis of Londonderry
said, that in giving the negative to the resolutions of his right hon. friend, he would not deny the general principle which they involved; but he thought that principle applied to a different state of things. He was anxious to see the general basis of the corn laws well settled before he consented to such a measure.
The amendment was than put, and negatived. Mr. Ricardo then submitted his resolutions for the sake of having them recorded on the Journals. [
See p.
Mr. Maxwell
said:—The duty on foreign wool recently imposed has beer followed by the meat prosperous trade ever known in woollen manufacture, and the monopoly of the corn-market has been followed by universal demand for British manufacture; yet we are told, that protecting duties are a positive detriment to the country, and a poll tax upon the community. And a poll tax upon the community High prices here, and low prices on the continent, would lead the farmer into the most disastrous situation, we told—and yet, We have never had complaints from the Wool grower on this ground. If we raise the price of previsions, we are assured of the flight of commerce—and yet we are told that a monopoly regulation is inoperative, in effecting a rise of prices. Have the junto at Henderson's hotel—has Mr. Webb Hall—ever advanced positions more unreasonable, or less demonstrable than these? Can any
559
560
Mr. Ricardo's resolutions were negatived; after which those of the marquis of Londonderry [
See p.
POST MASTER GENERAL IN IRELAND.
Mr. S. Rice
asked the noble marquis, whether it was the intention of government to adopt any resolution with respect to the second post-master of Ireland?
The Marquis of Londonderry
said, that when government advised the Crown to take measures with respect to the second post-master of England, they advised the same measure with respect to the postmaster of Ireland.
Mr. Hume
wished to know whether a similar arrangement was to take place with respect to the post-office in Scotland.
The Marquis of Londonderry
said, that the post-master there had other duties to perform, besides those of the post-office; and, besides, his salary did not exceed 800
l.
Mr. Hume
thought 800
l.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Tuesday, May 14.
ALE-HOUSES LICENSING BILL.
Mr. Bennet,
in rising to move for leave to bring in a bill "to alter and amend the present mode of licensing ale houses," observed, that under the present system an individual who solicited a license was obliged to give in a certificate of character. It might naturally be supposed that this certificate would be derived from the place where he had last resided. No such
561
l.
Mr. Calvert
thought something ought to be done to prevent the practice of serving beer in short measures.
Sir I. Coffin
maintained, that the poor man was cheated by the publican in the way of bad measure.
Mr. R. Colborna
suggested the propriety of permitting the sale of table beer of a quality stronger than that which was allowed to be sold by the present law.
Mr. Grenfell
thought the thanks of the
562
Leave was given to bring in the bill.
IONIAN ISLANDS.]
Mr. Hume
rose to submit his motion respecting the present state of the Ionian Islands. He commenced by stating, that the task which he had undertaken was not one pleasing to himself, nor, moreover, was it of a description which any man would be disposed to undertake who was anxious for his own ease; but he considered the welfare of 200,000 inhabitants of the Ionian islands, and the connexion which the maintenance of the English character had with their condition, as superior to all personal inducements, and as calling upon him to undertake the task, however painful it might be in any particular point of view. He was, therefore, perfectly prepared to discharge his public duty, entertaining as he did the strongest opinions upon the highly improper manner in which the government of the Ionian islands had been conducted since it was placed under the king of Great Britain, as protector. This was not the first but the third time he had called the attention of parliament to the subject: and he regretted that his endeavours to ameliorate the condition of the Ionians had had so little effect. He did so last year at considerable length; and, in now again submitting the miserable situation of those islands to the attention of the House, he should be happy to compress his statements within as narrow a compass as possible, consistent with the importance of the case, and the rendering all its circumstances as intelligible as was necessary to enable the House fully to comprehend the whole bearings of the question. In discharging this duty, He begged to disclaim being actuated by any personal feelings against the character of sir Thomas Maitland, whom he had principally to arraign in the narrative of these transactions. With that individual or his family he had never had any personal connexion or difference, and could not, therefore, be influenced by private motives of any description. He felt a deep interest in the condition of these islanders, because he had spent a considerable time amongst them, and had had much intercourse with them at that period. He could not, from his knowledge of their past and present situation, look at their condition now, without deploring it in the highest degree.
563
564
565
566
l.
l.
567
l.,
l.
l.
l.
l.;
l.;
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.,
l.
l.,
l.;
l.;
l.;
l.;
568
l.
l.
l.
l.,
l.
l.
l.
569
l.
l.
570
l.
l.,
l.
l.
571
572
573
alone.
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
l.
583
l. "That it appears by documents upon the table of this House, that the Ionian Islands were, by a treaty signed at Paris on the 5th November 1815, between the courts of Vienna, St. Peters-burgh, London, and Berlin, declared 'to be a single, free, and independent state,' and were placed under the immediate and exclusive protection of the king of Great Britain; and that, by article 6 of the said treaty, 'his Britannic majesty consents that a particular convention with the government of the said United states shall settle, according to the state revenues, all matters relative to the maintenance of the fortresses now existing, as well as to the support and pay of the British garrisons, and to the number of men who are to compose them in time of peace. The said convention shall also establish the relations which are to take place between the armed force and the Ionian government.' That by article 12, of the 2nd section of the 7th chapter of the constitutional chart of the United states of the Ionian Islands, agreed to by the legislative assembly on the 2nd May, 1817, and sanctioned by his majesty the king of Great Britain, it is settled, 'that all expense of quartering the regular troops of his majesty, the protecting sovereign, and generally speaking, all military expense of every kind to be incurred by the states (as far as relates to the 3,000 men therein named) shall be paid out of the general treasury of the same.'
2. "That it appears by returns on the table of this House, that the expenditure of Great Britain for the military establishments in the Ionian Islands, amounted to the sum of 145,023
l.
l.
3. "That it is expedient, in the present state of the finances of the United kingdom, that the military expense incurred for the Ionian Islands, should be paid from the revenues of those Islands, and regulated agreeably to the stipulations of the treaty of Paris, 5th November 1815, and the convention of the United Ionian
584
4. "That an humble address be presented to his majesty, that he would be graciously pleased to direct an inquiry into the state of the government of the Ionian Islands, the causes of the general disaffection, and of the numerous arrests and banishments which have taken place there, and for what reasons the inhabitants were disarmed, and martial law proclaimed."
Mr. Wilmot
said, it would not be necessary for him to go over the whole ground traversed by the hon. member, inasmuch as his speech, or at least the greater part of it, occupying a space of nearly two hours, consisted in a discussion of topics,
verbatim et seriatim,
maximum
585
formula,
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
ad valorem
ad valorem
l.
l.
593
594
Mr. John Williams
considered the prey sent question most important as it affected the prosperity of the islands, but more important as it involved the national honour. There was some inconsistency in the argument of the hon. under-secretary. He had charged his hon. friend with having traversed a beaten track—with having furnished no new ground for his motion; and yet the hon. gentleman in the conclusion of his speech had, strange to say, expatiated on the predicament in which he was placed by being brought to the discussion of the subject by surprise. In what manner were these contradictory declarations to be reconciled? But though the hon. gentleman, in a speech of no short duration, had expatiated on many subjects rather inapplicable to the question, he had left the main body of the subject wholly unanswered. Neither on the gross amount of the expenditure incurred in the Ionian Islands, nor on the details of the civil government, the staff, &c. had the hon. gentleman condescended to give any thing in the shape of an answer. The question, then, of expenditure, remained, as stated by his hon. friend, untouched and unshaken. The hon. gentleman had, indeed, given an interpretation to the charter, which its provisions would not bear. These provisions particularly specified, that the whole military expenditure of these islands should be borne by the insular treasury to the amount of 3,000 men; but that the commander-in-chief was, on the existence of a competent necessity, authorized to increase the amount of military force. That arrangement was, however, followed up by another provision, which specified, that the whole military expense should be defrayed out of the general treasury of the island. It was, then, upon the policy pursued at home, as well as in the islands, that his hon. friend rested his position. He complained, and he complained justly, of the expense which was entailed upon this country in opposition to the provisions of the charter, and continued at a time when the extent of the national distresses required every alleviation. But then the hon. gentleman had asked, under what new pressure did the Ionian Islands labour, to render necessary a renewed discussion? The only object of such questions was, to withdraw the House from the immediate subject before it, to a distant consideration of topics altogether immaterial. Of that character was what had
595
petitio principii,
596
"Pudet hæc opprobria nobis,
"Et dici potuisse; et non potuisse refelli."
The previous question, "That the question he now put," was then put and negatived on the two first resolutions. The third resolution was negatived. On the fourth, the House divided: Ayes, 67; Noes, 152.
List of the Minority.
Althorp, lord
Honywood, W. P.
Allen, J. A.
Hamilton, lord A.
Anson, hon. G.
Hutchinson, hon. C. H.
Blake, sir F.
Hurst, R.
Butterworth, J.
Hobhouse, J. C.
Burdett, sir F.
Lennard, T. B.
Brougham, H.
Lemon, sir W.
Bernal, Ralph
Lloyd, sir E.
Baring, Sir T.
Lushington, S.
Boughey, sir J. F.
Milbank, M.
Bury, lord
Maberly, J.
Concannon, Lucius
Martin, John
Crompton, S.
Monck, J. B.
Crespigny, sir W. De
Maxwell, J.
Davies, colonel
Macdonald, J.
Evans, W.
Newman, R. W.
Ebrington, lord
Normanby, lord
Fergusson, sir R. C.
O'Callaghan, J.
Fitzgerald, lord W.
Osborne, lord F.
Gurney, H.
Powlett, hon. W.
Gurney, R. H.
Palmer, C. F.
Grattan, J.
Power, Rd.
Gaskell, B.
Philips, G.
Grenfell, P.
Price, R.
Heron, sir R.
Ricardo, D.
597
Rumbold, C. E.
Williams, W.
Rickford, W.
Williams, J.
Russell, lord J.
Williams, O. jun.
Robarts, colonel
Williams, sir Rt.
Robinson, sir G.
Wilson, sir R.
Smith, R.
TELLERS.
Scarlett, J.
Hume, J.
Smith, hon. R.
Bennet, hon. H. G.
Sykes, D.
SHUT OUT.
Smith, W.
Guise, sir W.
Whitbread, W. S.
Scott, James.
Wood, alderman
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Wednesday, May 15.
TITHES ON POTATOES IN IRELAND.
Mr. S. Cooper
presented a petition from the high sheriff and land proprietors of Sligo, complaining of a claim recently set up in the county of Connaught to tithe upon potatoes; no such claim having ever before been asserted in that quarter of Ireland. The calamity of which it complained was likely to be a terrible one; and all parties were interested in alleviating it, if possible. A great portion of the disturbances in Ireland might be traced to the imposition of a tithe upon the potatoe; and the attempt to introduce that system into a province not yet afflicted with it, would extend that which now was a partial state of tumult, over the entire face of the country. The dispute, out of which the present petition arose, would have been amicably settled, if the bishop had not set his face against it.
Mr. Abercromby
thought that the subject must recommend itself to every man of feeling and humanity. He believed that the assertion of the claim complained of would be likely to extend the evil now operating in the south of Ireland. He trusted that the House would refuse to sanction the tithe now asserted, unless compelled to do so by the irresistible force of law; and, if the claim was really founded in law, he hoped that government would instantly interpose between the clergy and the petitioners. The Irish peasant, paying 6
l
l
598
Sir J. Newport
looked upon the potatoe-tithe as a dreadful scourge, and firmly believed that those who attempted to in-force it, would have to combat tumult and insurrection. The demand of that tithe was accompanied with circumstances unlike those attending the exaction of any other. The potatoe was the daily food of the peasant. Very early in the season he was frequently compelled to resort to it for subsistence. But, if he took only a part of his early potatoes for the daily sustenance of himself and his family, that taking was in law held a severance, and he was that moment at the mercy of the clergyman or of the lay impropriator. If the House could imagine one half the calamities which the demand of this tithe would cast upon a part of Ireland not yet afflicted by it, it could not for a moment hesitate interfere. Let compensation, if necessary, be made for the claim; but let it be abandoned, never to be revived. He had no terms to express his abhorrence of that man's conduct who could introduce it.
Mr. Goulburn
rose to explain some circumstances connected with this petition. He would say nothing as to the general discretion of urging the claim of potatoe tithe at the present moment in the province of Connaught; but much might be said in palliation and in justification of the individual whose act had given rise to the petition. The facts of the case were these. A gentleman in the county of Sligo, who for some years worked a farm of 200 acres, having other lands in the
599
l
l
l
l
600
Mr. Hume
said, that at the request of the right hon. gentleman, he had postponed his motion respecting Irish tithes. He feared, however, that if the matter was left to the gentlemen opposite, the session would pass over without any thing being done in it; and he therefore gave notice that, in the first week of June, he would himself bring the subject fairly before the House.
Mr. Spring
Rice said, that this was a petition, not from one individual but from the county of Sligo, complaining of the existence of a suit at law tending to establish in that part of Ireland, the potatoetithe system, which did not before exist there. From the statement of both sides of the House, they learned that there was a practice in Ireland, of taxing the material article of potatoes betwixt the hand and the lip; that the tithe proctor interposed betwixt the hand and lip of the grower and consumer. They had also learnt that this practice was not universal in that country, and it remained for the House to determine whether it would allow so odious a system to be spread throughout the whole of Ireland. It was not from remissness that himself and his hon. friends had omitted to call the attention of the House to this important subject; but, in fact, they had been waiting in daily expectation of hearing ministers come forward with some proposition on the subject. He assured them that he would rather that the tithe for potatoes was inflicted on the Protestant landlord than on the Catholic population.
Mr. Denis Browne
thought, that the House must see the necessity of relieving the petitioners. If nothing were done by the legislature on the subject of this petition, he would himself renew the question in some shape or another.
Mr. Goulburn
said, he had a measure to submit to the House on the subject of the Irish tithe system, which he hoped to be able to bring forward in time to anticipate the motion of the hon. member for Aberdeen.
Mr. Plunkett
said, he should deal uncandidly with the House, if he did not take that opportunity of stating, that after all the reflexion which he had given this question, he was unable to see his way clearly through all the difficulties which surrounded the subject. With respect to this tithe on potatoes, what might be the
601
Sir N. Colthurst
hoped, that the great question of tithes in Ireland would be submitted to the consideration of parliament. Of one thing he was convinced, namely, that the landlords of Ireland would be found ready to co-operate in any measure which should appear calculated to relieve the people.
Mr. Dawson
said, that whenever the question of tithes came under the consideration of parliament, it would be found
602
Mr. Becher
said, that this description did not apply to the character of the landlords in the south of Ireland. He knew them to be as ready as any set of men could be, to reduce their claims to meet the necessities of the times. He did not complain of the clergy; for they never received their tenth. It was the acts of the tithe-proctor that inflicted oppression upon the people; and the sooner the House investigated the whole question the better. The people of England were not generally aware of the arduous duties which were thrown on the Irish landlords. They were obliged, in their capacity of magistrates, to act the part of police officers for the maintenance of tranquillity; and he knew them in many instances to forego their rents altogether. In the district with which he was immediately connected, the conduct of both clergy and landlords was exemplary.
Sir H. Parnell
denied, that the distress was imputable to the exaction of the Irish landlords. He would undertake to say, when the compact between the landlord and tenant was fully investigated, that his right hon. friend's observation would be utterly disproved.
Col. Trench
said, he had heard with regret, that the attorney-general for Ireland, was not prepared to propose such a commutation of tithes as would sustain the just rights of the church, and effect the general tranquillity of the country.
Mr. Martin,
of Galway, said, he could see no excuse for any clergyman who exacted his tithe in the manner mentioned in the petition. This tithe on potatoe-ground was a great hardship, and the claim was new. The tenant in his bargain with his landlord could always calculate upon the other tithes, and consider them in his terms; but he could not guard against the potatoe-tithe; for of the existence of such a claim he was unapprised when he made his bargain. Certainly there ought to be no tithe on potatoes, where such a claim was not pre-existing.
Colonel Butler
defended the Irish landlords, and maintained that they did not deserve the imputations which had been cast upon them. Many of them did not get a shilling in rent.
Mr. Curteis
said, that if a relaxation in tithes was adopted in Ireland, he must put
603
Mr. Grattan
denied, that there was any similarity whatever in the condition of the peasantry of the two countries, and protested against the doctrine, that the clergy of Ireland were poor, and the landlords extortioners. On the contrary, the clergy were very rich; and the landlords were every year losing a large share of their property. The collection of tithes was in Ireland the never-ending source of conflict; and the sooner the subject was considered the better. The tithe on potatoes ought unquestionably to be done away with.
Mr. Hutchinson
also denied that there was any similarity, as to the question of tithes, between England and Ireland. He had visited different countries, in and out of Europe: he had often seen distressed and oppressed communities; but, in the course of his life, he had never seen any thing half so deplorable, as the distress that now existed, in the southern and western parts of Ireland. One grievance was the tithe question; and there were thousands of poor Irish who each held an acre or half an acre in potatoes, and were liable to this intolerable tax. A peasant, with a wife, and six children, even if employed every working day in the year, could only hope to obtain potatoes and water for his family—rarely a little milk—and as to animal food, it was totally out of the question. After this scanty and wretched produce of his labour, and after the landlord and the clergyman took their share, nothing hardly remained for clothing or education—no depth of privation could leave, a surplus for such purposes. Where in England could such a state of misery be found? He agreed that in looking at the condition of Ireland, no small part of the misery prevailing there might be traced, not only to absentee proprietors, but also to resident holders of land. He was very sorry to hear the right hon. gent. (Mr. Plunkett) hold out so hopeless a prospect of relief; for until this important question was thoroughly examined and settled, there could be no permanent peace or tranquility in Ireland.
Sir J. Newport
denied, that all these distresses, and the consequent insurrections, originated in the exactions of the Irish landlords. The great cause of the insubordination which the demand for tithes so frequently called forth, was the
604
Ordered to lie on the table.
CIVIL LIST—DIPLOMATIC EXPENDITURE.
Mr. Lennard
rose, for the purpose, of proposing to the House to appoint a committee to inquire into the Expenses of the Third Class of the Civil List. In considering the subject, his propositions were—that the present time was admitted to be one of overwhelming distress; that economy was called for, with no feeble voice, by every class, from the throne to the peasant; that, without the most rigid economy, public credit could not he maintained; it could not, as had been said by Mr. Burke, exist under the arm of necessity; "necessity and credit are natural enemies, and cannot long be reconciled in any. Situation." This being admitted, it must, he thought, be as easily admitted, that in the different departments of the expenditure of the taxes, there was no one which embraced so much useless expenditure as the civil list. These two positions being admitted, there was no difficulty in arriving at the third—that when economy was demanded imperiously by our distresses, there was no department in which it could be more safely adopted, than in severely searching into this department of the civil list. Since he had first given notice of his motion, a partial reduction had taken place of the private expenditure of his majesty, in his privy purse, his household, and in the salaries of the ambassadors. That reduction had induced him to confine his motion to the reduction of the third class of the civil list, including the expenses of our embassies; and he thought be should have little difficulty in showing, that whatever, might once have been thought proper to be expended in state
605
606
*
*
607
l.;
608
l
l
609
l.,
l
l.,
l
l.;
l
l.,
l
l
l
annus mirabilis
610
l
entrées,
611
The Marquis of Londonderry
said, that in giving, as he felt himself bound to do, a negative to the motion, he should offer as shortly as he could the explanations which made it necessary for him to give the vote. He regretted that while the hon. member had confined his motion to the third class, he had entered into a general censure of the administration of his Majesty civil list revenue, as to which,
612
minimum
613
l
l
l
l
614
615
in forma pauperis,
616
l
l.;
l
sui generis
617
618
l.,
l.,
l
l.,
l.,
l
l.:
l.:
l
l.;
l.,
l
l
619
annus mirabilis
620
charge d'affaires,
cum grano salis
621
charge d' affaires,
l
l
l
l
l.,
l
l
l.,
l
622
l.,
l.;
l
l.,
l.;
l
623
l
624
l.,
l
625
626
l
l
627
l
628
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
629
630
Sir James Mackintosh
said, he should have contented himself with giving a silent vote on this motion, if the discussion had taken the course which it was natural to expect from the clear and temperate
631
ultima ratio
632
633
"— nec enim levia aut ludicra petuntur
"Præmia, sed Turni de vita ac sanguine certant.,
634
635
636
637
638
639
charge
640
d'affaires,
641
642
Mr. Robinson
said, that after listening with unfeigned respect to the hon. and learned gentleman, it was with some surprise that he found, at the conclusion of his speech, that no part of his argument applied to the question before the House; or if it did in a single point, that it was in opposition and not in support of the motion before the House. With regard to the embassy at the court of St. Petersburgh, the hon. and learned gentleman was satisfied that it ought to be of the highest rank; and yet this was the very appointment of which the hon. mover had most bitterly complained. With regard to the motion, the House ought not to vote for it, unless they were also prepared for the result. So signal a proof of their utter want of confidence would undoubtedly convince ministers that they were no longer considered fit to discharge the duties of their respective offices, and that they ought to be succeeded by those
643
Mr. Creevey
wished the Muse to consider, what was the actual state of the case. A motion was made for appointing a committee the inquire into certain heads of the expenditure, and this committee, if appointed, the noble lord informed them of his determination not to attend. He conceived this to be a most daring declaration, only to be surpassed by the statement of another secretary of state, that whatever parliament might resolve, he would not advise the Crown to act in conformity with its resolution; or by the conduct of that minister who had affirmed the impossibility of governing the House of Commons without corruption. These, indeed, were novelties. It was reserved for the present time to see parliament thus degraded and insulted by the ministers of the Crown. Either the House ought to vindicate its character by an assertion of its rights, or to adjourn at once,
644
Mr. Tierney
said, that so extraordinary a speech as that of the noble lord would not permit him to give on this occasion, a silent vote. All, however, that he proposed to say, would relate strictly to the question; which was, simply, whether any saving, and how much, could be effected in a particular department of the public service? It was matter of alarm, to witness after so temperate a speech as that of the hon. mover, the sort of attack which it had provoked from the noble lord. The smallness of the reduction which was contemplated could not render it an object of indifference; for they had lately seen the House, much to its honour, eager to abolish an office of 2,500
l
645
l
l
l
l
646
647
l
l
648
l
l
l
649
l
650
Mr. Wynn
said, he was surprised to hear it maintained, that if ministers could no longer keep the confidence of the House, they would be wrong in announcing their intention to resign. He had always understood it to be constitutional doctrine that the loss of the confidence of parliament ought necessarily to be followed by a resignation of their places by any set of ministers. With respect to the motion-he should oppose it, because he thought it would be establishing the dangerous precedent of placing a committee of that House, like a committee of public safety, over the ministry for foreign affairs; for
651
652
After a short reply, the House divided: Ayes 147. Noes 274. Majority against the motion 127.
List of the Minority
Althorp, lord
Grant, J. P.
Aubrey, sir John
Griffith, J. W.
Anson, hon. G.
Grattan, J.
Astel, W.
Gaskell, B.
Abercromby, hon. J.
Hume, J.
Burdett, sir F.
Howard, hon. W.
Boughton, sir R.
Haldimand, W.
Boughey, sir J. F.
Hill, lord A.
Brougham, H
Heathcote, G.
Bright, H.
Hornby, E.
Barnard, lord
Hutchinson, hon. C.H.
Birch, Jos.
Honeywood, W. P.
Bennet, hon. H. G.
Hurst, R.
Benett, John
Hughes, col.
Barrett, S. M.
Heron, sir R.
Bury, visc.
Hobhouse, J. C.
Belgrave, visct.
James, W.
Browne, Dom.
Jervoise, G. P.
Bernal, R.
Kennedy, T. F.
Becher, W. W.
Lethbridge, sir T.
Butterworth, J.
Lockhart, J. I.
Byng, G.
Lamb, hon. G.
Baring, sir T.
Leycester, R.
Baring, H.
Lester, B. L.
Crompton, S.
Lemon, sir W.
Crespigny, sir W. De
Langston, J. H.
Calcraft, John
Lloyd, sir E.
Calcraft, J. H.
Lushington, Dr.
Cockburn, R.
Latouche, R.
Coke, T. W.
Monck, J. B.
Campbell, hon. G P.
Macdonald, J.
Campbell, A.
Maberly, J.
Carter, J.
Mackintosh, sir J.
Cavendish, lord G.
Martin, J.
Cavendish, lord C.
Marjoribanks, S.
Cavendish, lord H.
Mostyn, sir T.
Clifton, viscount
Marryat, J.
Carew, R. S.
Mahon, hon. S.
Concannon, L.
Moore, Peter
Calvert, C.
Newport, sir J.
Caulfield, hon. H.
Normanby, visct.
Coffin, sir Isaac
Neville, hon. R.
Davies, col.
Nugent, lord
Denison, W. J.
Newman, R. W.
Denman, T.
O'Callaghan, col.
Dickinson, W.
Osborne, lord F.
Dundas, Charles
Ord, W.
Ebrington, viscount
Price, R.
Ellice, E.
Pym, F.
Ellis, hon. A.
Palmer col. C
Fergusson, sir R.
Palmer, C. F.
Fitzgerald, lord W.
Pares, T.
Foley, T.
Peirse, Henry
Fitzroy, lord C.
Power, R.
Fetherston, sir G. R.
Powlett, hon. W. I. F.
Grosvenor, R.
Ricardo, D.
Gurney, R.
Robarts, A. W.
Guise, sir W.
Robarts, col.
Grenfell, P.
Rice, S.
653
Robinson, sir C.
Tynte, C. K.
Rickford, W.
Western, C.
Rumbold, C. E.
Wood, alderman
Ridley, sir M. W.
Wilson, sir R.
Smith, hon. R.
Webbe, col.
Scarlett, J.
Williams, J.
Stanley, lord
Williams, sir R.
Sefton, earl of
Whitmore, W. W.
Smith, W.
Warre, J. A.
Sykes, D.
Whitbread, W. H.
Sebright, sir J.
Whitbread, S. C.
Smith, Sam.
TELLERS.
Stuart, lord J.
Leonard, T. B.
Scott, J.
Creevey, T.
Tierney, rt. hon. G.
PAIRED OFF.
Titchfield, marquis of
Russell, lord J.
Townshend, lord C.
Phillips, G.
Tavistock, marquis of
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Thursday, May 16.
ABSENTEES.
Sir T. Lethbridge
said, he had a petition to present signed by 600 respectable inhabitants of the county of Somerset. He hoped the chancellor of the exchequer would not be displeased with him for presenting the petition, as the prayer of it was rather unusual—it prayed the House to lay on additional taxes. From the tax which the petitioners proposed, which was in itself politic and beneficial, an ample fund might be supplied to make up for other taxes which might be repealed for the relief of the country. The petitioners felt for the distress of the country, and they called the attention of the House to a circumstance collateral to that distress, the number of Absentees who were gone to take up their residence in foreign parts. The greater part of these were persons of quality and fortune, not only from England but from the whole empire. The petitioners calculated that in the city of Paris alone, there resided 10,000 families of English, Irish, and Scots; that these families consisted on an average of five individuals each; and the petitioners went the length of saying, that these persons do not spend less than a guinea a day each, or 50,000
l.
l.
654
bonus
l.
bonus
l.
Mr. Ricardo
wished to set the hon. baronet right, as to the state of the exchange, which was now, he could assure him, very nearly at par; and it was impossible it could be far otherwise, because with a metallic circulation in this country and in France, the exchange could never vary more than from ½ to ¾ per cent. As to the petition, he should be sorry to see its prayer granted; because a tax on the property or income of absentees, would hold out a direct encouragement to them to take away their capital, as well as their persons. Now, we had at any rate their capital, which was useful, though not so useful as it they also stayed at home. What most surprised him was, that the hon. baronet should bring such a petition forward, at the very time that he was proposing in the agricultural committee a resolution which might make all the articles of life, and provisions in particular,
655
Mr. Denis Browne
dwelt on the evils suffered in Ireland from the absentee system. All taxes were on consumption; so that they all fell on the resident gentry, while the absentees entirely escaped. One half of the men of property of Ireland were calculated to be absentees. It was disgraceful that in a country of statesmen and philosophers, such an evil as this should exist, and that we should despair of a remedy. He was disposed to apply himself to this practical evil, and not to draw sun-beams out of cucumbers.
Mr. H. Gurney
said, he conceived the chancellor of the exchequer would have no small difficulty in assessing the tax, proposed by the petitioners on the income of absentees; though he had always thought the abolition of the property tax, and the thus throwing the weight of the whole taxation on articles of domestic consumption, was the greatest financial error committed since the peace. He entirely distrusted the statement of the petitioners, as to the enormous sums they conceived to be spent by Englishmen
656
657
Mr. Dickinson
thought that his right hon. friend (Mr. D. Brown) had put this question on its right footing: he had fixed the attention of the House to the main point of the petitioners—not to those who were travelling for their health, or to the youth of this country for instruction, for they too well knew the advantages of foreign travel—but to those who had fixed themselves habitually on the continent, and whose object was, to avoid the taxes, and expend their incomes in a foreign country, thereby stimulating the commerce and the agriculture of France with that capital which ought to stimulate the commerce and agriculture of England. What would happen when his hon. friend's (Mr. Ricardo's) project of paying off the national debt was accomplished, he could not pretend to say; but this he knew, that such a payment had been a vision that had inhabited the brain of many a speculative enthusiast, from the institution of that debt up to the present hour. He also knew, from experience and history, that emigrations were dangerous to the countries from which they sprung, and advantageous where they went: Holland, within the last two centuries, was a country almost wholly made by emigrations; and the revocation of the edict of Nantes had, according to historians, furnished 50,000 emigrants, who had increased the prosperity of England, of Belgium, and of Prussia, and inflicted a blow on France from which she had not yet recovered. He doubted the practicability of a tax on emigrants, but he would put it
ad verecundiam
658
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
thought the hon. member for Portarlington and other members had sufficiently pointed out the objections to the tax proposed, and the impossibility of carrying their wishes into effect. Of the many modes of taxing absentees, which had been suggested to him, none appeared to him practicable. Among the many absentees from Ireland, there were not a few who resided in England, and who, consequently, did not thereby evade their share of the taxes imposed generally upon the empire. He had taken considerable pains to ascertain the proportion of taxes which might have been borne by the absentees on the continent, had they remained in England, and he found that it did not exceed 5,000
l.
Sir I. Coffin
said, that the British officers residing abroad were driven there, not by inclination, but by poverty.
Mr. W. Smith
expressed a wish, that the chancellor of the exchequer would bring
659
Ordered to lie on the table.
EMBASSY TO THE SWISS CANTONS.
Mr. Warre
rose to bring forward the motion, of which he had given notice, relative to the embassy to the Swiss Cantons. He could assure the House, that in return for the favour of their attention, he would confine himself strictly to the subject of his motion, without going into the consideration of the general question, which was discussed last night. The object at which he aimed was a reduction of the expense of our embassies. By the return which had been laid on the table, it appeared, that from the year 1750 to 1783, four ministers had been sent to the Swiss Cantons at a salary of 1,572
l.
l.
660
veto
l.
661
662
663
664
l.
l.
665
The Marquis of Londonderry
said, that having had occasion last night to address some observations to the House upon this subject, and considering the very liberal and certainly very fair manner in which the hon. member brought forward the question, he should not think it necessary to trouble the House at any length. He
666
667
668
Lord Normanby
said, that though he contemplated no such effect as the resignation of the foreign secretary, he nevertheless indulged the hope of seeing the noble marquis continue in office, without the appendage of a Swiss Envoy, at an expense to the country of 5,000
l.
669
The previous question was moved on the first resolutions and carried. On the last resolution the House divided: Ayes, 141; Noes, 247. Majority against the motion, 106.
List of the Minority.
Althorp, lord
Fitzroy, lord C.
Abercromby, hon. J.
Frankland, R.
Anson, sir Geo.
Farrand, R.
Bentinck, lord W.
Graham, S.
Burdett, sir F.
Grosvenor, hon. R.
Boughey, sir J.
Grant, J. P.
Bright, H.
Grattan, J.
Birch, Jos.
Grosvenor, gen.
Benett, John
Gurney, R. H.
Browne, Dom.
Griffith, J. W.
Barham, F.
Gaskell, Ben.
Beaumont, T.
Gurney, H.
Benyon, B.
Hotham, lord
Brougham, H.
Hume, Joseph
Barnard, lord
Haldimand, W.
Bennet, hon. H. G.
Heathcote, G.
Barret, S. B. M.
Howard, hon. W.
Belgrave, lord
Hill, lord A.
Bernal, R.
Hornby, E.
Byng, G.
Hurst, Robt.
Baring, H.
Hutchinson, hon. C. H.
Burrell, sir C.
Hobhouse, J. C.
Curwen, J. C.
Honywood, W. P.
Crompton, S.
Hughes, colonel
Campbell, hon. G. P.
James, W.
Carter, John
Johnson; col.
Cavendish, C.
Kennedy, T. F.
Concannon, Lucius
Lethbridge, sir T.
Caulfield, hon. H.
Lamb, hon. G.
Curteis, E. J.
Lester, B. L.
Chaloner, R.
Langston, J. H.
Crespigny, sir W. De
Lennard, T. B.
Colborne, R.
Lockhart, J. I.
Calcraft, J. H.
Leycester, R.
Cavendish, lord G. A. H.
Lemon, sir W.
Lloyd, sir E.
Cavendish, H.
Latouche, Rt.
Calvert, C.
Monck, J. B.
Coffin, sir I.
Maberly, J.
Calvert, N.
Martin, J.
Davies, col.
Mostyn, sir. T.
Denman, Thos.
Mahon, gen.
Denison, W. J.
Maxwell, J.
Ellice, Ed.
Macdonald, J.
Evans, W.
Mackintosh, sir J.
Ellis, hon. G. A.
Marjoribanks, S.
Fergusson, sir R. C.
Marryatt, J.
Fitzgerald, lord W. C.
Moore, Peter
670
Milbank, M.
Stanley, lord
Maberly, J.
Scarlett, J.
Newman, R.
Sefton, lord
O'Callaghan, colonel
Smith, R.
Ord, W.
Smith, W.
Palmer, col. C.
Stuart, lord J.
Power, R.
Sykes, D.
Prittie, hon. F.
Scudamore, R. P.
Pym, F.
Tierney, rt. hon. G.
Palmer, C. F.
Titchfield, marquis of
Peirse, H.
Tavistock, marquis of
Powlett, hon. W. I. F.
Tynte, C. K.
Pryse, P.
Western, J. C.
Ricardo, D.
Wilson, sir R.
Robarts, colonel
Williams, J.
Robinson, sir G.
Whitbread, Sam. C.
Rumbold, C. E.
Wilson, T.
Russell, lord J.
Wood, alderman
Ramsbottom, J.
Williams, W.
Robarts, A. W.
Whitmore, W.
Rice, S.
Whitbread, W. H.
Rickford, W.
White, L.
Ridley, sir M. W.
TELLERS.
Ramsden, J. C.
Warre, J.
Russell, G.
Normanby, lord
IRISH POOR EMPLOYMENT BILL.
Mr. Goulburn
rose to move for leave to bring in a bill "for the Employment of the Poor in certain districts in Ireland." The chief object of the measure was, he said, to enable the population to earn their subsistence by their own exertions, as the greatest and most substantial benefit that could be conferred upon them. It was well known, that there many large tracts of land in Ireland utterly impervious, where there was little or no communication, and where crimes were frequent from the means afforded of escape. By the present measure, it was proposed to place a certain sum at the disposal of the lord lieutenant, to be by him applied to the construction of new roads, in those districts where the suffering was most severe. The work, it was intended, should be executed, not under local authority, but by officers appointed immediately by government. A want of means had hitherto prevented the counties in question from undertaking this improvement but as soon as the advantages were realized, and the estimates of their expense submitted to the grand juries, no doubt could be entertained of their disposition to repay the sums advanced.
Sir W. De Crespigny
felt anxious that the benefits of this measure should be rendered permanent.
Mr. S. Rice
warmly approved of the bill, as one of the wisest measures that could be adopted.
Sir E. O'Brien
Complimented the
671
Mr. Brougham
was willing to give his consent to the bill, provided he did not bind himself by so doing to any approbation of the conduct of government, with respect to the affairs of Ireland.
Leave was given to bring in the bill.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Friday, May 17.
DISTRESS IN IRELAND.]
The Earl of Darnley
adverted to what he had said on Wednesday, respecting the distressed state of a part of Ireland, and wished to know whether the noble earl was now prepared to give the date of the first communication from the government of Ireland respecting an apprehended scarcity in that country.
The Earl of Liverpool
said, he had no hesitation in giving the information requested. The marquis Wellesley in the course of a few days after he had taken upon him, the government of Ireland, had resorted to measures for the purpose of obtaining information as to the state of Ireland, both politically and with regard to the supply of food. It was found, that at that period there was a great abundance of articles of food, and at low prices, and no apprehensions were entertained of any scarcity. He thought it right here to observe that great delicacy and difficulty were necessarily involved in any question of interfering with regard to the supply of food; as such interference tended to do much mischief by interfering with individual speculations, and enhancing the price of articles of the first necessity. The only measure resorted to in this part of the empire with reference to such a subject, was the measure during the scarcity of 1800, of granting a bounty upon the importation of grain, and he believed all were now agreed that that measure did more harm than good, as the grain would have been sold at a cheaper rate, had the bounty not been given. He was fully aware that such a state of distress, under peculiar circumstances might exist, as to render it absolutely necessary for government to interfere; but still it was highly essential that such interference should only take place when it became unavoidable. It was in this view of the subject that the state of Ireland was
672
The Marquis of Lansdown
agreed with the noble earl in his general principles, with regard to the inexpediency of the interference of government, in the supply of the markets; but it should be recollected that there was a distinction between the case of a general scarcity, and that of the partial failure of a particular article of food. In the present instance, the distress had arisen, not from any general scarcity, for on the contrary, there was an abundance of grain; but from the failure of one article of food, that of potatoes, and that too in the garden of the peasant, and upon which he depended for subsistence. Though, undoubtedly it would be highly inexpedient to interfere with the markets in the case of a general scarcity, yet, under the special circumstance of the partial failure of one article of food, it became absolutely necessary to extend relief; and, therefore it was, that he rejoiced in the liberality of those individuals who had so promptly entered into a subscription for the relief of that distress. He highly approved also of the bill brought into the other House, for affording employment to the poor of Ireland. The fact was, that the poor peasants, whose potatoes had failed, had been compelled to resort for subsistence, to the
673
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, May 17.
ROMAN CATHOLIC PEERS BILL.
The bill was read a third time. On the question, that it do pass,
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, that as the bill had undergone a full discussion, and as the sense of the House had been fairly taken on the subject of it, he would not persist in what he had no doubt must be an unavailing opposition. He trusted, however, that his not pressing the House to another division, would not be construed into any want of decision, or any diffidence of the opinions he had delivered on this important bill.
Mr. Canning
could not do justice to his own feelings, or to the conduct which had been pursued by his right hon. friend, if he did not declare, that the course he had pursued upon this occasion reflected on him the highest credit. Entertaining the strong sentiments which his right hon. friend was known to cherish upon this subject, it was impossible that he could have acted in a more candid, a more liberal, or a more handsome manner. Next to the gratification he should have felt in having his right hon. friend for a supporter, was the satisfaction of having had such an opponent.
Sir T. Lethbridge
said, he could not arrest the progress of the bill in that House; but he might at least be allowed to thank God, that there were three estates of this realm—the King, Lords, and Commons.
The bill was then passed.
674
WEST INDIA AND AMERICAN TRADE BILL.]
Mr. Robinson moved the second reading of this bill.
Sir W. Curtis
asked, who had called for such a measure? None, but such as acted from motives entirely interested. He should oppose the bill in every stage, on account of its decided interference with those navigation and revenue laws under which the kingdom had flourished during so long a period. The only advantage that could accrue from it must be to America; since, it would allow her ships to load at ports in our West India colonies, and to sail directly for the United States.
Mr. Serjeant Onslow
conceived, that upon every ground of justice, policy, and humanity, the country was bound to thank his right hon. friend for bringing forward this bill. Since the period at which the existing laws were framed, the country had acquired, by the result of two successful wars, a large addition of extensive, valuable, and important colonies and towards those colonies, the treasure was an act of absolute justice.
The bill was read a second time.
COLONIAL TRADE BILL.]
On the order of the day for the second reading of this bill,
Mr. Powell Buxton
rose to remind the House, that last year the chancellor of the exchequer had stated, that a proposition, as to-East India sugars being imported into this country on the same terms that sugars from the West Indies were, might be referred to the committee on foreign trade. That, however, had not yet been done; and as this bill greatly interfered with the question of adopting such a proposition, he wished to ask the right hon. gentleman when it was intended to bring it forward? Certain facts had recently come to his knowledge which attached additional importance to this question. By a very able pamphlet lately written by an intelligent merchant of Liverpool, a Mr. Cropper, it appeared that the tax levied by the West India importers upon the public in profit on their sugars, over and above the profits which the public would have to pay on other sugars, was no less than 1,500,000
l
s
675
s
l
l
ad valorem
d
d
l
l
l
Mr. Robinson
said, he did not happen to be in the House when the discussion to which the hon. member alluded took place. The fact, however, was, that last year an act was passed, imposing a duty upon East India sugars, which act would expire this year. If it should be proposed
676
Mr. Bright
thought, that the East India question stood on very different and distinct grounds from any upon which the interest of our West India colonies could be imagined to rest. The East Indies by their natural situation could not be made more accessible to the rest of the commercial world than they now were. The nature of our communication with them was liable to very little alteration. But in regard to our intercourse, and the intercourse of other powers, with our West India colonies, we were very differently situated. He, therefore, implored ministers to put the minds of those who were interested in the West India trade at rest, by specifically declaring what were the intentions of government. A very large capital was embarked in this extensive branch of our commerce; and a very strong and painful interest was excited among its principal members, as to the ultimate views of ministers with respect to this subject.
Mr. W. Williams
said, that the hon. gentleman who had just sat down appeared to be against all monopolies but the monopoly enjoyed by the West India merchants. The great object of the bill was, to allow to our colonies free intercourse and communication with every part of the world; and he apprehended that if the trade in sugar was not thrown open, considerable mischief must ensue to the commerce of Great Britain. Under the pressed regulation, the consumption was rather declining than increasing. In the short period of three years the quantity of sugars on hand had diminished from 28,000 to 62,000 hogsheads. If sugars were allowed to be exported to every part of Europe, the consumption would be very materially increased.
Mr. C. R. Ellis
thought, that the East India merchants had no just claim to such a benefit as the hon. member for Weymouth had put in for them. They were, in effect, asking for the ruin of those who had virtually abolished the slave-trade. The representations of those for whom
677
Mr. T. Wilson
feared, that the bill would do but very little good to the West India trade; and if it did not effect a positive good to that interest, he thought it was likely to be productive of mischief somewhere else.
Mr. Money
contended, that the East India merchants had been treated with injustice and partiality by the legislature. It had refused to receive the cotton manufactures of India without a duty amounting t prohibition; while it had compelled the inhabitants of the East Indies to receive our manufactures without the payment of any duty.
Mr. W. Smith
said, he did not wonder that gentlemen were anxious to press this subject forward now, because the longer
678
679
Mr. Barham
, that his hon. friend in speaking of the monopoly, had said that they ought to possess it entire. Not only did he subscribe to that doctrine, but every man in the colonies assented to it. They considered it as their charter. It was on the faith of that agreement that those who preceded them had formed their great colonial establishments. If it was violated, it would be an act of gross injustice, and the colonial interest would be absolutely annihilated. But, it seemed, there had been an invasion of that monopoly; and that was used as an arguments for destroying it altogether. Now, if there had been an invasion of that monopoly, it was not effected for the sake of the West India interest; and if, for the purpose of serving some other interest, the West India proprietors gave up a certain right, it was not fair to turn round on them any say, "Your contract is broken, and the monopoly shall be destroyed." This would be a most violent and a most unjustifiable doctrine. Perhaps this measure might do good. He did not say that it would or would not. But why should a measure be introduced which would deprive the West India proprietor of a prietor of a privilege which had long been his, on account of some incidental, some contingent benefit? Why should he, for such a speculation, be reduced to a mere nonentity? With respect to the right of trade which had been granted to Demerara and Berbice, it had been asked, why, at the time, some representation was not made on the subject? He had only to answer, that representations were made. At that time there was an abundant supply of colonial produce, and the act of the minister, on that occasion had tended to create the present distress. The West India merchants remonstrated in every way they could; and he was one of a deputation that waited on the minister, and argued the question with him. He (Mr. B.) then foretold what distress
680
681
Mr. Ellice
offered his cordial support to this bill as one of those measures of approximation to free trade, which was the safest, and best, protecting, to a rational extent, existing interests which had grown up under an opposite system, and at the same time offering to the rest of the world a sincere proof of our disposition to carry into effect those liberal principles which we had so loudly professed. He had listened with attention to the speech of his hon. friend the member for Norwich (Mr. Smith) and had heard no argument urged against this measure, which did not equally apply to our whole colonial system. Certainly if we were I now called upon to legislate on this important subject for the first time—with the experience and information the last century had given us, he might agree in the impolicy of peopling the West India Islands with slaves, to produce articles, which we could more easily and profitably obtain from other countries in exchange for our manufactures—but the case before the House was, how the restrictions on trade could be gradually and ultimately removed, without entailing absolute ruin on those, who had embarked their property on the faith of existing regulations and the protection of parliament. This bill was, in his opinion, calculated to effect that object, and he therefore supported it. Much matter had been introduced foreign to the subject under discussion, and the attention of the House had been diverted from it, by a kind of by-battle between the East and West Indians, respecting the duties on sugar, which were to be regulated hereafter by another bill. He could not avoid, as this course had been followed, offering a few remarks in answer to some very strange observations of one or two of his hon. friends on this subject. The West India planter was, in his opinion, fairly entitled to a moderate protection for some time to come, in the same manner as he conceived the agriculturist entitled also to a moderate, not to the monstrous, protection, afforded him by the corn bill. One hon. gentleman (Mr. Money) had brought before the House the whole case of the, cultivators of India. He complained, and with great
682
s
d
d
683
684
l
l
685
686
l
687
l
l
l
l
688
1
s
d
s
s
s
l
l
l
l
689
l
690
Mr. Ricardo
rose, in the first instance, to make one observation on the subject of the currency. Though the facts were not known to him, he could not help suspecting the correctness of his hon. friend, respecting the payments in the west Indies. That persons in the West Indies who, in 1815 paid a debt of 100
l
l
l
691
Mr. Marryat
denied the correctness of the statement, that a tax was imposes on the people of England, by the prefer-
692
693
694
695
other sugars
696
s
d
d
d
d
697
Mr. Wilboforce
thought it might be desirable to connect with this bill a provision for registering slaves like that which he had brought under the consideration of the House five or six years ago, but which had not been adopted. In granting the boon now intended to be given by this bill, some security ought to be obtained against the importation of slaves.
Mr. Bernal
contended, that this bill was not a boon to the West India colonies, but to the great body of distressed shipowners. He thought the present measure ought not to be clogged with any enactment with regard to the registration of slaves.
Mr. Manning
described the distress in the West Indies to surpass all description, and to exceed that experienced by the agricultural classes here; and therefore he considered it was of the utmost importance to afford relief.
Mr. Brougham
said, it could not be denied that great distress existed amongst the West India body of merchants—a distress which was as great, if not greater than that which prevailed amongst our agriculturists at home. Therefore, it was, that he should be glad of this measure for their relief, though it was not called for by themselves; and he hoped that a much
698
The bill was read a second time.
EMPLOYMENT OF THE POOR IN IRELAND.]
The House having resolved itself into a committee on the employment of the poor in Ireland, Mr. Goulburn moved, "That, for the Relief and Employment of Poor in certain parts of Ireland, the lord lieutenant shall be authorized to advance out of the consolidated fund, any sum or sums of money not exceeding the amount of any presentments made for the Making or Repairing Roads or carrying on the Public Works in Ireland, at the last Spring Assizes; and also, such further sum of money, not exceeding 50,000
l
699
Sir N. Colthurst
expressed his approbation of the grant, and was confident that the noble, generous, and humane manner in, which the people of this country had come forward on this occasion would make a lasting impression on Ireland, and inspire the sincerest gratitude.
Mr. Becher
said, he was gratified at the introduction of such a measure. It was a source of high gratification, that the liberality of, the people of England was now endeavonring to remedy the evil caused by government; but as prevention was better than cure, as employment was preferable to alms-giving, he should have been better pleased if timely measures, had been adopted by government, by which much of the present distress might have been avoided.
Mr. J. Smith
gave his warm support to the present measure, and thought that thanks, were due to the right hon. gentleman by whom it was introduced; though he could not extend those thanks to the government generally; seeing that they might by timely measures have prevented much of the evil. Still he hailed the present plan, because he was satisfied that it would be productive of considerable relief. He had become acquainted, in the committee at the London tavern, with scenes of distress now prevailing in several parts of Ireland, which he almost shuddered to think of, and which he could not detail to the House. But, from all he had learned, he had come to this conclusion, that the want of employment was the great cause of the evil. England was now imperatively: called upon to assist the sister island. We owed her a great debt, which we ought now to discharge. We had in our prosperity acted towards her with oppression; and we were bound at this trying time to do every thing for her improvement. It was in evidence before the committee for managing the Irish subscription, that in the barony of Moyarta, in the county of Clare, there were not less than 10,000 individuals without the necessaries of life. A large portion of them were deprived of the assistance which they might have expected from a resident country gentry, and were left to perish from want of food; as he had no doubt many of them had done. Now, be contended, that the hundred of Brixton in Surrey, or of Ossulston in Middlesex, had not a better
700
Mr. W. Smith
said, he would mention to the. House one class of absentee landlords, whose benevolent example he trusted would have many imitators. The parties to minim he alluded were two corporate bodies of London, who possessed estates of considerable extent in Ireland. The first was the Drapers company. They had on their estates, tenantry of not less than 1,791 families, consisting of 10,740 persons, for whose relief they had done every thing which could be expected. The other company was one to which he had the honour of belonging. They had come to the possession of a considerable estate in Ireland, on the demise of the late king; and since then they had expended seven-eighths of their income in improving the condition of their tenants. He was sorry that the subscription opened for the Irish poor had not the names of many of the Irish absentees.
Mr. Martin
, of Galway, expressed his gratitude to ministers for the measure they had proposed. He trusted that no person would exaggerate the distresses which existed in Ireland and play off the calamities of that country to disturb the empire. He felt it his duty to call the attention of the House to the conduct of an hon. member. That hon. member (Mr. Hume) was usually very constant in his attendance in the House, and he had heard him talk of this thing and that thing; but when the present subject came to be discussed, the hon. member yawned, and walked out of the House. The hon. member was soon to treat of the tithe system of Ireland. He would supplicate that hon. member to leave Ireland to other gentlemen, and the legitimate ministers who represented that country in the House. The hon. member, he dared to say, would come down to the House and bewail the sufferings of Ireland-but what was Ireland to him?
"What's Hecuba to him, or he to Hecuba,
"That he should weep for her?"
Mr. Hutchinson
thought it was invidious and unjustifiable to allude to any member in the manner the hon. gentleman had done. If the hon. gentleman alluded to the hon.
701
The Marquis of Londonderry
said, he could assure the hon. member for Norwich, that the most strenuous efforts were making in various parts of Ireland to raise subscriptions for the relief of the distressed sufferers.
Captain O'Grady
regretted the observations which had fallen from the hon. member for Galway. It was exceedingly improper that any gentleman who might originate a measure in that House, should be subjected to the foul imputation of making it a party question.
Mr. Martin
said, that his observations were intended to apply exclusively to the hon. member for Aberdeen. He was sorry that the hon. member had not been in his place when he addressed the House. His absence was a bridle in his mouth, and had prevented him from saying a great deal more. He would willingly repeat in his presence all that he had said in his absence.
Mr. G. Lemb
thought it would have been better if the hon. member had refrained from alluding to the conduct of an absent member.
The resolution was agreed to.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Saturday, May 18.
IRISH LINEN TRADE.]
Sir George Hill
rose to move for the appointment of a select committee to inquire into the laws which regulated the Linen Trade of Ireland, and to report thereon. He remarked, that nothing was of more importance to the sister kingdom than her linen trade, and more particularly in the province of Ulster, where it was carried on to a great extent. The object of his committee was, to simplify the numerous and complicated acts of parliament which had been passed at different periods re specting this trade. Many difficulties arose respecting the arrangement of the officers, who were, as the law stood, to superintend the different markets in Ireland. The applications which were made on the subject from the counties of Down,
702
Mr. Denis Browne
entirely concurred in what had fallen from the right hon. gentleman on the value of the linen trade. He hoped the attention of the committee would be directed generally to the whole linen trade in Ireland, and not to any partial purpose.
Mr. Spring Rice
spoken in favour of the Irish linen trade. Whatever measure was calculated to improve it must confer a great national benefit. He would suggest to the right hon. secretary for Ireland, the propriety of encouraging the growth of flax, and thereby opening a source of employment to the people, in the preparation of the article for the linen trade. This was a very favourable moment for giving effect to the report of the commissioners upon that subject.
The committee was then appointed.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Monday, May 20.
MARRIAGE ACT AMENDMENT BILL.]
The House having resolved itself into a committee on this bill,
Dr. Phillimore
proposed to substitute the word "natural" in place of the words "natural and lawful," in the first clause. In many instances the marriage had been invalidated, although the mother had given her consent to it, her daughter being a minor; because it had been afterwards roved that such party was the natural mother only, and not the natural and lawful, mother. The House, he thought, would not be disposed to sanction such a plea.
703
Mr. Wetherell
was surprised at this clause, which was calculated rather to increase than to diminish the cases of doubt and difficulty which arose under the marriage act. Here was one of the penalties which had been long attached to illicit connexions at once removed. The effect of this first clause would be, that any young man might marry a minor, born out of wedlock, with the consent of her mother as knowing that the mother herself was not in a condition to give it under the present law, and as being willing to take the chance of future legal decisions, whether by the pending bill she would be empowered to consent. The present bill would be a premium on these hypothetical marriages, and might lead to the most mischievous consequences. A young lady might say to a gentleman, or a gentleman to a young lady under age, "Oh, never mind the consent of father, or mother, or guardian; let us marry, and take the chance of our marriage being, if we continue together till after our majority, declared valid, and our children legitimate, or, if we do not, of its being pronounced invalid, and our children illegitimated." In fact, the bill provided, that where parties had married, the one or each of them being a minor, without consent of parents or guardians duly obtained, they should not be allowed to institute any suit for the annulling of such marriage, if they had continued together until the minor was of the age of 21 years. This measure, therefore, which was intended to be amendatory was, in fact, attended with ten times the objections and obscurity that attached to the existing law. Since the case of "Liddiard and Horner," decided in 1799, and the effect of which was to lay down a rule of construction different from that which had previously prevailed every body must know the principle of the existing marriage law. It might be, therefore, imprudent to alter it. He would conclude by moving, as an amendment, that all the words after "be it enacted," be left out.
Sir J. Mackintosh
said, he was not prepared to hear an hon. gentleman rise in his place in that House and declare that no alteration was called for in the existing marriage law—a law which he would be hold to say, had encouraged fraud, perjury, and dishonour—had sowed the seeds of dissention in private families—had caused misery and anguish between parties in all situations—and had introduced
704
Dr. Lushington
said, that the grievances to which the marriage act gave rise were
705
Dr. Phillimore
said, that as the law now stood, all marriages of minors, had without the consent of the natural and lawful parents, or of guardians, were declared to be null and void. The consequence was, that either of the parties contracting marriage under such a disability, might at any period of his or her life, however remote, come forward and set aside the connexion. They might, as the law was new administered, set aside their own oath, after taking the benefit of their own perjury.
Mr. Wetherell
contended, that it would be an unprecedented deviation from the general rules of jurisprudence, to give this measure a retrospective operation. The general rule of law was, that a party should bear the consequences of their own crimes, faults, and even errors. It was unwarrantable, therefore, if a man became the lawful possessor of property, on account of the invalidity of the marriage of his uncle for example, to step in and deprive him of his right.
Sir J. Mackintosh
maintained the propriety of the retrospective part of the bill, and cited several precedents in its favour; especially the statute of limitations, and the act of James 1st, assigning the period within which suits from personal property might be instituted. Thus, the security of a tailor's bill was guarded with all the anxiety of legislation, while the dearest and most solemn ties, as the marriage law now stood, were left without any corresponding protection. Hence might foreigners fairly infer, that the English disregarded every thing that was not immediately connected with pounds, shillings, and pence: that the relations of blood, and affection—the bonds of father, mother, and child,—were postponed on our Statute book to the most insignificant matter of pecuniary arrangement. The object of his amendment would be, to restore the bill in some degree to the shape in which it formerly passed that House. The law, as it now existed, was cruelly, needlessly, and inquisitorially retrospective, and one great object of the measure now under consideration was to remedy a law so un-
706
707
ab initio
Mr. D. Gilbert
observed, that parliament had, upon various occasions, agreed to bills which had a retrospective effect. In proof of this, he observed, that the ancient mode of executing deeds and wills was by sealing and delivering. In modern times, however, signing was introduced. Now, it had so happened, a few years ago, that property, to the amount of several millions, had been transferred in the ancient mode, without the formality of signing, by which the transfer was vitiated. Under these circumstances, that House had passed a bill, which was in spirit similar to that now before the House, by which those deeds were rendered valid.
The Marquis of Londonderry
observed, that a great mass of evil was generated under the existing law, and, as a moral
708
NAVIGATION BILL.]
The order of the day was read for going into a committee on this bill. On the question "That the Speaker do now leave the chair,"
Mr. Wallace
said, he wished to offer to the House a few observations on the nature and object of the measure which they were about to discuss in committee, and, at the same time, to state the alterations he should propose in the committee, which he hoped would have the effect of obviating the principal objections that had been advanced against certain parts of the bill on a former evening. The measures now immediately before the House, and another, not at present under their consideration, were intended to carry into effect the propositions which he had the honour of laying before the House at the close of the last session, for the purpose of clearing, simplifying, and amending the navigation laws of this country, as well as with a view to the extending and improving our commercial intercourse with foreign nations. Bills were at that period introduced,
pro forma
709
710
by
711
712
713
714
715
dépôt
716
717
718
directly
719
Mr. Davenport
vindicated the proceedings of the deputation from the silk manufacturers. The silk trade was the only flourishing trade in the country at the present moment. He trusted that full time would be allowed to those whose interests were affected to be heard by counsel against the bill.
Sir W. De Crespigny
protested against the principle of the bill. It militated against the best interests of the country, and was equally prejudicial to British shipowners and seamen.
Sir M. W. Ridley
defended the shipping interest against the animadversions thrown out against them. It might be said that they were a body who felt anxiously alive to their own exclusive interests; but so ought all bodies of men to feel. It was their opinion, that where a competition existed an advantage should not be taken from one party which would result to the benefit of the other. But the difference of expense in navigating an English ship of 500 tons, and a foreign ship of the same burden, was upwards of 1,700 against the English ship; therefore
720
Mr. Davenport
Mr. Bastard
hoped an opportunity would be afforded to the silk manufacturers to be heard by counsel.
Mr. T. Wilson
did not think that the measure would be productive of the good anticipated from it.
Mr. Ellice
suggested the propriety of giving time for the fullest consideration of the subject. He hoped the right hon. gentleman would give members an opportunity of discussing the subject at some future stage.
Mr. Wallace
said, he had no wish to refuse the fullest opportunity to parties concerned to defend their interests.
Mr. M. A. Taylor
would oppose the bill in every stage, and was for inserting any article by which the bill might be likely to be thrown out. If passed into a law, it would transfer the trade of England to the opposite shores.
Mr. Ricardo
considered it a happy omen that so many gentlemen were now of opinion that our system admitted of improvement. The only complaint he had against the bill was, that it did not go far enough.
Mr. Brougham
said, he recognised in this bill a portion, though a very minute portion, of the improvements in our commercial system which had often been recommended from his side of the House. A few years since, he had occasion to call their attention to the state of the manufacturers of this country, who had been then almost as much distressed as the agriculturists were now. He then alluded to the improvement of the navigation laws as a remedy, and had remarked, that they had indeed been once beneficial, but that their character had since changed. On that occasion the very person who now brought forward the present measure, had moved the passing to the order of the day. He (Mr. B.) rejoiced that in this improving age the measure which had been so treated five years ago was now brought forward under auspices which made success almost certain. As relaxation had begun on a
721
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Tuesday, May 21.
IRISH PAYMENT OF RENT BILL.]
Sir J. Newport
rose to move for leave to bring in a bill "to authorize occupying tenants in Ireland to tender in part payment of rent receipts for grand jury and parochial assessments, subject to certain exceptions." This bill materially concerned the interests of a large portion of the people of Ireland, whose distresses it was calculated to relieve, as well as to place them in a greater degree of certainty as to the payments which they had to incur with their rent. The grand jury presentments in Ireland were peculiarly extensive and severely pressing in their' nature upon the occupying tenant. Soon after the Union, the Irish presentments did not exceed 400,000
l.,
l.,
722
IRISH CIVIL LIST.]
Mr. Hume,
moving for a return of all pensions, allowances and other expenses paid out of the Civil List of Ireland, observed, that he was extremely desirous of ascertaining how they had been augmented to so large an amount. The civil list of Ireland amounted in the first year to; 214,877
l.
l.
l.
l.
at once.
l.
l.,
l.,
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
723
l.
l.
l.;
l.;
l.
l.
l.
*
In 1769
£.513,511
—77
618,340
—84
60,000
—86
210,000
1802
990,053
—4
591,842
—5
10,458
—14
118,853
3,113,061
Regency expenses, viz. 52 Geo. 3, c. 8.
100,000
April 5, 1815, to pay off arrears
534,713
£3,747,774.
724
l.
l.
s
d.
l.
l.
l.
l.
The Marquis of Londonderry
was surprised, after it had been intimated to the hon. gentleman, that no opposition would be made to his motion, that he have brought forward such a variety of details, which no man could he prepared to answer on the sudden, which were calculated to produce false and painful impressions—and which could answer, no practical purpose. With reference to the question the hon. gentleman had again raised on the contract of the civil list, he (Lord L.) contended, that it was a contract of the strictest kind, under the sanction of the law. It was true, that like all contracts, it could he avoided by consent of the parties; and whenever the Crown came to parliament, the whole question was thus opened to revision. But the Crown had never said—"give me back my hereditary duties;" and the public had been a gainer during the whole of the late reign, by an arrangement made at the beginning of it, to the extent of eight or ten millions.
Mr. Bennet
said, that constitutional authorities were decidedly against the position of the noble marquis. As to the Crown having been a loser by the contract, if the public had not been saddled
725
Mr. Goulbourn
was confident, that the hon. member for Aberdeen was mistaken in several of the statements he had made.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
rose to do justice to Mr. Crofton, who had indeed a retired allowance of 1,000
l.
l.
Sir J. Newport
felt himself bound to bear testimony to the talents of Mr. Crofton in the department to which he had so long belonged.
Mr. Peel
had been for six years connected by official ties with Mr. Crofton, and assured the hon. member for Montrose, that he was completely mistaken in his assertions. He was also misinformed regarding the secretaries of the lord lieutenant, who received nothing from the civil contingencies.
Mr. Hume
said, he had spoken Mr. Crofton, only as one out of eighteen; and if he was mistaken, the return, when produced, would set him right. If the secretaries of the lord lieutenant did not receive the sums he had mentioned from the civil contingencies, he apprehended it would found that they did obtain them from the civil list, or from the consolidated fund.
The motion was agreed to.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Thursday, May 23.
IRISH POOR EMPLOYMENT BILL.]
The bill having been read a first time,
The Marquis of Lansdown
said, he was not friendly to the suspension of the standing orders of the House for the purpose of accelerating the progress of bills, but under the special circumstances of the present bill, having for its object, the immediate relief of a considerable portion of the population of Ireland now labouring under the most sever distress, and recollecting also that at the commencement of the session the standing orders were suspended for the purpose of passing
726
Lord King
had no doubt that their lordships would willingly give their consent to this measure, tardy and inefficient as it was. In the distressed districts of Ireland, a million of people were said to be in a state of absolute starvation; and this bill proposed to lay out 50,000
l.
The Earl of Limerick
was surprised that the noble lord should choose such a moment for repeating any exasperating language, which might have been used in another place. For his part, he would assert that, whoever had cast on the landlords of Ireland the charge of rapacity, such charge was not founded in fact. There were, undoubtedly, some rapacious landlords in Ireland, and so there were in England. As to jobbing, it was most unfair to apply it exclusively to Ireland; for if the public money was to be laid out in England some of it would find its way into the pockets of those who were not intitled to it. What had been done in this country for the relief of Ireland was most generous, and would, he doubted not, have a powerful influence in the work of conciliation.
Lord King
protested that he had not held exasperating language. The whole object of what he had stated, was to show that all had not been done which ought to be done in so pressing a case. Those who had caused the evil ought to be more liberal in relieving it. The sum given by the bill was too little to afford any substantial relief to the suffering people of Ireland.
727
The Earl of Blesington
denied that there was any foundation for the charge of rapacity, as applied generally to the landlords of Ireland. With regard to the bill, it was a measure highly satisfactory to him, though he trusted that it would be followed by other measures for the relief of the suffering people of Ireland.
The Earl of Liverpool
said, that under the special circumstances of the case, he was induced to support the bill; it being, in his opinion, objectionable in principle. The general principle acted upon in England was, to leave public works, such as roads, canals, &c. to individual or joint speculation, it being well understood, that under such a system, individuals were induced, for the sake of their own interest: to a careful superintendence, and a more economical expenditure of money in consequence took place. As to the objection, that the relief was of small amount, it was only necessary for him to say, that it was considered, enough for the present exigency, and that there would be ample time to apply a further sum for the same purpose if the present should be found insufficient.
The Marquis of Downshire
regarded the measure as merely temporary, and trusted that government would look a little deeper into the state of Ireland. The great cause of the discontents in that country he considered to be the state of the law respecting tithes. He concurred in every thing that had been said on that Subject by a noble duke, (Devonshire) previous to the recess. The revision of the tithe system was indispensable, for nothing could be worse adapted to the situation of the country. He was himself a great proprietor of tithes, but he was willing to make almost any sacrifice to get rid of a system fraught with such injurious consequences to agriculture, and productive of so much discontent.
The. Earl of Darnley
was sensible of the hardships of the tithe system, but considered the want of employment to be the great cause of the present distress in Ireland. He wished that what was now done had been done sooner, and thought that it would have been more gracious to vote as much for the suffering people of Ireland as parliament had done for the Russians, Spaniards, and Portuguese. With respect to landlords in Ireland, he disclaimed any thing like a system of oppression on their part.
The Marquis of Lansdown
gave notice,
728
The bill went through all its stages, and was passed.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Thursday, May 23.
WELCH JUDICATURE.]
Mr. Allen
prefaced his motion upon this subject by a variety of observations upon the state of the courts of justice in Wales. He complained generally of the want of responsible officers, and of the inefficacy of process issuing from the courts of equity. The courts of common law were, perhaps, in, even a worse condition. The allowing, judges to practise as barristers between the sessions was highly objectionable. It opened a door to connexions between judges and attorneys, which might be highly prejudicial to the ends of justice. The hon. gentleman further complained of that law which permitted the trying of a Welsh cause in the nearest English county. When the House heard that the cost of such a removal was 300
l.,
729
730
Mr. Barham
said, that on fairly viewing this subject, any one would naturally ask what reason could be assigned for supporting a separate judicature for so small a part of the united kingdom? Reasons, cogent enough, might have existed in the time of Henry 8th; but what was there now in the state of Wales, so different from that of any other part of the empire, as to make such a judicature necessary? He might be answered, that the language of the country was different. But to this he should rejoin, that the proceedings, the banisters, the judges, were all English. The country was mountainous; but many parts of England were equally so. He believed the present Welsh judges to be men of learning, integrity, and honour, but he must be allowed to observe, that the judges in Wales were not looked upon by the people with the same respect that was shown to the judges in this country. The Welsh people could not but be aware that, their judges were chosen, sometimes rather for their parliamentary services, than for their professional qualification. The best evidence of the opinions of the people was to be found in their own conduct; and certain it was, that they removed every thing they possibly could do—and that a great charge—to another judicature. Without meaning any reflection on an hon. gentleman, opposite (Mr. Jones), he did think that the motion would do a great good, if it should reduce the number of Welsh attornies in some proportion to the remainder of the population.
Mr. Jones
expressed his decided disapprobation of the motion. Admitting, for the argument that the court of equity could not enforce it's decrees, it was in the option of the plaintiff to proceed either there or in the superior court of England; but he was prepared to show, in opposition to what had been stated, that it could enforce its decrees. Having gone through the whole of the evidence annexed to the two reports, he felt satisfied that it was strongly against the change now proposed. The hon. gentleman entered into some details in order to support this opinion. He particularly dwelt upon the point, that law was both cheaper and more expeditious in Wales than in England, and to this effect he quoted the words of the report of the committee of 1819. He also adverted to the testimony in favour of the
731
Sir J. Mackintosh
said, he should be curious to see in what manner the hon. gentleman would word his clause to prevent the appointment of Welsh judges from political motives, and to deprive the Treasury of the power which it possessed at present by law, in order to transfer it to the lord chancellor. The old mode of appointment by the minister of, the day, was, of itself, a most abominable evil; and he put it to those who heard hin, whether the inhabitants of the principality of Wales were not entitled to the same pure administration of justice as the people of England. It was puerile to bring forward the names of respectable persons who had taken Welsh judgeships only as a stage in their professional advancement. He might just as fitly quote the names of lord Bacon and lord Coke, in favour of the continuance of the court of star chamber. Would any man say that the principle of selection was the same with the Welsh judges as with the other judges of the land? It was not to be denied, that the former had been chosen for their parliamentary influence; and if this was the fact, what more was it necessary to state in support of the present motion? He was not at all sure that the exclusion of Welsh judges from seats in the House would be effectual. They might still be named from parliamentary considerations; and, though the mode and form might thus be changed, the effect would be the same, while the responsibility of the advisers of the Crown in this respect might be lessened. The
732
733
Mr. Scarlett
perfectly concurred with his hon. and learned friend, that rattler than the respectability of the administration of justice should be lowered by an inequality among the judges, the number of the superior judges ought to be increased; but he did not think the necessity existed. He had no partial attachment to the number of twelve, nor did he think there was any extraordinary virtue in that of four; but he thought that if at present an alteration of the judicature of our courts was necessary, the number of judges ought rather to be diminished than increased. He was opinion that one of, the judges of the King's-Bench might be detached in term time to do the inferior criminal business, while the higher duties might be performed by three. There was a great deal of minor business which came before this court, and which he thought might be disposed of as he proposed. As to the present system of Welsh judicature, it was undoubtedly very defective, It was difficult to suppose that gentlemen at the English bar, who were in any thing like eminent practice, would accept of the appointment
734
l.
Colonel Wood
thought, that the great increase of property which had taken place in Wales since the time of Henry the 8th, entitled them to a change in their judicature more suited to their, present state. The honourable colonel said he had changed his mind on this subject; and he had done so from conviction.
The Attorney General
could not agree to the plan of abolition, or of increasing the number of English judge. The present system of Welsh judicature was defective, and ought to be amended; but the hon. member for Carnarvon was about to bring in a bill to remedy those defects, and the House was not at present in a condition to come to a decision on the question. Besides, the opinions of two previous committees were in favour of amendment, and not of abolition.
Mr. C. Wilson
bore testimony to the respectability and integrity of the Welsh judges; but said, that any measure which would have the effect of assimilating the jurisdictions in Wales with those of England should have his support.
Mr. Wynn
said, that he should, as a general principle, have no objection to the jurisdictions in Wales being assimilated to those in England; but he did not think that such a measure could be carried into effect without considerable inconvenience. He had no objection to discuss a bill on the subject; but he could not give his assent to the whole of the resolutions before the House. He would suggest to the hon. member to withdraw his motion now, and if he should not be satisfied with the plan to be proposed by the member for Carnarvon, he might renew it at a future day.
735
Mr. M. A. Tayor
supported the motion, but was unwilling that, a question of such importance should be disposed of in so thin a House. He therefore moved as an amendment, that the debate be adjourned to that day fortnight.
The gallery was cleared for a division; when there being only 34 members present, the House adjourned.
HOUSE OF COMMOS
Friday, May 24.
ALEHOUSES LICENSING BILL.]
Mr. Bennet
presented a petition from the licensed victuallers of the metropolis complaining of the present mode of Licensing Public-houses.
Mr. Carew
felt many objections to the bill which the hon. member for Shrewsbury had introduced.
Mr. Bernal
observed, that the interests of those brewers who were freeholders of public-houses would be very materially injured by that clause of the bill which provided that a magistrate should grant a license to any individual who possessed the qualifications necessary to enable him to open a public-house. The clause would also hold out greater temptations to drinking.
Mr Alderman Smith
expressed himself inimical to the bill.
Mr. Littleton
suggested, that it was expedient to introduce a clause into the bill for encouraging the sale of beer of a diminished strength.
Colonel Trench
thought, that the brewers of London had too long enjoyed the monopoly of their trade.
Mr. Marryat
believed that the proposed measure would operate injuriously upon the vested interest of the brewers.
Mr. Hume
could see no reason why the trade in beer should not be thrown open.
Mr. Brougham
considered it a measure of the first necessity, to break down the present system of licensing public houses, although in doing so, care should be taken to injure as little as possible, the vested capital of the brewers. He did not think that if the number of public houses were larger than at present, the amount of tippling would be increased. As well might it be contended, that, in a private party, the quantity of liquor that would be drank would depend upon the number of glasses placed on the table. He could see no objection to throwing open at once the retail trade in beer. At present, no
736
Mr. Bennet
said, that, in looking to the abuses which had so long existed in the licensing system, he felt that those abuses could not be fully remedied, or the monopoly broken up, without injuring the private properties of certain individuals. Therefore, his object, when he first brought the question forward was, with a view to have it discussed, and understood both in and out of doors. If the magistrates in the country, generally, would adopt the system practised in Wiltshire, there would be little fear of a monopoly of licenses. The magistrates of those counties, whenever they found that the brewer's had a monopoly in any one district, instantly granted a new license, by which means all monopoly was destroyed. He begged the attention of the House, while he stated a few instances of the extent to which the monopoly of the beer trade had been carried in some parts of the country. In Portsmouth there were 231 public houses; of these 168 were in the hands of brewers, 31 in the hands of spirit-merchants, and 29 were free houses. In King's Lynn there were 68 public houses, all in the hands of the corporation or of brewers. In Brighton there were 66 of which 55 were in the hands of the brewers. In Watford, St. Alban's, and Reading, all the public houses were in the hands of the brewers. In other counties, such as Staffordshire and Shropshire, where beer was brewed at home, there was another description of monopolists—he meant the malsters of those counties. In one district near London there were 180 public houses, all of which were in the hands of brewers except 19. In the eighteen excise districts there were 8,859 public houses in the hands of brewers, being a proportion of five to one of the whole number. Having thus pointed out the evil, he now came to the remedy. He had intended to open the beer trade
737
Mr. Hume
thought it would be expedient to adopt the licensing system practised in Scotland, under which no monopoly existed.
Mr. F. Palmer
thought, if the hon. member abandoned the clause making it compulsory on magistrates to grant a license, he might as well give up the bill altogether.
Ordered to lie on the table.
NAVAL AND MILITARY PENSLONS.]
The House haying resolved, itself into a committee on this subject,
The Chancllor of the Exchequer
said, that he would call to the recollection of the House, As briefly as possible, the principle of the resolutions on this subject already agreed to by the House. The resolutions to which the House had agreed [see p. 264], recognized the military and naval pensions granted during the late war, and also the civil superannuations, granted by: consent of parliament, as Ai charge on the public, and as forming part of the public debt. These pensions were granted for the seryices which brave and meritorious persons had rendered their country. Without attempting to carry the analogy farther, he would say, that the House having recognised the principle that these pensions formed part of the public debt, had also recognized the propriety of this principle—that where a large public debt pressed upon the country,
738
739
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
740
l.
741
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l,
742
l.
l.
l.,
l.
l.,
l.
l.,
l.
l.
l.
743
s.
s.
s.
744
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
d.
s.
d.
l.
l.
745
l.,
l.
l.,
l.,
l.
l.
l.
746
l.
l.
l.
l.,
l.
l.
Mr. Calcraft
congratulated the House upon the propositions which they, had just heard. He confessed that he must
747
748
s.
The Marquis of Londonderry
said, that after the manner in which the hon. member had expressed himself, it would be unpardonable in him to make a single observation which might interrupt the harmony of the evening. He had not for a long time, passed so satisfactory a moment; nor did he ever remember to have seen the countenances of the gentlemen opposite so creditably lighted up. The hon. gentleman had done such ample justice w the plan of his right hon. friend, and he had spoken of it in such a spirit of candour, and even of kindness, that he (lord L.) should be doing violence to his own feelings if he suffered himself to let fall any expression which might throw a cloud over this happy dawn. There was one maxim of the hon. gentleman, however, from which inconvenient consequences might be drawn, if it were suffered to pass wholly unnoticed. As the hon. gentleman had called upon the House to observe what advantages were derivable from opposing ministers, he (lord L.) would remind the hon. gentleman of the advantages of supporting ministers, Whose great object was, to preserve public credit. He agreed with the hon. member, that if the fisheries should be embarrassed or injured by this duty, it would be incumbent on the House to consider the particular bearing of the tax upon their interests The hon. member had said, that the government had now for the first time discovered that relief for the country Was to be derived from the remission of taxes; but surely ministers had contended; as loudly as the hon. member himself, that the House could not be too eager to repeal taxes, provided they did it upon a sound principle. He would not, however, be a party to so gross a delusion as to hold out, that even this large reduction of two millions, in addition to the reduction of a million and a half in the malt duty, which followed close on the repeal of the agricultural horse tax, would be likely to
749
Sir J. Newport
rejoiced at the repeal of the window tax, arid was also happy that the hearth tax was given up, not on account of its magnitude, but because it was extremely disagreeable to the feelings of the people, who viewed it as a badge of slavery. The financial plan appeared to him more desirable in its present shape than if it had been effected by means of a body of contractors.
Sir B. Shaw
expressed the great pleasure he felt at the repeal of the Irish window tax.
General Gascoyne
adverted to the present state of the shipping interest, and said, he experienced, great pleasure at finding that it had not been neglected. The right hon. gentleman deserved the gratitude of the country, for the equal manner in which he had distributed relief to different classes and descriptions of individuals.
Mr. Hume
said, that no member of that House could be more pleased with the remission of two millions of taxation than he felt much surprised at the
750
s.
s.
s.
l.
l.,
l.
l.
l.
l.
751
s.
s.
s.
d.
s.
d.
s.,
l.
752
l.
Mr. Curwen
could not refrain from expressing his satisfaction at the selection of taxes to be remitted. The effects of the remission of the salt tax would be greater than were calculated upon. He was, however, anxious that the whole duty on rock salt should be remitted; for then agriculture would be greatly relieved, and trade inconceivably increased. What was proposed to be done would, he was persuaded, give general satisfaction to the country.
Mr. Davenport
congratulated the House on the great remission of taxes which had been announced. He begged to suggest, as the salt duty was to terminate in January next, that much relief would be afforded to the dairy farmers, who consumed great quantities in cheese and butter, if it were taken off in the present year.
Mr. W. Smith
regretted that the whole tax on salt was not remitted, in order to save the expellee of collection, and wished the whole of the leather tax was repealed also. With respect to the amendment, he was surprised that the point should not be given up by ministers; for nothing could be more clear to any rational mind than that there could be no sinking fund but what arose from the surplus of revenue above the expenditure, best course therefore, was, to take from the sinking fund without disguise, and in a manner
753
Mr. J. Benett
said, he would rather see the whole of the salt tax taken away, and the leather tax left as it was, than both reduced, but still retaining the expense of collection. He rejoiced in the reductions that were made, but hoped they would not have a tendency to relax the endeavours of members to push the principle of economy still further.
Mr. Bright
observed, that the fisheries would not feel the benefit of the repeal, if it was merely partial, and would therefore be dissatisfied. Another class of persons who had great interest in the removal of the whole tax, were the linen bleachers of Ireland; and he would submit whether it would not be right to remove the pressure from the staple manufacture of the sister kingdom. He rejoiced that the tonnage duty was also removed, as it would be of great advantage to the commercial interests.
Mr. Hutchinson
could not withhold the expression of his satisfaction and congratulation for measures so well calculated to give relief. He was most grateful for the remission of the Irish window tax, and also for the relief which in the leather tax would follow. With respect to the salt tax, he wished the whole had been reduced; but he trusted that the operation of the arrangement on the subject of foreign salt would not affect injuriously the provision trade of Ireland.
Mr. Ricardo
said, he was most ready to commend the conduct of ministers where he found it prudent and proper; and in the proposed remission of taxes he thought they had acted judiciously in listening to the general prayer of the people. But, when he offered this commendation, he must decline concurring in any terms of excessive gratitude. He confessed, that he owed no gratitude to ministers for giving the people what was, in fact, their own money, If, indeed, the ministers had framed any plan for giving the people any portion of money which did not really belong to them, then would be the time to offer them fervent gratitude. But he thought that ministers, in coming down with all that earnestness to announce the remission of taxes, had not dealt quite fairly with the House. It looked as if they wished to induce the House to assent to those parts of their proposition which were bad, under the cover of those parts which were good. Now, he thought it was the
754
Mr. Wilson
said, he considered the present proposition as nothing more or less than a loan; indeed it was worse than a loan, as it trenched upon the sinking fund. It went to borrow from year to year, instead of being fixed on a long annuity. He was, however, quite gratified at the remission of taxes, particularly that portion of it, which so peculiarly affected the shipping interest.
Mr. Maberly
disapproved of the financial part of the scheme, which was, in point of fact, creating a loan for the purpose of reducing taxation. This was not a legitimate mode of effecting such an object, whilst there remained another, an
755
l.
l.,
Mr. Huskisson
denied that the plan was any infringement upon the principle of the sinking fund: on the contrary, it was one which must keep up the public credit, and be of peculiar service in the present situation of the country. He joined, therefore, in the general congratulations of the House, and was surprised to hear the epithet of "frauds and tricks" applied to any part of the arrangement. If any man had an annuitant for life attached to his estate, what fraud would there be in offering him a proportionate equivalent for a term of years? His right hon. friend bath assumed, and he was correct in that assumption, that supposing the present amount of annuities to be in existence for a certain specific time, and supposing the country would have to maintain the ordinary charges for the navy, army, and other expenditure, and even contemplating a few years of ordinary war, still the amount of debt charged would not exceed
756
l.
Mr. H. Gurney
said, he could by no means participate in the cheers and congratulations which he heard all around him; and he was afraid the House, if he might be allowed the expression, would find itself in a fool's paradise. In fact, the propositions of the chancellor of the exchequer were, in his mind, the most alarming symptoms of the times—the adoption ea system marking, and fraught with ruin; an increase of debt, accompanied by a decrease of revenue—the precise proceeding which had been the index and forerunner of the bankruptcy of all nations. As to the total; remission of the window tax to Ireland, he could by no means comprehend why the large house of a great proprietor in that country should be exempted from a burthen, which was borne by what was almost a cottage in England and Scotland; though there might be a very valid reason for their exempting rather a better species of house than was exempt here.
Lord John Russell
observed, that as it was on all sides admitted, that there could be no sinking fund unless there was a surplus of revenue over the expenditure; and as they were now, after baying resolved that there should be a sinking fund pf five millions, about to remit two millions of taxes, it was incontrovertible in arithmetic, that the sinking fund could not; exceed three millions. The present plan was to be in operation for fifteen years—that was, the taxes were to be lightened, but the remission was to be met by continual loans for fifteen years. During that time the sinking fund would not, be in operation. If the country should be involved in war, the loans we should be obliged to make must, according to their equal or greater amount, altogether destroy the sinking fund. It was manifest that the sinking fund proposed in the early part of the session, was for the purpose of facilitating a recent financial operation; for the moment it was effected, the very minister who proposed the former resolution, proposed a plan to break down that
757
Mr. Alderman Heygate
did not object to the selection of the taxes to be repealed, but thought a reduction or repeal of the window tax in England would have been most desirable. With regard to the annuity scheme, it was objectionable, because it enabled government to take off taxes without a correspondent reduction of expenditure, and removed the burthen; from our own shoulders to those of posterity; Who were already loaded by our improvident wars with a debt of nearly 800,000,000
l.
l.
Mr. W. Williams
denied, that the sinking fund had been maintained inviolate, and contended that it was now too late to
758
Mr. Cripps
supported the proposition of ministers, and congratulated the country on the reduction of taxation.
Captain Maberly
said, he had no objection to either of the plans then before the House, but was of opinion that the plan proposed by the hon. member for Montrose was the most effectual and economical.
Mr. J. Martin
preferred the amendment, on account of its greater clearness and simplicity. It was a palpable joggle to talk of having a sinking fund at a time that we were borrowing money to defray the expenses of our ordinary establishments.
The committee divided: For the amendment 35. Against it. 115.
List of the Minority.
Attwood, M.
Martin, J.
Birch, J.
Monck, J. B.
Baring, sir T.
Milbank, M.
Calcraft, J. H.
Normanby, visc.
Coke, W. jun.
O'Callaghan, J.
Dundas, hon. T.
Palmer, C. F.
Duncannon, vis.
Power, R.
Davies, T. H.
Pares, T.
Denman, T.
Rumbold, C. E.
Gurney, R. H.
Robinson, sir G.
Heron, sir R.
Russell, lord J.
Hornby, E.
Taylor, M. A
Hobhouse, J. C.
Wood, alderman
Hume, J.
Wilson, sir R.
James, W.
Williams, J.
Latouche, R.
Williams, W.
Lennard, T. B.
TELLER.
Maberly, J.
Ricardo, D.
Maberly, W. L.
The several resolutions were then agreed to.
ILL-TREATMENT OF CATTLE BILL.]
Mr. R. Martin
759
Mr. R. Martin
expressed his surprise that the attorney-general had not assigned any reasons for opposing the bill. The learned gentleman ought to have done so, if not in courtesy to the member who brought the measure forward, at least on account of its having received the approbation of a large portion of the inhabitants of the country. The learned gentleman had placed himself in opposition to the common sense of the whole nation. The magistracy of London and Middlesex had spoken in an articulate manner in favour of the measure. It had received the support of clergymen who did honour to their calling. There was not a pulpit in London that had not spoken in a pronounced manner in approbation of it. It had been asserted by the advocates of cruelty, that the bill did not define in what cruelty to animals consisted. But, could any one define what was called excessive correction of an apprentice? He would not object to a horse being beaten; but he would protect the animal from being inhumanly treated. The utmost penalty which his bill provided for the most flagrant case of inhumanity towards an animal, was three month's imprisonment, or the payment of a fine of 5
l.
The Attorney General
observed, that he had had an opportunity, in the course of the last session, of explaining the reasons for his objecting to a measure of this description.
The House divided, for the second reading: Ayes 29. Noes 18.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Thursday, May 30.
WELCH JUDICATURE BILL.]
Mr. Jones
Mr. Barham
complained of the course taken by the hon. gentleman, on a former night, in moving that House be counted, and by that means smothering the measure of his hon. friend, (Mr. Allen). If his hon. friend's measure had been suffered to go to a committee, the House would then have had the two plans before them. He could not help thinking that his hon. friend had been ill used.
760
Mr. Peel
maintained, that nothing could be further from the intention of hon. gentlemen on his side of the House, than to show any want of courtesy to the hon. member for Pembroke. The hon. member for Durham had moved the adjournment of the debate for a fortnight on the night alluded to. The motion for counting the House, therefore, had produced no other result than would have been produced, had the motion for and adjournment been persisted in.
Mr. Denman
said, the question on which a difference had arisen, was not as to adjourning the debate to any particular day, but to the appointment of committee to which the resolutions of his hon. friend and the whole subject might be referred. The present bill supplied a remedy to trivial evils, but did not meet any of the great objections against the present system of Welch judicature. He thought it would be better that the subject should go off altogether till next session, than that such a measure should be adopted.
Leave was given to bring in the bill.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Thursday, May 30.
BANK CHARTER.
Mr. Grenfell
rose to present a petition from several highly respectable individuals in the country of Berks, relative to a negotiation said to be pending between government and the Bank of England, for the renewal of the Bank charter. To the extension of that monopoly, which would expire in 1833, he had the strongest objection; and the petitioners were of the same way of thinking; but they objected more strongly to the relaxing of the restrictive law as to the number of partners engaged in country banks—to the relaxing of that law in places more than 65 miles form London, and continuing it in places within that limit. Now, whenever the measure for renewing the charter came before the House, he should feel it his duty to oppose it. Indeed, after the experience which the country had had of the conduct of the Bank during the last 20 years—after their immense profits, amounting in 25 years (after the payment of 7 per cent dividend) to more than 25,000,000
l.
761
Mr. Manning
defended the conduce of the Bank, and treated the charge of tyranny as invidious and unfounded. He also denied that the profits of the Bank were unreasonable, referring to the very large additions the Royal Exchange Insurance Company had made to their capital in consequence of their great profits during the war.
Mr. Dundas
supported the prayer of the petition, and remarked upon the loss which had been sustained by the failure of country banks in Berkshire.
The Marquis of Londonderry
said, the natural moment was not arrived for the discussion of the question, which was too large to be settled on the mere reception of a petition, to which there was no sort of objection.
Mr. Ricardo
did not complain of the Bank directors for making the concern as profitable as possible; but he complained of ministers for having made such improvident bargains with the Bank, as to enable that establishment to make those enormous profits. He should oppose to the utmost the renewal of the Bank charter, because he was satisfied that every farthing made by the Bank ought to belong to the public. Even if a paper currency were wanted, ministers could accomplish the object more advantageously for the public without, than with the assistance of the Bank of England.
Mr. Pearse
defended the Bank of England, and asserted that they had no monopoly, since it was in the power of any of the London bankers to issue notes if they thought fit to do so.
Mr. Monck
contended, that the Bank had a monopoly in effect, if not in fact, seeing that the private banks could not compete with the favoured Chartered companies. With regard to the bargains between government and the Bank, he thought they were just upon the terms of a spendthrift add it usurer—the former being obliged consent to anything that the latter required.
Ordered to lie watt the table.
POOR REMOVAL BILL.]
Mr. Scarlett,
in rising move the second reading of
762
763
764
765
766
767
l.
l.
768
s.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
769
770
771
l.
772
l.
l.
Mr. Mansfield
said, that his constituents were strongly opposed to the measure, and in that opposition he concurred with them. He believed, that if curried into effect, it would operate with a multiplied pressure, not only on those who were relieved. He therefore felt it his duty to move as an amendment, "That the bill be read a second time this day six months."
773
Mr. Monck
declared his conviction, that the present measure was brought forward with the purest and best intentions, and with the hope of redressing the many evils which flowed from the system of poor-laws. Indeed, so long as these laws existed, great abuses would prevail, and the lamentable truth was, that in every discussion on the subject the House was reduced to a choice of evils. But he must be allowed to say, that the evils of the present system were comparatively small, when contrasted with that mass of abuse which would be engendered by the operation of the present bill, if carried into effect. The principle of the measure was not new—it had been tried in this country before; but the inconveniencies and abuses it produced made its repeal imperative. It was first introduced in the reign of Elizabeth, and continued until the 13th of Charles the second, when the inconveniencies felt, in consequence of the overflow of paupers from country parishes into towns and rich districts, where there was plenty of stock, were so abandon the system. If such were the abuses in the simple state of society in those times, how much more aggravated much they be if that system was renewed under our present complex condition? The present average amount of the poor-rate, was 15
s.
s.
774
l.
l.,
l.
l.
l.
Mr. T. Courtenay
felt considerable apprehensions in rising to oppose a measure introduced under the authority of the hon. and learned gentleman, in speech so well calculated to make a considerable impression. That speech appeared to him, however, more particularly to apply to a bill which some sessions back had been brought forward by a right hon. friend of his, the chairman of the poor-laws committee (Mr. S. Bourne), which was
775
Mr. J. Shelley
said, he was afraid that, in the present state of the country, the land itself would not long be able to keep the poor along with the payment of rent and taxes. Some remedy should be applied, and therefore he would support the measure.
Captain Maberly
opposed the bill, as producing too violent an alteration in the poor laws. Though the system of removal might be sometimes oppressive to the poor, yet the proposed alteration would he exceedingly oppressive to the rich. The comparatively light pressure in sonic places did not proceed froth any restraint on the free circulation of labour, but from the vigilance of those who superintended the poor, and the prevalence of industrious and frugal habits.
Sir M. W. Ridley
said, that great in-
776
Mr. Nolan
began by alluding to a remark that had been made, that the poor had no representatives in that House. He could not suffer such an observation to pass without maintaining that there was no class of his majesty's subjects whose interests were not represented there—and there was no class to whom greater attention had at all times been paid than to the poor. Great acknowledgments were due to his hon. and learned friend for the very able, candid, and ingenious manner in which he bad introduced the subject; and though he might differ from him as to the remedy proposed, yet he thought this advantage, at least, would result from the discussion of the question—that it would set the public mind to work upon it, and that no inconsiderable benefit might be derived from that source. It had been said, that the subject was one which ought to have been taken up by his majesty's ministers. Now, he did not think they were bound to take it up. As a measure interesting to all classes, it was open to the consideration of, and might be introduced by, any member who felt himself competent to the task. One general objection to the measure which he had was this—even if he thought favourably of it, he should hesitate to estabish it as a law when he found so many petitions against it from every part of the country, and so general an opinion against its practical effects. Another objection was, that the measure was partial, and left wholly out, of consideration the general system of the poor-laws with all its defects. When his hon. and learned friend introduced his former bill, he observed that it was complicated, but that every part of it depended on the other; but now he abandoned all the parts except that which referred to the removal of paupers, without any reference to how they wore to be supported. It had been
777
The Marquis of Londonderry
complimented the hon. and learned gentleman, who had just sat down, on the ability and knowledge which he had displayed on this interesting subject, and congratulated the House on the fact, that it was a subject which had never been discussed with any thing like party feeling. On the contrary, there had never been but one object in view, which was, to resolve the difficult problem of relieving the country from the evils attendant on the existing system. The present discussion tended to show how unfair it was to call on his majesty's government to embark in a measure of this kind when it appeared that even the hon. and learned author of the bill, with all his legal knowledge and research, found himself compelled to abandon two out of the three propositions originally embraced in his bill, and experienced great difficulty with respect to the details of the third. To the principle or the bill, every man must be favourable. The only doubt was as to the mode in which that principle could best be carried into effect. In the present state of the bill it appeared to him that bands of paupers might traverse the country, and obtain what would be very like a right of settlement wherever they might find themselves in especial want of aid. That was an evil which, in his opinion, ought not to be permitted. Without going further into the details of the new bill, he would simply state that it appeared to him to be calculated to promote litigation to an unexampled extent, and to create great additional expense, instead of furthering the cause of economy. He wished the hon. and learned gentleman to find out sonic plan to disarm his bill or the evils which it was certain to create, if the principle of it was pushed
778
Sir C. Burrell
defended the habits of the poor in Sussex, and the disposition of the farmers of that county, to do all in their power to relieve their wants. The poor-laws required extensive amendment; and he thought the hon. and learned member entitled to great thanks for having bestowed so much attention on the subject.
Mr. Chetwynd
said, that as the present system of poor-laws was one of the greatest curses under which the country laboured, its gratitude was due to every gentleman who suggested the means of amending them. After complimenting his hon. and learned friend on the exertions he had made upon this subject, he proceeded to say, that though he would not go the whole length of abolishing the law of settlement, he was still aware that some alteration in it was absolutely necessary. After pointing out several inconveniencies which accrued from it, not only to parishes but individuals, he proceeded to attack the present system of bastardy laws; and contended, that that system was calculated to promote vice and immorality, inasmuch as a women with three of four bastards was enabled to live in ease and idleness form the allowance she drew from the father of her children for their maintenance; whilst a married woman, with the same family, use obliged to work hard before she could obtain a similar relief from the parish in which she had a settlement. He should vote for the second reading of the bill, as all the objections he had to it might be removed in the committee.
Colonel Wood
said, he should cordially vote for the second reading, and heartily thanked the learned gentleman for bring-
779
Mr. P. Moore
said, he concurred in the unanimous sentiments of his constituents in opposition to the bill.
Sir R. Wilson
approved of the principle of the bill, but hoped it would receive some modifications in the committee.
Mr. Alderman Bridges
opposed the bill, though he was in favour of some alteration in the system of the poor-laws.
Mr. Scarlett
expressed, his readiness tot make such alterations in the committee, as he hoped would do away the different objections that had been urged against it.
Mr. Denman
objected to the principle altogether, and cautioned the House against favouring it so far as to permit it to be read a second time.
The House divided: For the second reading, 66. Against if 82. The second reading was consequently put off for six months.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Monday, June 3.
REFORM OF PARLIAMENT—REMONSTRANCE AND PETITION FROM GREENHOE.
Mr. Coke
rose to present a petition from the hundred of North Greenhoe in the county of Norfolk, complaining of agricultural distress, and praying for a Reform of Parliament. The petition set forth, that taxation was the cause of their distress, and that the enormous sums raised by it were lavished to increase the influence of the Crown, by maintaining a corrupt majority in that House, once to keep up a large standing army for no other purpose than that of subduing the constitutional feelings of a justly indignant people. It stated, that the majority of the House was always ready to support any administration, however corrupt and tyrannical. The hon. member expressed, his concurrence in the prayer of the petition; and moved, that it do lie on table.
Mr. Fremantle
though the language of the petition was most insulting to the House, and moved, that it be rejected.
Mr. Curwen
said, the truth of some of the allegations in the petition could not be dented. It was notorious that seats in that House were bought and sold like cattle at Smithfield market. It could not
780
Mr. James
rose to notice a mistake into which the petitioners had fallen. It was not to keep up the influence, of the Crown, that such lavish acts were committed, and, he thought it almost high treason to say so. It was to maintain, the unjust influence of the boroughmongers.
The Marquis of Londonderry
said, that the tone of the petition was not only a tone of remonstrance but of insult, and the thought that the House, with a due regard to its own character, could not receive it.
Mr. Calcraft
could see nothing in the petition which was adverse to its being received. What it contained had often been repeated in that House, and doubtless would be again. Were they not accustomed to say that taxation was grievous? Was it not a fact that pensions and useless offices were kept up, by which many members were under the direct influence of the Crown? With regard to the standing army, he had always said that it was greater than was necessary for proper purposes; and it had been used, in some instances, under very suspicious circumstances. He thought his hon. friend had displayed a little too much zeal in moving for the rejection of the petition.
Sir. R. Wilson
said, that the hon. gentleman could not, as a man of honour, deny that seats in that House were bought and sold, to his own knowledge. He thought the petition ought to be received.
Mr. Wynn
had always considered that a petition ought not to be rejected upon any particular expressions or words which it might contain, but upon the general spirit in which it was drawn up. If he looked at the general spirit of the present petition, he thought it was plainly intended to menace and insult the House. It was a justification of rebellion, and it was received, the House, could never after venture to reject any other petition.
Sir J. Newport
thought they were bound to open as far as possible the doors of the House to the petitions of the people. By so doing they would best consult the dignity of the House. To a large proportion of what was contained in the petition he gave his assent. There were some words in it which he regretted; but they ought not to be scrupulous about expressions in a time of distress like the present.
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, there was a point of form which struck him as being
781
animus
Mr. J. Smith
did not believe many of the allegations contained in the petition, the one with regard to the army was together false. But he felt considerable difficulty in rejecting a petition of this kind; and he was determined not to do so by what had fallen from the right hon. gentleman who had lately accepted office. The right hon. gentleman had said, that before rejecting a petition they ought to be satisfied that there was an intended insult and this had not been made out in the present case. He believed there were many persons who thought every word in this petition be true. He, however, did not think so, and he knew the part which related to the army, to be grossly false.
The House divided: For receiving the petition 55. Against it 89.
List of the Minority.
Aubrey, sir J.
Haldimand, W.
Abercromby, hon. J.
Hamilton, lord A.
Brougham, H.
Hobhouse, J. C.
Bernal, R.
Hutchinson, hon. C. H.
Burdett, sir F.
Hume, Joseph
Bennet, hon. H. G.
James, W.
Bright, H.
Kennedy, F.
Boughey, sir J.
Lushington, G.
Birch, Jos.
Macdonald, J.
Calvert, C.
Marjoribanks, S.
Creevy, T.
Monck, J. B.
Cavendish, lord G.
Moore, Peter
Colburne, N. R.
Martin, John
Crespigny, sir W. Dc
Newport, sir John
Calcraft, J.
Normanby, visct.
Duncannon, visct.
Price, R.
Denison, W.
Powlett, hon. W.
Davies, T. H.
Pares, T.
Ebrington, visct.
Ricardo, D.
Fergusson, sir R.
Roberts, A.
Fitzroy, lord C.
Russell, lord J.
Griffiths, J. W.
Smith, G.
Heathcote, G. J.
Smith, John
782
Scarlett, J.
Williams, John
Tierney, rt. hon. G.
Winnington, sir T.
Taylor, M. A.
TELLERS.
Webb, E.
Coke, T. W.
Wood, alderman
Curwen, J. C.
Wilson, sir R.
NAVAL AND MILITARY PENSIONS.]
On the order of the day, "that the report of the committee on Naval and Military pensions be now brought up,"
Mr. Hume
said, he did not blame the chancellor of the exchequer for touching; the sinking fund, but he blamed him for talking one way and acting another. It was most inconsistent to buy and sell annuities at the same time. It was a roundabout way of doing that which might easily be simplified. It was better to proceed simply and honestly in the management of our finances, and to free them from complexity. He therefore moved as an amendment, "that it is expedient to take from the Sinking Fund and annual sum equal to the amount of taxation to be remitted, towards relieving the distresses of the country instead of raising money by Loan, or Annuities, as is proposed to be done by the Chancellor of the Exchequer for the payment of Military and Naval Half-pay and Pensions."
Mr. Grenfell
said, that should the amendment be rejected he intended to propose a clause similar to that proposed in 1786 by Mr. Fox. It would be a clause empowering the commissioners the reduction of the national debt to apply the monies in their hands to the purchase of these annuities.
Mr. Brougham
said, that as light alteration of words would make the plan of the right hon. gentleman and that of his hon. friend precisely the same. The right hon. gentleman proposed two sets of commissioners; one for reducing the national debt and the other for increasing it. Why not save the trouble of bringing one set of them into existence? At present here was a set ready made to their hands to grown up and in full maturity. They were precisely of the same cast as that of the set proposed to be created. The present commissioners might sit on the same day and at the same place in their united capacity, and might be empowered to deal in the stock. The plan for double commissioners was a senseless, degrading mummery; and it was merely proposed to make it be though that the right hon. gentleman was really not touching the sinking fund. He should therefore
783
Colonel Davies
could see no distinction whatever between the measure proposed and a direct invasion of the sinking fund. At all events, if the thing was to be done, let it be done in the way most advantageous to the country. Place the commissioners of the sinking fund in the shoes of the parties, who were to become purchasers; and then, at the end of the 45 years, the public would reap the benefit of the bargain.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, he was inclined to acquiesce in the suggestion of the hon. member for Penryn.
Mr. Ricardo
said, that the plan was neither more nor less than sending one set of commissioners into the market to sell stock, mid another set into the market to buy stock; and even the chancellor of the exchequer now understood that fact so fully, that he was about to support a clause which would enable these two sets of commissioners to deal with one another. And here he would remind the House of an expression used by the right hon. gentleman on first bringing forth his plan. The right hon. gentleman then assured the House, that he was not so young in office, as to make a proposal to parliament unless he had good ground to believe that he could make a bargain upon the terms which he stated. And what had the right bon, gentleman done since? Why, he had been forced to tell the House, that there had been an error in his calculations—that he had never supposed that he could make a bargain with any body for 2,800,000
l.,
l.
l.
l.
l.,
l.
l.
The Marquis of Londonderry
said, it
784
l.
l.
Mr. Calcrtyft
considered the chancellor of the exchequer to be at that moment in too pitiable a plight for any generous mind
"Parcere subjectis"
l.
l.
l.
785
The House divided: For the Amendment 51. Against it 81.
List of the Minority.
Abercromby, hon. J.
Lethbridge, sir T.
Aubrey, sir J.
Martin, J.
Barrett, S. M.
Monck, J. B.
Birch, J.
Mackintosh, sir J.
Benett, J.
Macdonald, J.
Boughton, sir W. E.
Newport, sir J.
Bennet, hon. H. G.
Nugent, lord
Blake, sir F.
Ord, W.
Brougham, H.
Philips, G. jun.
Burdett, sir F.
Palmer, C. F.
Bernal, R.
Power, R.
Calvert, N.
Robinson, sir G.
Crawley, Sam.
Rice, S.
Crompton, S.
Ricardo, D.
Calcraft, J.
Rickford, W.
Creevey, T.
Sebright, sir J.
Curwen, J. C.
Smith, W.
Crespigny, sir W. De
Smith, S.
Denman, Thos.
Stanley, lord
Fergusson, sir R. C.
Wood, alderman
Gipps, G.
Williams, John
Grattan, J.
Williams, W.
Honywood, W.
Western, C. C.
Hutchinson, hon. H.
White, L.
Hobhouse, J. C.
Whitmore, W.
James, W.
TELLERS.
Kennedy, T. F
Hume, J.
Leycester, R.
Davies, colonel
Latouche, R.
Mr. Hume
said, that after what had just occurred, the next thing for the House to do was, to endeavour to persuade ministers to carry the complex operation of their plan into effect as beneficially to the public as possible. He thought that this would be best done by the commissioners for the reduction of the national debt advancing the annual payments for a number of years, and afterwards repaying themselves, as the annuities to be paid decreased in amount. Such a plan would have the effect of relieving taxation at the present time, and might be carried into effect without the loss of a single penny to the country. He would therefore move to leave out all the words of the original resolution after the word "that," and to insert the following in their place: "That it is the opinion of this House, that, for the purpose of apportioning, conformably to the resolution of the 3rd of May last, the burthens of the naval and military pensions, it is expedient that the commissioners for the reduction of the national debt be authorised and required to
786
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
did not think it necessary to trouble the House with, any observations upon this amendment, as it was substantially the same with that which had just been negatived.
l.,
On the resolution, relative to the repeal o 13
s.
s.
Sir J. Sebright
said it would be of great relief to the agricultural interest that the tax should be taken off before the autumn, because then the greatest quantity of cattle was killed and salted.
Mr. Curwen
observed, that there was another inconvenience by the mode proposed, as the poor people who laid in their salt would incur a great loss. For his part he was induced to move the taking off the whole tax [Cheers]. If it was necessary that the government should have the 250,000
l.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
objected to the amendment, on the ground that there could be no material alteration, in the existing financial arrangements without breaking clown the system altogether. It the whole of the salt tax were repealed, either some new tax must be imposed to supply the deficiency, or the integrity of the sinking fund must be invaded [A laugh!]. Did gentlemen mean by that laugh, that the resolution which had recently been agreed to, trenched on the sinking fund? If so, the House ought to adhere with the more pertinacity to what remained. But he denied that the resolution in question involved any incroachment on the sinking fund. If, however, this amendment was adopted, the present surplus of the income over the expenditure, on which the existing sinking fund was founded, would be diminished. With respect to the proposition, as viewed with reference to its effect on the community, he believed, that the remission of 13
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.,
s.
s.
s.
l.
Mr. Brougham
congratulated the House on the great light which had broken in upon the right hon. gentleman's mind since the commencement of the session. The right hon. gentleman had then talked as, if no relief could be experienced by the country from any remission taxation. Nay, the right hon. gentleman had
s.
s.
s.
l.
l.,
l.
787
l.,
The Marquis of Londonderry
said, that any stranger who had heard the learned gentleman, would really Suppose that his right hon. friend was so fond of laying on taxes, and so inimical to taking them off, that he had preached a lecture to the House on the delights and the utility of taxation. Now, he would appeal to the House, whether his right hon. friend had invariably declared, that whenever taxes could be remitted without detriment to the public credit, it would be a great relief to the country to remit them? What his right hon. friend had argued against was, the assertion of the learned gentleman, that taxes should be taken off to such an amount as immediately to remove the agricultural distress. The learned gentleman contended, that if the remission of five or six millions of taxes did not relieve that distress (which he very well knew it would not), the remission, ought to proceed farther. His right hon. friend, the contrary, maintained that the remission could not proceed so far; and
à fortiori,
788
Mr. Ricardo
said, it was asserted by ministers that the annuity scheme was no infringement on the principle of the sinking fund. If so, instead of forty-five let the period of that scheme be extended to fifty or sixty years, and that would afford a sufficient sum to enable parliament to remit the whole of the salt duty.
General Gascoyne
was of opinion that the reduced duty would be much more productive than was anticipated. He was satisfied with the diminution proposed.
Mr. Benett,
of Wilts, characterized the Salt tax as the most mischievous of all imposts. He hoped it would be entirely got rid of, and that, no longer existing as a
nucleus
Mr. Calcraft
allowed that the chancellor of the exchequer's proposition went in the first instance farther than his (Mr. C's.) had done. But it should be recollected, that his ultimate object had been the annihilation of the tax, although he was obliged to suit his primary proposition to the palate of those to whom it was made. To make the residue of the tax productive, it must, be extended to the fisheries, than which nothing could be more injurious.
It would be in vain otherwise to expect an increase of consumption at the rate of 50 per cent on an article of the first necessity. It was evident that on the ground of constitutional principle, it would be better to get rid of the tax altogether. While any part of it remained, the people would suspect, that on the occurrence of any necessity for raising money, it would be restored to its present magnitude. It was well worthy of the consideration of a financial minister, that the repeal of the tax in question would afford the people the means of indulging in the consumption, of other exciseable commodities; so that, the revenue would not suffer.
The House divided: For the original motion, 111, for Mr. Curwen's amendment; 67.
CORN IMPORTATION BILL.]
On then order of the day, for going into a committee on this bill,
Mr. Canning
rose, to move an instruction to the committee, the subject of which, he said, was not new to the House, having been introduced to its attention in a petition from the holders of foreign corn at, Liverpool. It was undoubtedly a great object to get rid of the accumulation of foreign corn, and the holders entertained, the hope, that if it were ground into flour there would be an opportunity of exporting it to the West Indies or some other place, and it was wished that permission should be given that it might be taken out for the purpose of being ground for exportation, and failing of exportation, that it might be returned into warehouse. The first regulation would be, that the person taking out foreign corn should enter into bond to return even a larger than the usual proportion of flour. It might be permitted to remain for the chance of exportation a certain time, say six weeks, and then be returned into bond, and not suffered to come out for home consumption until the ports were opened. He would move, "that it be an instruction to the committee, that they have power to make provision in the bill to allow the taking of foreign corn out of warehouse, for the purpose of being ground into flour, for exportation."
Sir T. Lethbridge
said, that the agriculturists had been so completely ground already, that he must take the liberty of opposing this grinding clause, in whatever shape it appeared. Nothing was more likely to promote the introduction into
Mr. Ricardo
agreed, that if the clause could not be introduced with a full security against the flour coming into the home market it ought not to be admitted; but, if that security could be found, it would be most unjust to deprive the holders of foreign corn of it. He thought the bill of the noble lord would be a great improvement on the present law. The hon. member for Cumberland founded all his arguments on the value of corn in pounds sterling; but he (Mr. R.) did not regard the pound sterling. He was anxious that the people should have an abundant supply of corn and an increase of their comforts, and he thought a greater freedom in the trade calculated to produce those effects. He differed entirely from the hon. member, as to the ill effects which it would have upon the demand for labour.
Mr. Western
would acquiesce in the clause, if security could be given that the corn reduced to flour should not be brought into home consumption; and he was disposed to think that such security might be given.
Sir J. Newport
had no objection to the clause, on the understanding that proper means: would be applied to prevent the flour from being brought into home consumption.
The House divided: For the instruction, 136; against it, 49; On the question, "that Mr. Speaker do now leave the chair," Mr. D. Browne moved as an amendment, "that this House do resolve itself into a committee of the whole House, to consider the laws relating to the importation of foreign corn." The amendment was negatived. On the question, "that the Speaker do now leave the chair," the House divided: Ayes 149; Noes 41. The House then resolved itself into the committee. On the question, that 70
s.
Mr. Whitmore
said, that the bill had two objects—to raise the price of corn in this country above the level of other countries, and to induce the agriculturists to grow a sufficient quantity of corn for the whole supply of the country. He decidedly objected to both these proposals. In a country densely peopled like this, it was necessary, that much of the supply should be obtained from other countries. Without, imports we could not expect to; have exports. It was true that of late we
789
s.
s.
s.
s.
Mr. Wodehouse,
instead of agreeing to reduce the import price to 64
s.
s.
s.
Mr. Ricardo
expressed his surprise at the proposition of the hon. member for Norfolk; since the most active supporters of the agricultural interest had declared that 67
s.
The committee divided on Mr. Whitmore's amendment: Ayes, 42; Noes, 87. Mr. Wodehouse's amendment was withdrawn and the original resolution agreed to.
Mr. Bankes
then moved an amendment, that the importation duty should be paid
790
Mr. Robinson
saw no sufficient reason for adopting the amendment. It would have the effect of preventing the warehousing of corn under any circumstances.
Mr. Marryat
contended, that the amendment was in opposition to the whole warehousing system of this country.
Mr. J. Benett
contended, that there was little or no analogy between the warehousing of corn and other articles.
The committee divided: For the amendment, 33; Against it, 70. Mr. Canning then proposed a clause to authorize the grinding of foreign corn into flour, for the purpose of exportation. The clause was agreed to
pro formâ;
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Tuesday, June 4.
CRIMINAL LAWS.]
Sir James Mackintosh
rose, to entreat the attention of the House to that very important subject, the criminal law of the country; and the felt that in mooting a question already so often discussed, he should have occasion for the patience and for the indulgence of honourable members. The fact of the repeated discussion of the subject—that fact alone—impressed upon him the difficulty of his task; but he was also aware, that the very nature of the question was calculated to do any thing rather than to excite general interest in the House. The question, however important to the community at large, touched, at no point, the interests of any particular class: it neither promoted the views of any party, nor could it be rendered subservient to the ambition of any individual: it formed no field for that kind of personal contest in the House which was the principal amusement of the parliamentary bystander; nor was it likely to produce any of those more serious contests between bodies of gentlemen threatened with ruin, and ministers compelled to defend their own measures, which the House had unfortunately heard so often during the present session. Not one of those various and opposite kinds of interest belonged to the subject upon which he had now to treat; but the deep importance of the subject had left him, in his own feelings, no choice but to undertake it. Under the difficulty which attached to the handling of a question so repeatedly discussed, he was sustained by the numerous and respectably-signed petitions which had been presented to the House. Those petitions, attested as to their value by the hon. members who presented them, spoke the deliberate opinion, the decided feeling of a great majority of the enlightened and reflecting inhabitants of England; and he, standing upon the foundation of public opinion and about to examine a question which no one could deny to be of the very first importance, claimed excuse if he asked that same patient attention from the House with which he had been honoured upon former occasions. At such an advanced period of the year, he could have no hope of introducing a bill to be passed during the present session. Any proposal to that effect, at such a time, would be unreasonable; and he had been prevented, partly by the course of public business, partly by a sense of the difficulty of his subject and partly by his own ill state of health, from bringing the matter forward at an earlier period. But although he had no hope of a full discussion of the subject in both Houses of parliament this year, he should hold it unpardonable if he did not make some effort to advance a cause which the community had so deeply at heart; and the therefore intended to propose a resolution to the House, merely affirming a general principle which he believed had already been recognized, and virtually adopted in various cases by the House, and by the legislature; and that resolution might serve as a basis for measures to be taken in the next session for the revision and reformation of British criminal law.
791
s.
l.
l.
s.
792
793
794
s.
arbitrium, judicis,
s.
experimentum crucis
795
796
797
798
The Attorney General
trusted, that opposing the present motion, his hon. and learned friend would not consider him as adverse to any alteration in our criminal laws. It was certain that almost all the ameliorations in our criminal code had been introduced by gentlemen of his profession. It was therefore erroneous to suppose that the profession were opposed to any improvement in the state of our laws. He for one would not be favourable to capital punishment in any case where it could be shown that it might be safely dispensed with. He, however, could not consent to motion which went to pledge the House to a measure which would cast a censure on the whole of our criminal law. The motion was the less necessary, as no specific measure was to be founded upon it this session; and such a sweeping declaration would, he thought, put the government and the criminal law in a situation in which they ought not to be placed. What had been the course hitherto pursued by his hon. and learned friend? He had first of all proposed the appointment of a committee to take into examination the whole state of the criminal law. Such a committee was accordingly appointed, and subsequently presented a report to the House, recommending that, in particular cases, capital punishment should be abolished, and a secondary punishment substituted in its stead. Upon that report his hon. and learned friend brought into the House certain bills to carry that recommendation into effect. The House adopted some of them, but rejected others; notwithstanding which, his hon. and learned friend said, that the House had, on that occasion, adopted the same principle indirectly which he called upon it by his resolution to adopt formally at present. The proper course for his hon. and learned friend to have pursued was to have again brought forward those measures which the report of the committee had recommended, order that, the House might see the remedies which it was intended to apply to the grievances complained of; but, instead of doing this, his hon. and learned friend had left the House entirely in the dark regarding his intentions, except, indeed, with regard to
799
s.
800
Mr. Fowell Buxton
said, that at so late an hour he should not have risen to address the House, were it not for some of the minor points which had been touched Upon in the course of this discussion. If the present motion went merely to affect the law as applicable to capital offences, he should have rested its merits upon the able speech of his hon. and learned friend; but upon the minor points to which his hon. and learned friend had adverted, he begged permission to make a few observations. It was curious and essential, in looking at this subject, to consider the operation of the existing law, and how far the prevailing punishments were rendered available in practice. Upon a reference to the returns of committals and Convictions in Ireland, he found that the number of committals in one year for offences not capital, were 6,000; for offences that were capital, 2,500. Of the former, the convictions were in the proportion of one-half, and of the latter only one-seventh. The same inquiry would lead to nearly the same result—though not perhaps to the same extent—in England. In Ireland he might also mention that the committals for minor offences were 3,700, of whom 3,000 were convicted. In England experience showed that when a man was tried on a capital charge, his chances of escape were double, in comparison with what it would be, were he indicted upon the minor charge. And in America, when the capital was mitigated, the acquittals were only at the rate of 1 to 7, although before the alteration in the severity of the law they always equalled the convictions. In the year 1818, the number of persons sentenced to death or transportation were 3,306, of whom 100 only were executed. The greater part of the been transported. Upon the punishment of transportation it was only necessary for
801
802
l.,
insula nobilis et amena,
803
Mr. Courtenay
said, that though he concurred in the general principles laid down by his hon. and learned friend, he could not accede to the resolution. Nothing could be more improper than to set the public mind afloat on the subject for six or twelve months, without doing any thing for so long a period to remedy the evil. As there was a committee now sitting, whose labours were directed to that end, he did not see how the House could come to any resolution which imputed neglect. The present proposition would not advance the practical reform of our criminal code, and therefore if the question was pressed to a division, he should vote against it.
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, that he concurred in what had been stated with respect to the committee for the reformation of prison discipline. Their exertions were above all praise, being dictated by the soundest policy, and likely to lead to the most beneficial results. It was his intention, on Friday next, to submit to the House a bill which went to provide for the regulation of prison discipline. Was it possible, then, for him to support a measure which was to pledge the House to take into its consideration a subject, which had been already delayed too long? The question of transportation was one which presented many difficulties. As it would, however, be materially affected by the forthcoming bill for the improvement of prison discipline, he should refrain from saying any thing about it at present. He also concurred in the propriety of adopting a vigorous system of police. God forbid that he should mean to countenance a system of espionage; but a vigorous preventive police, consistent with the free principles, of our free
804
Mr. Wynn
earnestly recommended the hon. and learned gentleman to withdraw his motion; at all events in its present form.
Sir J. Mackintosh
said, he would have no hesitation to adopt the suggestion of his right hon. friend, if he did not feel it necessary to retain that part of his resolution which went to pledge the House to adopt measures for increasing the efficacy of the criminal law by mitigating rigour. The resolution pledged the House to no principles but those which they had session after session recognized, therefore no injury could possibly follow the adoption of his resolution. By entertaining it, the House would give a proof of their intention seriously to adopt measures for the amendment of the criminal code. They would thus invite persons of knowledge and experience to lay their sentiments upon the subject before parliament. The resolution would, in fact, serve as a notice, as well to the profession of the law, as to all others, to supply that House
805
The question was then proposed, "That this House will, at an early period of the next session or parliament, take into their most serious consideration, the means of increasing the efficacy of the criminal laws, by abating their undue rigour," and the previous question being put, "That the question be now put," the House divided: Ayes, 117; Noes, 101. Majority in favour of sir J. Mackintosh's motion, 16. Loud cheering followed the announcement of the numbers.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Wednesday, June 5.
ALIENS REGULATION BILL.]
Mr. Secretary Peel
rose for the purpose of moving, that the powers of the Alien act should be intrusted to the executive government for a period of two years longer. Even those who differed from him in opinion, would admit that he opened the question fairly, if he touched, first, upon the nature of the danger to which he proposed to apply a remedy; next, the character and extent of the remedy itself; and lastly, the various objections which, upon general principles of policy or apprehensions from abuse of power, might be started against the remedy. To begin, then, with the nature of the evil against which they had to provide. He recollected that he was proposing the continuance of an Alien bill at a time when the country had been seven years at peace, and after a declaration from the sovereign, that he continued to receive assurances of the favourable disposition of foreign powers. But every man who looked back to the events of the late war, the circumstances of the contest, and to the principles which had produced it—every one who dwelt upon the consequences by which that war had been attended—must admit, that it was not the mere signature of a treaty of peace, nor even the duration of a peace for seven years, that could extinguish the principles which had led to the tumult, or con, ciliate the various interests which had taken part in it. He denied that to provide a corrective for such an evil, was any imputation on the character of those relations of amity in which this country was bound with the other states of Eu-
806
807
808
809
810
Sir J. Mackintosh
observed, that he had felt the deepest anxiety and alarm on hearing that it was in contemplation to propose a renewal of the present measure. It could not but produce the deepest feeling of melancholy to find principles such as those proclaimed by the right hon. gentleman avowed to a House of Commons, or to any assembly of men accustomed to a free government. It was lamentable to find them made the ground of a legislative proceeding, by a minister of great talents, and of high character. The right hon. gentleman was thus furnishing them, not with an auspicious sample of the future benefits to be expected from his career, but marking the outset of an administration which would probably last longer than he (sir J. M.) should live, by an assertion of principles that, if pushed to their legitimate consequences, would subvert every law and every security which we now enjoyed. What was the tenour of this proceeding? It vested in the government a direct and absolute power of banishing from the home of their choice, from the conduct of their affairs, and perhaps from the seat of their fortunes, 25,000 individuals. This bill, too, was to be passed on the assurance of a secretary of state, that he would only exercise this absolute power in cases where it should be necessary and expedient. Gracious God! had it not been said that ship-money was so moderate, that although levied by the mere authority of the king, no real grievance or oppression was likely to arise from it? The very same arguments had been urged in defence of that iniquitous imposition, which were now advanced by the right hon. gentleman, and which would go to destroy every right that had been acquired for us in a lapse of ages. The right hon. gentleman tendered his responsibility; and, relying on this, they were invited to surrender principles which their forefathers had maintained and established with their blood. When
811
812
813
814
815
nisi publice prohibiti,
Mr. H. Twiss
contended, that the right of excluding strangers was one inherent in every state, and that its exercise ought not to be considered an act of injustice. A country which tolerated the residence of foreigners within its territories had a right to say, "You shall be treated as our subjects, as far as the protection of our laws goes; but we will consider you only as tenants at will, and you must depart whenever we think proper to give
816
817
Sir R. Wilson
said, that though the right hon. secretary had taken upon himself the responsibility of the proposed measure, he must still consider it the work of the noble marquis who had taken so active a part in recent proceedings on the continent. It had been well said, that in the seventh year of peace we had a right to expect a discontinuance of this disgraceful measure. But what was the fact? The present bill, the baneful effects of which had been already so fully felt, and so ably described, was pressed forward for the purpose of meeting the views of those continental powers, who were confederated together to impede the progress of knowledge, and to retard the march of freedom. The bill bore upon its face the signet of the autocrats of Europe. This was not an English measure. Since England was England, we never had excluded foreigners from our shores, until our recent continental connections. The right
818
Mr. Scarlett
said, that upon the occasion when this bill was last granted by the House, he trusted that it would be the last time that so odious and unnecessary a measure would be demanded of it. The idea that a body of foreigners could revolutionize a people so exclusively national as were the people of this kingdom, though it was sometimes urged as a pretext for the continuance of this tyrannical measure, was an idea too puerile and absurd to deserve any formal refutation. The bill was attempted to be defended by precedents; but supposing those precedents to be correctly stated, they were taken from barbarous periods of our history, and ought to be avoided rather than imitated. He was surprised that any member of the legal profession could come forward in defence of this bill. He had hoped that, whatever indifference might be felt upon constitutional points in other parts of the community it would not be shared by gentlemen who made the law a study and profession. As to offer any farther arguments upon this
819
Mr. Serjeant Onslow
said, that not concurring in the opinion of the gentlemen opposite, that this bill was dangerous to the liberties of England, or unfriendly to the hospitable consideration due to foreigners, it should have his support. Notwithstanding the denunciations of the gentlemen opposite, the people of England had manifested no hostility to the measure.
Mr. Denman
said, he would give the bill in every stage, his unqualified opposition. One great and important question had been repeatedly put to ministers, and, had invariably been left unanswered; namely, where was the proof of the necessity of the bill? The call remained unanswered, and the necessity of the bill still rested upon the mere statement of the right hon. secretary, That right hon. gentleman had spoken as if he were alone the responsible administrator of the measure, and had forgotten that the whole of the three secretaries were equally invested with the powers it conferred. It was urged that there were only four cases in which this power had been recently exercised. But how did the House know the facts of these four cases? How did the right hon. secretary himself attain the information respecting them? He must entirely depend upon others, which was the evil of a measure, executed by a secret power, called into action by secret spies, and, in the whole of its progress, worked by clandestine machinery. The right hon. gentleman had made a strong appeal to the House to intrust him upon his own responsibility, with this bill. To such an appeal, he was compelled to reply, that it was it strong objection to the fitness of any man for office that he commenced his career by wishing to be invested with such a power. He wished, indeed, to have known the right hon. gentlemen's official career in Ireland connected with some wiser and better act than the suspension of the trial by jury; and he should have been better pleased to have seen him open his official career in England, without calling upon parliament to intrust him with such a measure as this. It gave him the deepest concern to have heard the free provisions of Magna Charta decried and depreciated in a British House of Commons. Notwithstanding the neglect of
820
821
The Marquis of Londonderry
said, he rose not for the purpose of travelling over again the same arguments which had been so forcibly adduced by his right hon. friend, but to protest against its being understood that he supported the bill upon any of the obnoxious grounds which it was convenient for gentlemen opposite to assume were the motives influencing that support. An hon. and learned gentleman (sir J. Mackintosh) had said, that he listened with sorrow and humiliation to the speech of his right hon. friend, and that he felt some alarm at seeing the dawn of his public life clouded by such a bill as this. The learned gentleman might express, it he pleased, these feelings of alarm; but he (lord L.), so far from participating with him in his view of that speech, saw nothing but a subject of congratulation at the prospect it held out of long and able and efficient services in the cause of the country. His right hon. friend had in that powerful speech, disclosed a character and a capability to exalt the liberties of his country, and to establish them upon a firm basis. He did not, indeed, like the gentlemen opposite, pursue a phantom and call it liberty, in the absence of all the qualifications belonging to real, rational liberty—a mock liberty, reared in the midst of bloodshed, and founded upon the ruins of empires. His right hon. friend understood liberty better. He understood it as he found it, as in England, raised upon a basis of internal tranquillity, and only secure and durable so long as it was allied with order and peace. For this country could not hope for tranquillity, nor deserve it, if it suffered its noble soil to become a public nuisance to Europe. The gentlemen opposite seemed to think that the larger the crop that could be collected from the malcontents of Europe, and deposited in England, the better. He thought differently. He would throw open their door widely for the reception of the petitions of the people. So would he the shores of England for
822
Sir John Newport
said, that the noble marquis had asserted, that no argument had been adduced against the bill. He would tell the noble lord, that when a measure was introduced to take away a part of the liberties of the people, on those who introduced it, lay the burthen of the proof.—He denied absolutely that the right hon. secretary had given any reason for the bill. He had introduced it on his mere assertion, that it was ne-
823
Lord Stanley
could not be silent when he heard a minister of the Crown characterise the people of England as a nuisance to the rest of Europe. Where were refugees now to look for shelter? The creed which he had imbibed with his mother's milk, was this—that to the distressed and the persecuted of all the world, England was the land of protection.
The Marquis of Londonderry
said, his argument was, that if England permitted the free ingress of foreign conspirators and agitators, she would absolutely become a nuisance to all Europe.
Lord A. Hamilton
said, that if the bill was passed at all, it should be only for one year; but for himself, proposed as it was for no British purposes, he would not consent to its passing even for a month.
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, that a learned gentleman (Mr. Denman) had declared, that he (Mr. Peel) was indebted to the other side of the House fork the candour and forbearance he had experienced at their hands. Of any want of candour and forbearance on the part of those hon. gentlemen, he never complained. But, what did the terms amount to, as they were explained by the learned gentleman? Why, to this—that he was indebted to their candour and forbearance for not having attacked him for his junction with his majesty's government. He must tell that learned gentleman, that there was nothing he deprecated so much as his charity; that he defied his scrutiny; that he was not afraid of his accusation. If that learned gentleman thought that he was awaiting his accusation, "with baited breath and whispering humbleness," he was very much deceived. He challenged him to bring forward the accusation which he insinuated he had in his pocket, but would not promulge. His motives in accepting office were as pure as those which had actuated the learned gentleman in doing so. He had been connected with the present government ever since his first appearance in public life. He was secretary to the lord lieutenant of Ireland—a post which he quitted earlier than he could have wished. As to his subsequent connexion with government, it arose not out of his own solicitation.
824
The House divided: Ayes, 189; Noes, 92. The bill was then brought in, and read a first time.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Friday, June 7.
BISHOP OF PETERBOROUGH'S EXAMINATION QUESTIONS.]
Lord Dacre
rose with reluctance, to present a petition to their lordships, as it was directed against a person, whose character for piety and learning was eminent. After the petition should be read by the clerk, he would move that it be laid on the table. If their lordships agreed to that motion, he would follow it up by moving an address to the Crown. Their lordships were not ignorant of the nature of this case, as it had been before the House in the course of the last session. [See Vol. 5, p. 1166.] He must here observe, that if the right reverend prelate had thought fit to act consistently either with the statute law or the canon law, he would not have given occasion to the present complaint. But the right rev. prelate, not satisfied with the 87 questions, answers to which he originally required from all persons before he licensed them, had since added 36, making 123 intricate questions on points of doctrine propounded to the petitioner. The petitioner complained of this de-wand, considering himself only bound to declare his belief in the 39 articles. He should now beg leave to present the petition of the Rev. Thomas Shuttleworth Grimshaw, rector of Burton Latimer. [The petition was then read. It stated that the petitioner had appointed the rev. Edward Thurtell curate of Burton, and complained that the bishop had refused to license him on the ground of his not giving satisfactory answers to his questions.] The subject of complaint was briefly this—that persons who had received holy orders were compelled to submit to an examination of a very extraordinary nature before they could be licensed to curacies in the diocese of Peterborough. The questions of the right rev. prelate were delivered to the candidates printed. The candidate was expected to annex his answer to each question, and then sign the paper; but the questions were printed in so contracted a manner,
825
826
827
828
The Bishop of Peterborough
[Dr. Herbert Marsh,] rose and said:
*
*
829
830
831
832
833
834
835
836
837
838
839
840
841
Lord Holland
said, that he disapproved of the language which the right rev. prelate had employed in speaking of the petitioner: such language was harsh in itself, and not becoming the quarter whence it proceeded. With regard to the defence of the right rev. prelate to the charge of the petition, it was the most complete instance of
ignorantia elenchi
842
843
844
845
Lord Calthorpe
contended, that the mode of proceeding adopted by the right rev. prelate closed all those openings in the 39 articles purposely left for the scruples of conscientious minds. He thought it most desirable for the welfare, and most essential to the peace, of the country, and the interests of the clergy, that their lordships should express their decided reprobation of the course which had been pursued by the right rev. prelate. He did hope, that their lordships by their vote of that evening, would make it clearly understood that they would not lend their high sanction to a proceeding, more menacing to the prosperity of the church, than any which had been ventured on, since the period of the Reformation.
The Earl of Harrowby
said, that as he had, on the last occasion voted that the petition should not be laid upon the table, he felt anxious to explain the grounds upon which he should now be disposed to give a contrary vote. They allegations which the petition contained appeared to him to be of the gravest character; and, looking to the important interests which might be in some further inquiry ought to be instituted. He was satisfied, in regard to the church and its welfare, that to narrow the base was the best method of securing the superstructure. The conduct of the right rev. prelate, he considered to be clearly most impolitic. But, while he was disposed to vote for laying the petition on the table, he was far from pledging himself to support the proposed address.
The Lord Chancellor
said, it appeared to him that the petition ought to be permitted to be read and laid on the table, whether their lordships should found any ulterior measure upon it or not. But if it was intended, by laying the petition on their table, to imply any censure on the right rev. prelate, he would vote against it, even in that stage of the question. He could not see how the right reverend prelate, indeed, could go on to the subscription, without previous examination.
The petition was read, and ordered to lie on the table.
Lord Dacre
said, he had intended to have followed up the last motion, by moving an address to the Crown; but from what the learned lord had said, it was clear that he should find much opposition if he persevered in his intention. He was
846
The Lord chancellor
said, that having explained the terms on which he would consent that the petition should be laid on the table, he would only add, that he could not consent to this motion.
The Earl of Carnarvon
expressed his astonishment, that not one of the right rev. prelates on the bench had signified, either by word or gesture, whether he approved or disapproved of the doctrines and conduct of his right rev. brother. Those learned and rev. prelates' attendance on the present occasion was certainly ornamental; but whether it would be practically useful, remained to be determined. He really did think that on a question like the present, their timid silence was a desertion of the cause which it was their duty to advocate. On any constitutional question there was no delay on their part in giving their lordships the benefit of their experience; but now, on a question of church policy, it seemed they were prepared to go to a vote without any explanation of their opinions. What would the public think when they found, that among so many right rev. prelates there was not one who had said a word on the subject? He trusted, however, that one would yet be found to rescue the bench from what he must call the shame of such inactive and timid policy.
The House divided: Contents, 19; Not Contents, 58.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, June 7.
YORKSHIRE ELECTION POLLS BILL.]
Mr. Wynn moved the second reading of this bill.
Mr. Chaloner
said, it was a remarkable circumstance, that those who advocated the measure had no connexion with the county of York, and therefore could receive no injury if it were carried. On the other hand, the various interests in the county of York which would be effected by it felt no inclination to support the measure. That which principally created his hostility to the bill was the direct and gross injury which it would inflict on the exercise of the elective franchise. If the electors had committed
847
Mr. Ramsden
could perceive no benefit which the bill was likely to produce, Out was confident that its effects would be mischievous. The voice of the great body of the Yorkshire electors was decidedly against it. He held in his hand a statement of the sentiments of the grand jury on the subject. Of 22 members 21 were present when the expression of their opinion took place. Of these 21 members, 17 decided against the bill, and, four reserved their opinion. Three of this latter number had since given their opinion against this measure, and one gentleman, who was absent at the time, was supposed to be hostile to it. The only one in favour of the bill was the county treasurer. It would have a baneful effect on the elective franchise. As the law now stood, he had four votes for the county of York; but if this measure were agreed to, he should only have two.
Mr. Wilberforce
considered this question as one of very high importance. A variety of opinions existed as to the best mode of popular representation. Some wished to confine the elective franchise to large counties, towns, and districts; others were desirous of extending it to places of smaller consequence. From the extent of its population, and its diversity of character, all those varieties of opinion were to be found in the county of York, which might be said to constitute a little empire. He was, however, entirely in favour of having future elections for that county carried on as they had formerly been. The feeling of constitutional importance which arose from an election so conducted was of no small value in the support of public liberty. To know that by their proceedings at a great election, they gave a tone to the rest of the country, was exceedingly pleasing to the people, and was a principle which they valued in the extreme. On the importance of keeping this stimulating principle alive, the late Mr. Fox had dilated in public and private company; and his opinion, he was convinced, would be treated with respect. The bill of the right hon. gentleman would have a contrary effect. The right hon. gentleman conceived that the
848
849
Sir H. Parnell
fully agreed that the present measure was one of the most important that could be submitted to their consideration, with reference to the condition or interests of Ireland; but he could not help regarding as most grievous, the consequences of that neglect which had marked the proceedings of those to whom the government of Ireland had been hitherto confided. In that country there was still visible a sort of lawlessness which seemed to indicate that the effects of early conquests were not yet terminated. Among the more immediate causes of confusion, however, he might mention the want of a proper system of communication between the executive authority and the different counties. In England this branch of the civil power was in full vigour, and there were lords lieutenant in every county with whom government might correspond, and derive, through these means, timely information with regard to all that was passing, or likely to occur. One material defect of this measure was, that it offered no enactment for improving the present state and character of the magistracy in Ireland. Its sole purpose was, to provide for a new mode of appointing constables, and the bill might be considered as going to vest greater powers in the hands of magistrates, who were already notorious for doing all they could to bring the laws into disrepute. It was but recently that one of them was convicted of turning every process that came before him to his own private emolument. It was no uncommon case for a justice of the peace to derive 200
l.
l.
850
851
Lord Normanby
said, that the House ought to pause before they proceeded farther with a measure which was as inimical to the interests as it was obnoxious to the feelings of the freeholders of York.
Lord Hotham
contended, that the bill would be beneficial to the county of York, and denied that they had any reason to believe that the county was averse to it.
Mr. Stuart Wortley
said, that a decided majority of the freeholders were against the bill. The West Riding were almost unanimous against it.
Admiral Sotheron
thought it would be for the benefit of all parties that the county should be kept entire.
Mr. Denison
opposed the measure, and expressed a wish that a bill similar to that formerly brought forward by lord Milton, might be adopted.
Mr. Duncombe
supported the bill.
Mr. H. Sumner
supported the bill, and contended that the West Riding ought not to ride over the two other ridings.
852
CONSTABLES (IRELAND) BILL.]
Mr. Goulbourn
rose to move the second reading of this bill. He pointed out the state of the police with regard to the appointment of constables, and showed its defects. He also alluded to the difficulties of arresting persons in Ireland, which could seldom be effected with the concurrence, or without the opposition, of the population. From these causes, to be efficient in his office, a constable ought to devote his whole time to its duties. The grand juries who now appointed them could not grant such salaries as would enable them to do so; and, in consequence, the office of constable had fallen into a state which it was most desirable to avoid. If they wished to make the people of Ireland respect the law, they must endeavour to ensure its administration with effect. The means of accomplishing this, he was about to propose to the House. He was aware that he might be met with the objection that it was against the principles of the constitution to vest such a power in the hands of the government as the appointment of these constables. But he thought the first constitutional duty of every man was to enforce the observance of the laws. The appointment of the constable of a barony was no new power in the hands of government. Several previous acts had authorized this, and the object now in view fully authorized them in extending the power to the common constables. He should propose by the bill, that the duties of a constable should be limited to the maintenance of peace, under the directions of the magistrates. He thought the present measure would remove one of the difficulties which prevented their acting with that efficiency which rendered a magistracy respectable. The House was aware that there were extraordinary measures of police now in operation, which had been attended with the most happy results; and he did not mean to imply any thing unfavourable to those measures when he proposed others, which, he considered, would operate as a preventive, instead of a remedy, for outrage. Various petitions were to be found upon their Journals, pointing out the defects of the police in Ireland. One of these, from the county of Galway, also alluded to the means by which they were to be removed. He thought no man would object to the proposition, that an effective police in Ireland was desirable. He proposed this measure to the House as the opening of a
853
Mr. Wynn
said, that many of those who last session agreed in the disfranchisement of the borough of Grampound, and the transfer of the right to the great county of York, were induced not to offer certain amendments which would have endangered the fate of the bill, on the distinct understanding, that the manner in which the additional members were to be elected should form the subject of a bill to be afterwards introduced. The measure then contemplated was now before the House, and he denied that it was, in any degree, a breach of the franchises of the electors of Yorkshire. The hon. gentleman asked, why was not Devonshire or Lancashire divided? They were not divided for this simple reason—because the House had fixed on the county of York, in consequence of the great number of its electors, to exercise that right which had been forfeited by the electors of Grampound. It then became the duty of the House to consider in what way the new members were to be elected, and whether they had not better be chosen by a division of the county, than by the counts, at large. Many years ago, the state of the county of York was brought under the consideration of the House, for the purpose of lessening the expenses attendant on the election of members. It then appeared, that at the last election for that county, 23,000 persons actually voted, and many individuals who came to York to give their votes, were unable to fulfil their intention, although they waited to the latest moment. The subdivision of property in manufacturing districts was known to have increased the number of electors; and therefore, if the House did not now alter the system of election with respect to Yorkshire, they would be imperatively called on to do so hereafter. A noble lord, one of the members for Yorkshire (lord Milton), felt the necessity of an alteration so strongly, that he had some time ago introduced a bill to divide the county of York into three or four districts, for
854
l.
l.
855
l.
l.
l.
l.
Mr. Plunkett
said, that upon the necessity of improving the police of Ireland, no difference of opinion could exist. Whether the measure now proposed was the fittest to be adopted, it was for the House to determine; but it was the unanimous opinion, that a change in the police must be the first step towards the promotion of tranquillity, in that country. The hon. baronet had most correctly spoken of Ireland as having been governed for many years by little else than measures of emergency; and the object was now, instead of having a relaxation of law one moment, and a paroxysm of violence the next, to have a steady, vigorous, and efficient police—a police which should not only act to punish crime, but, to prevent it; and which, by habituating the people to obey the law, would in the end have the
856
857
l.;
l.;
l.
l.
l.,
l.;
l.
l.;
l.;
l.;
l.;
l.
l.
Mr. S. Rice
said, that he laid little stress upon the question of expense, because he thought that, if the bill would answer the object proposed, it ought, at any cost, to be carried into effect. But he resisted the bill upon the broad ground of its principle. There was no doubt of the advantage of equally enforcing the law, and of making the people look up to it as a protection rather than as an evil; but the bill now proposed, so far from bringing public opinion to the side of the law, was, of all measures, the most calculated to awaken public indignation. The execution of the law at present was defective; but let the system be fairly tried before it was condemned. Let it be ascertained whether the fault was in the principle of the existing system or in the abuse of it. The right hon. gentleman had adverted
858
ad infinitum
859
Sir J. Newport
said, that if he could be convinced there was in the present bill any thing which could be called an amelioration of the system of police in Ireland, it should have his most cordial support; but, from the view which he took of it, he did not think it would be a benefit to his country; on the contrary, he thought it would be a source of increased evil. He therefore trusted that the house would attentively consider whether some more effective measure could not be adopted to remedy the defects of the old system. The present system of police in Ireland was most defective; but when he saw, that in the case of the county of Longford, and in other places where the attempt was made, that system had been rendered efficacious by a vigilant exertion on the part of the local authorities, he would ask whether the present was a time to abandon all that had been done, and to introduce a system diverging in quite the contrary direction? There was not a doubt in his mind that the enactments of the bill would create very general discontent among the respectable magistracy of Ireland; and he was authorized to state by many most respectable magistrates, that if it passed into a law, they would throw up their commissions, as they should consider themselves disgraced by its enactments. He would have no objection to going into the com-
860
Mr. Secretary Peel
admitted, that k was a defect in the police of Ireland, that there was not that link of connexion between its magistracy and the government which existed in England, by means of the lords lieutenant of counties. This was an evil to which he should wish to see a remedy applied. With respect to the magistracy of Ireland generally, he had always found it defective; and reform it as parliament might, it would still continue defective, owing to the great number of absentee proprietors. However active and honest their agents might be, they could never adequately supply the places of the great landed proprietors. At the same time he should not wish to see the deficiency remedied by a general extension of stipendiary magistrates; for he thought that the appointment of stipendiary magistrates in every county would degenerate into abuse. Still, however, he held it necessary that government should have the power of appointing such magistrates in certain cases; for it would be destructive of all law to allow 20 or 30 miles extent of country to be without a magistrate, or, what was the same thing, with magistrates who did not act. He would suggest, that the stipendiary magistrate should be appointed only where there was no resident magistrate, or where he did not do his duty; and that then it should be on the recommendation of the other magistrates of the county. Under any other circumstances, he thought that the extension of salaried magistrates would be an evil.—As to the general state of the police in Ireland, it was admitted on all hands, that the system was so bad that something should be done. Let the House look to the present state of Ireland in that respect. She had now, not to guard against any external danger, but to protect the administration of the law, to support a regular army of 21,000 men, besides 4,000
861
Mr. Abercromby
admitted, that there
862
The Marquis of Londonderry
said, that as there seemed to be but one feeling as
863
Lord Althorp
said, that as he had a decided objection, to the whole bill in principle, he could not consent to go into a committee upon it; for no modification could reconcile him to it. The measure was in itself most arbitrary, and would lead to worse evils than those which it affected to remedy.
Mr. Grant
said, he felt extremely sorry that he was bound to withhold his consent from the present measure. He was the more compelled to give this bill his decided opposition, because it had been under the consideration of the late government of Ireland, and had been rejected after having undergone considerable discussion. He allowed that it was the paramount duty of every government to see justice administered, and property secured; but there was another duty, scarcely less paramount—namely, to take care, that in administering justice and securing property, it did not sacrifice any great principle of constitutional freedom. Indeed, that was the whole distinction between a free and an arbitrary government. The object of both of them was to secure property; but the difference between them was, that in one case it was effected with a due regard to, and in the other at the expense of, every principle, civil, moral, and religious. The questions which every member ought to put to himself before he formed his opinion upon the present bill, were these—first, was there any evil at present in existence? secondly, if there was, was the remedy which it was proposed to apply of a stronger nature than the disease required? and thirdly, had every other remedy been tried, and tried in vain, before the present was proposed for adoption? Before be proceeded to discuss these topics, he should say a few words upon the nature and object of the bill itself. It went to place the whole of Ireland under an armed police, to subject it to a species of
gendarmerie,
864
865
866
867
868
869
Mr. R. Martin
said, that nothing short of this bill could restore peace and tranquillity to Ireland.
Sir N. Colthurst
said, he could not join in the reprobation which had been directed against this bill. Much had been said of the imperfect and inadequate condition of the magistracy. Admitting that
870
Mr. Grattan
was unfriendly to the bill, and hostile to the introduction of this description of stipendiary magistrates into Ireland.
Mr. V. Fitzgerald
lamented that his right hon. friend's (Mr. Grant's) conclusion should have been at variance with the principle arguments of his able speech; for the whole weight of his arguments went to support the necessity of a complete alteration in the existing system. Believing the present bill, in principle, to be the best calculated for the purpose, and that its details could be modified in the committee, it should have his support.
Mr. Brougham
said, that if the lateness of the hour and length of the debated would not deter him from trespassing on the House, the able and unanswered speech of his right hon. friend (Mr. Grant) would have that effect. But he thought that, being unconnected with Ireland and having necessarily only superficial information to guide his judgment on such a subject, it would be well for him, and for other English gentlemen who thought with him, to show the sister kingdom that they were awake to her
871
Mr. Grant
said, that an appeal had been made to him by an hon. bart. (an appeal involving a charge) to which he felt it necessary to give a reply; and he trusted the House would indulge him with their permission to do so. He had been asked, why, if he thought it practicable and right, he had not, while he held office in Ireland, introduced an improvement of the internals system of police in Ireland? Now, on this branch of public duty,
872
seriatim,
873
Mr. D. Browne
said, that in the county of Mayo, the constables recently appointed by the grand jury had been found perfectly efficient. That mode of appointment, he was persuaded, was much superior to the proposed plan of appointment by the government.
Lord Ebrington
opposed the measure, as being, subversive of every, thing like a free government in Ireland.
The question being put, "That the bill be now read a second time," the House divided: Ayes 113, Noes 59.
List of, the Minority
Abercromby, hon. J.
Lawley, F.
Barrett, S. B. M.
Martin, J.
Bright, H.
Milbank, M.
Brougham, H.
Monck, J. B.
Browne, Dom.
Marryat, J.
Buxton, T. F.
Newport, sir J.
Calcraft, J.
O'Callaghan, J.
Campbell, W.
Palmer, C. F.
Carter, J.
Power, R.
Colborne, N. R.
Powlett, hon. W.
Concannon, L.
Prittie, Hon. F.
Crompton, S.
Rice, T. S.
Creevey, T.
Ricardo, D.
Denison, W. J.
Ridley, sir M. W.
Duncannon, viscount
Rumbold, C. E.
Evans, W.
Robertson, A.
Fergusson, sir R.
Scarlett, J.
Forbes, C.
Smith, W.
Grattan, J.
Smith, R.
Glenorchy, lord
Sebright, sir J.
Grant, C.
Tremayne, J. H.
Gaskell, B.
White, L.
Hamilton, lord A.
Warre, J. A.
Hume, J.
Webb, E.
Hurst, R.
Western, C. C.
Hutchinson, hon. C. H.
Wood, alderman
Jervoise, G. P.
Wodehouse, E.
Kennedy, T. F.
Whitmore, W. W.
Latouche, R.
TELLERS.
Lemon, sir W.
Althorn, viscount.
Lennard, T. B.
Ebrington, viscount.
Lushington, S.
ILL-TREATMENT OF CATTLE BILL.]
Mr. Buxton
rose, on the order for the third reading, of this bill, and having stated some objections, recommended the hon. member by whom it was introduced,
874
Mr. R. Martin
could not consent to abandon the bill.
Mr. Monck
opposed the Bill, and moved, "That it be read a third time that day six months."
Mr. Scarlett
opposed the Bill, not because he did not concur with the hon. mover, in disapproving of the ill-treatment of animals, but because the offences proposed to be punished by this bill were of too vague and indefinite a nature. Indeed, if the, principle were adopted he could not see where the line was to be drawn, or why there should not be a punishment affixed to the boiling of lobsters, or the eating of oysters alive.
Mr. Holford
expressed a wish that the hon. member would withdraw the He really should not, as a magistrate, know how to act, if a postboy were brought before him, under the present bill, for riding his horse too hard.
Mr. R. Martin
said, he was satisfied of the propriety and justice of the measure; and, as he thought the majority of the House was with him, he should press it.
The amendment being withdrawn, the bill was read a third time, and passed.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Monday, June 10.
CORN IMPORTATION BILL.
The Marquis of Londonderry,
upon the report being brought up said, that as there was so strong an opinion against the clause for grinding foreign wheat, introduced by his right hon. friend (Mr. Canning), he should feel it his duty to oppose that clause, and proceed in the bill without it. It would be in the power of his right hon. friend to bring that clause afterwards before the House in the shape of a separate bill.
Mr. Canning
could not accept, at that period of the session, the compromise offered by his noble friend. He should, therefore, take the sense of the House on the clause. All parties were friendly to its principle, but some were apprehensive of abuse in the operation. His constituents were ready to acquiesce in any security or restrictions the Treasury might think proper to impose.
Sir J. Sebright
considered the clause fatal to the agricultural interest.
On the question being put, for agreeing
875
Mr. Curwen
said, that the clause could not promote the interest of the agriculturists, and might very seriously injure them, as it afforded no security against an unlimited quantity of corn finding its way into the home market.
Mr. Bright
supported the clause, the provision of which he thought due in equity to the commercial interest. Had a similar advantage been proposed in 1815, the period of the last corn-bill, it would not, according to the then mode of taking averages, have been refused. The landed interest were under a most ill-founded alarm, when they apprehended that the existing Custom-house regulations could not suffice to prevent the illicit importation of foreign flour.
General Gascoyne
said, that when the corn was warehoused it was entered for exportation; and it could make no difference in what form it went out. The petitioners did not ask for liberality, but equity and justice.
Sir J. Sebright
said, the millers had assured him, that if the corn came into their mills, they would defy the Excise to prevent them from taking it out again as they thought fit.
Sir T. Lethbridge
said, that the bill would be an inducement to the merchant to deal with the foreign grower instead of the British farmer. He looked on the bill as one of horror and abhorrence, and an insult to the landed interest.
Mr. F. Lewis
contended, that the clause would be essentially serviceable to the landed interest.
Mr. Denis Browne
said that the clause would have the effect of encouraging the speculator in foreign corn, and of depreciating the price of our home produce.
Mr. D. Gilbert
said, that if the clause were adopted, it would be impossible to prevent foreign flour from being smuggled into home consumption.
Mr. Ricardo
said, that unless the agriculturists could show that injury would arise to them from the adoption of the clause, parliament should not hesitate to give to the foreign importer the proposed relief.
Mr. Benett
was indifferent as to the fate of the clause; for if it were agreed to, it would probably endanger the whole measure, which was one of the most ruinous that had ever been devised.
876
Mr. T. Wilson
thought there was something more in this clause than met the eye.
Mr. Canning
said, he would not have brought this clause forward if he thought it would prejudice the agriculturist. He had introduced it with the same view which the country gentlemen had in supporting the general principles of the bill. They conceived the bill necessary to prevent a greater accumulation of agricultural distress. He conceived that his clause went to remove an evil which parliament were called upon to remedy. Still, however, much as he thought the clause necessary, he would not press it if he believed it could defeat the main objects of the bill; and whether it was agreed to or not, he should still vote for the bill. But he begged of the House to consider the situation in which the importers of foreign corn were placed. The House had already granted them a boon by which they would be enabled to send their corn from the warehouses at 10
s.
The Marquis of Londonderry
agreed that the importers of foreign corn were entitled to some boon, but thought that by this bill they obtained no inconsiderable advantage—that of being enabled to bring their corn into the home market 10
s.
877
The House divided: For the clause, 21; Against it, 116.
List of the Minority.
Bennet, hon. G.
Irving, J.
Barrett, S. B. M.
Lewis, T. F.
Blair, W.
Monck, J. B.
Courtenay, J. H.
Money, W. T.
Canning, right hon. G.
Martin J.
Cust, hon. W.
Ricardo, D.
Douglas, hon. K.
Stuart, sir J.
Ellis, C. R.
Thomson, ald.
Forbes, C.
Whitmore, W. W.
Gladstone, J.
TELLERS.
Hobhouse, J. C.
Bright, H.
Hume, J.
Gascoyne, gen.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Tuesday, June 11.
RESUMPTION OF CASH PAYMENTS.
Mr. Western
rose, pursuant to notice, to bring forward his motion relative to the effect which the Resumption of Cash Payments had had in producing the present agricultural distress. Such was his conviction of the calamity which the resumption of cash payments had produced to the agriculturists, and, he might say, to all the industrious classes in the country, that he could not help making every effort in his power to bring it before the House and the country. He felt, that he had not the wit or the eloquence to charm their ears or arrest their attention; but still he was anxious to lay before them the result of that investigation of the subject, upon which he had been induced to enter. The object of his motion, he would state at the outset was, to arraign the wisdom, the justice, and the policy of the measure passed in 1819 for the resumption of cash payments; but in arraigning that measure, he did not mean to censure the motives, or to cast any exclusive blame on the conduct, of his majesty's ministers. He knew that it was
878
879
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
880
l.
l.
l.
l.
s.
881
882
primo
d.
d.
d.
s.
l.
vice versa;
883
884
885
l.
886
s.
d.;
s.
d.;
s.
d.;
s.
d.,
s.;
s.
887
s.
s.
s.
s.;
s.;
s.,
s.
s.
s.
s.;
s.
d.
s.
s.
888
s.
s.
889
l.:
s.
s.,
s.,
l.
890
891
l.
l.
l.
l.
s.
d.,
s.
d.
l.;
s.
d.;
892
l.
s.,
l.,
s.
d.,
l.
s.
l.
s.
l.
s.
l.
l.
l.
l.,
l.
s.
d.
s.
l.,
l.
s.
d.
893
s.
d.,
l.
l.
l.
l
s.
d.
894
l.
l.
s.
895
896
The motion having been put by the Speaker,
897
Mr. Huskisson
spoke in substance as follows:—
898
899
900
901
l.
l.,
l.,
l.
l.
data
902
l.
l.
l.
l.;
l.
l.,
quantum
903
904
905
him,
bona fide
906
l.
l.
natural
legitimate
907
908
909
910
common measure
common equivalent
medium
911
vice versa,
s.
s.
s.
912
s.,
s.
913
s.
d.,
l.
s.
l.
s.
d.
l.,
s.
d.
l.,
s.
d.
914
s.
s.
915
916
debtor,
nett
917
l.
l.
l.,
l.,
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
quantum
918
919
s.
d.
s.,
s.
d.
920
921
s.
s.
d.
s.
s.
"and enacting the clipt money to go again, the very hopes of which locks up all the gold and good money, and would be to undo all that has been done."
Enacting the clipt money to go again! undoing all that has been done!
petitions from all the counties about the state of the money; that they could afford little help as to a present supply, but by the expectation they
922
would raise, that clipt money should be current again, or a recompense allowed for it; that the standard should be advanced, and the price of guineas improved."
"the re-issuing of the clipped money, and the undoing all that has been done."
923
"for undoing all that had been done,"
s.
d.
s.
d.
l.
s.
d.
l.
s.
d.,
924
i. e.
925
Lord A. Hamilton
expressed his surprise that the right hon. gentleman should have assumed throughout the whole of his speech, that the country was in a prosperous condition. He was inclined to support the original motion, because it was represented that the change which had been made in the value of the currency was operating ruin towards a large portion of the country. He protested against the doctrine laid down by the right hon. gentleman, that every member who supported the motion must therefore be supposed to entertain the same opinions as the hon. mover of it. He agreed in many of the arguments made use of by his hon. friend; but he could not admit that by doing so he implied his approval of an alteration of the standard, or a repeal of the bill of 1819. If his hon. friend had proposed to repeal that bill without inquiry, he would have opposed such a proceeding. If he were to admit that much of the argument of the right hon. gentleman were true, still it would not induce him to withhold his support from the motion. The right hon. gentleman asserted, that by acceding to the proposition of his hon. friend, the House would commit great injustice towards debtors. Now, it formed one of the grounds of complaint against the bill which provided for the return to cash payments, that it oppressed the debtor and benefited the creditor. The right hon. gentleman had asked, what was to be done with respect
926
927
s.
928
s.
s.
On the motion of Mr. Bennet, the debate was adjourned till to morrow.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Wednesday, June 12.
RESUMPTION OF CASH PAYMENTS.]
The order of the day being read, for resuming the adjourned debate on the motion of Mr. Western, and the amendment thereon proposed by Mr. Huskisson,
Mr. Bennet
rose and said, that before he proceeded to make a few observations on the motion before the House, he wished the resolutions to be read, which had been moved by the chancellor of the exchequer on the 13th of May, 1811. [The said resolutions having been accordingly read by the clerk, the hon. member proceeded.] He apologized to the House for offering himself to their notice on this occasion, but he was unwilling to give his vote in favour of the resolution of his hon. friend, without entering into some explanation of the principles on which he should support that resolution—principles, which were in strict conformity with opinions which he had long ago entertained on this subject, but which he confessed he had shrunk from acknowledging, partly from their great singularity at the time, and partly from the unwillingness he felt when he was a younger man, to obtrude himself on the attention of the House upon questions of such primary importance. Had he entertained opinions directly opposite, he should have had no scruple in manfully and honestly retracting them; but when he saw consequences resulting from the measures of his majesty's government, in strict conformity with what he had, previously anticipated, he had no hesi-
929
s
d.;
s.;
s
d
s
d.;
l
s
d
l
s
s
d.;
s
d.;
s
d.;
s
d
930
931
l
l
l
l
l
l
932
l
l
l
933
Mr. Alderman Heygate
said, that having been one of the few who actively opposed in 1819, not the principle, but the time and mode of the bill for resuming cash payments, and who then unsuccessfully endeavoured to rouse the landed interest in that House to a sense of its danger, he was desirous of stating on what ground he should vote for the motion of his hon. friend, especially as he did not coincide in all the views he had taken of the subject. He was an enemy to a return now to a paper currency without control, as one of the greatest calamities; but the motion pledged him to nothing more than to a re-consideration of what was called Mr. Peel's bill, and its effects on the country. Such a revision was called for in innumerable petitions. The present was a favourable moment for a calm consideration of it, as we were in a state of tranquillity at home and abroad, and as the clamour had subsided which attended the passing of this bill in 1819, and which rendered it then almost a service of danger to venture to oppose Now, indeed, the public feeling was so much the other way, that he would venture to say, the majority of that night would rather be procured by the supposed impracticability of remedying the evils of this bill than by any approbation of it. He contended, that the measure of 1819, was not perfect and accurate, because it was carried by clamour—because the committee was constituted of individuals, the majority of whom had pledged themselves to the bullion theory by pamphlets or speeches. Besides this, they had founded their measure on a false theory; namely, that gold was the exact index of the depreciation of our currency.
934
Mr. Hudson Gurney
said, that though in much that had fallen from the hon. alderman, he widely differed from him, yet he felt himself compelled to vote as he did. There could be neither doubt nor
935
l
l
936
Mr. Leycester
said, that as he had not yet heard any of the arguments of his
937
"Pol me occidistis, amici,
Non servâstis, ait; cui sic extorta voluptas,
Et demptus per vim mentis gratissimus error."
"Stepp'd in so far, that should they wade no more,
Returning were as tedious as go o'er."
Mr. Haldimand
said, that as the coun-
938
Mr. Ricardo
said, that he agreed in a great deal of what had fallen from his hon. friend who spoke last, and particularly in his view of the effect of the preparations made by the Bank for the resumption of payments in specie; it was undeniable, that the manner in which the Bank had gone on purchasing gold to provide for a metallic currency, had materially affected the public interests. It was impossible to ascertain what was the amount of the effect of that mistake on the part of the Bank, or to what precise extent their bullion purchases affected the value of gold; but, whatever the extent was, so
939
940
941
s
942
943
944
*
*
945
s
s
s
s
946
s
l
s
quantity regulated the value of every thing
947
948
s
s
s
949
s
s.;
s
950
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s.;
s.;
s
s
951
952
953
l
s
l
s
l
s
d
l
s
l
s
d
l
l
s
s
l
l
954
Mr. Pearse
said, that the hon. member for Portarlington had charged the Bank with error and indiscretion in having become too extensive purchasers of gold, in consequence of the passing of the act of 1819. The fact was, that the Bank were quite passive in taking the gold from the merchants who offered it for their purchase. The consequence, however, had been, that bullion had been paid whenever it had been demanded, and that an issue of 10 or 11,000,000 of gold sovereigns had taken place. Ever since he had been connected with the establishment, he had been invariably against, all forced or artificial measures. The cirstances which had chiefly led to the late high and the existing low prices, and plenty of gold, were, perhaps, these:—in 1797, the country was pretty full of gold. During the ensuing year some gold, in small quantities, was sent out of the country, to pay a few balances, such as purchases of corn and other commodities. As fast as that gold went out of the country, the quantity of Bank notes issued was increased. Up to the year 1810, which was 13 years after the suspension of cash payments, gold enough was left in the country to pay all its foreign balances. By the end of the year 1813, the war had become excessively expensive, and very large quantities of wheat were purchased. Still, however, sufficient gold was left in the country to pay the same balances; but it was at this period that it obtained its excessive price. In four years afterwards, when the war and these several causes ceased, gold fell extremely. When peace returned, and trade was more regularly settled, the exchanges became gradually more favourable to us. The issue of Bank-notes in the meantime certainly continued; but it was with great regularity. In fact, the Bank had no means of making forced issues. In proportion as the nominal value and the trading value of gold was different, the transactions between man and man were more or less affected; but the issues of Bank-notes were kept up, always with reference to the standard price of gold. He would assert, that as the Bank had never forced an issue, so neither had there ever been any depreciation in the value of their notes, with reference to the price of gold.
Sir F. Burdett
said, that if ever there
955
956
l
l
957
958
959
960
l
l
l
961
962
963
964
965
Mr. Haskisson
appealed to all who had heard him, whether he had represented the hon. member for Essex, as saying, that corn was to be the currency; but he maintained that he advocated corn being the standard. He would not call that un-candid of the hon. baronet; but he would say that he had been misrepresented. The hon. baronet represented him as comparing the currency of 1797 with that in the time of king William. He had not done so. He had compared the pressure which now prevailed from the restoration of a metallic currency, with that during king William's reign, and had argued, that similar effects had arisen from similar causes.
Mr. Attwood
addressed the House to the following effect:
966
967
968
969
970
l
s
d
s
s
l
l
s
s
971
l
s
d
s
s
972
s
d
973
974
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
975
976
s
s
s
l
l
l.;
l
s
d
s
d
s
d
977
978
979
The amount in circulation.
Aug. 16,
1817,
is 30,100,000.
It was reduced by
Nov. 15,
1817,
to 29,400,000.
And continued as follows:
Feb.
1818,
28,700,000.
May,
—
28,000,000.
Aug.
—
26,000,000.
Nov.
—
26,000,000.
Feb.
1819
25,600,000.
May.
—
23,000,000.
Aug.
—
26,000,000.
Nov.
—
24,000,000.
Feb.
1820.
24,000,000.
May.
—
23,900,000.
Aug.
—
24,400,000.
Nov.
—
23,400,000.
l
980
l
l
Notes of £.5 and upwards,
Nov. 1817
£19,600,000.
Nov. 1818
16,900,000.
Nov. 1819
*
Nov. 1820
15,300,000.
Nov. 1821
14,800,000.
May 1822
14,600,000.
*
981
l
l
982
983
l
l
s
d
984
l
s
d
985
986
987
en-
988
tirely
mainly
l
s
l
s
d
989
990
l
991
l
s
d
992
l
l
l
l
993
994
995
996
997
998
999
1000
There is a general feeling we despair pervading the tenantry Ireland."
1001
1002
1003
1004
1005
1006
s
1007
1008
1009
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, that, as he wished the discussion to be as much limited as was consistent with the importance of it, in claiming the attention of the House, he promised to confine the observations which he had to offer within the narrowest bounds. To prove that such was his intention, he would at once come to the question before them, without entering into those abstruse topics in which the hon. member who had just sat down had indulged, and which were hardly fit to be debated in an assembly like the present. For unless a case of over-ruling necessity could be made out, that House ought not for a moment to entertain an idea of again interfering with the standard of the country it was difficult to conceive a motion to which more objections could present themselves than the one which was now before them. The period of the session at which it was brought forward—the arguments by which it had been supported—the object contemplated—all presented separate sources of objections to it. It was on the 12th of June that they were called upon to commence an inquiry into the effect of a bill, the operation of which affected the agriculture, the manufactures, and the commerce of the empire, and consequently all classes in the state. He would ask the House if it was possible for them to enter upon a more important or more extended inquiry; and what proposition was pointed to as that at which they must ultimately arrive? This was not distinctly made out; and until he came to the speech of the hon. baronet, the member for Westminster, he was at a loss to determine what it was that the committee was to do. The hon. alderman, the member for Sudbury, in supporting the motion had declared that he could not concur in the arguments which had been used in its support. He was followed by another hon. member, who also agreeing with the motion, disapproved of five-sixths of the arguments which had been advanced in its behalf; and to him succeeded the hon. member for Portarlington, who, proposing to vote for it, considered the act of 1819
1010
1011
s
s
l
l
1012
1013
1014
1015
s
s
1016
1017
Mr. Brougham
rose for the purpose of stating very briefly the grounds on which he-should give his vote to the motion of his hon. friend, the member for Essex. Of all the propositions which had ever
1018
s
s?"
1019
1020
s
s
s
1021
l
l
1022
1023
s
s
s
1024
l
l
1025
1026
s
s
The Marquis of Londonderry
said, that at that hour of the morning he would occupy the time of the House only for a few minutes. The motion of the hon. member would, he contended, if adopted, lead to very dangerous results, and could produce no possible benefit. With that candour and manliness which characterized that hon. member, he had at once called for a committee to inquire how the standard currency of the country might be altered. Such a motion could be met by arguments showing that no alteration was necessary. But, that this was a measure not called for by necessity, was proved by the conduct of the hon. member himself; for if he considered it a measure of the importance which it was now sought to attach to it, why had he delayed it unfit the present period of the session? With respect to the amendment of his right hon. friend, it had been greatly misunderstood. It was not meant by it, that under no possible contingency any alteration could take place in the currency of the
1027
1028
List of the Minority
Attwood, M.
Moore, P.
Bennet, hon. H. G.
Monck, J. B.
Burdett, sir F.
Maxwell, J.
Bentinck, lord W.
Owen, S.
Burrell, sir C.
Price, P
Burrell, W.
Palmer, F.
Brougham, H.
Rowley, sir W.
Brown, Dom.
Thompson, alderman
Benett, J.
Titchfield, marquis
Crawley, S.
Wodehouse, E.
Denison, W.
Webb, E.
Dundas, C.
TELLERS.
Gurney, H.
Western, C. C.
Gratton, J.
Hamilton, lord A.
Grosset, J. R.
PAIRED OFF.
Griffiths, J. W.
Barham, J. F.
Heygate, alderman
Barham, J. F. jun.
Honywood, W.
Leycester, R.
Latouche, R.
Ossulston, lord
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Thursday, June 13. 1822.
BANKRUPT LAWS.
The Lord Chancellor
said, that a bill had been brought up from the other House at the close of the last session, making some important changes in the Bankrupt Laws. But as it contained much unnecessary matter, and was otherwise highly imperfect, he had signified his intention, if the measure were allowed to drop, to introduce a bill, or bills, upon the subject. This engagement he was now ready to perform. The first bill he should bring in, would remedy a considerable hardship, occasioned by the law as it now stood. If a commission were issued against a particular firm, all the partners were involved in the same fate, whatever might have been their conduct. Now, men had different feelings, and there were some who would think it highly important to their character to have the commission of bankruptcy superseded, instead of being obliged to take their certificates as bankrupts. This, however, could not now be done. The object of his bill, therefore, would be to amend the law in this particular, and to enable the lord chancellor, or lord keepers in cases of bankruptcy under a joint commission, to supersede the commission against any one of the partners who had satisfied all his creditors. On Monday, he should introduce another bill to amend some other part of the bankrupt laws, and he hoped that, together with the present, it would pass before the close of the session. He should afterwards propose a third bill, but as he had not yet made up
1029
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Thursday, June 13.
IRISH TITHES LEASING BILL.]
Mr. Goulburn
said, that in rising to call the attention of the House to this important subject, he was deeply sensible of the difficulties with which any individual had to contend, who undertook to submit to parliament a legislative measure on the subject of Tithes. All questions which involved the right of property were of a delicate and embarrassing nature; but there were, in this particular question, so many, and such important interests—so much of passion and prejudice to be reconciled, that it presented far more than ordinary difficulties. The antiquity of the system, and its necessary connection with the most valuable part of our institutions, made it doubtful how far any measure for its regulation could be satisfactory. It was not enough to see the evils to which the present system gave rise; it was requisite that the remedy proposed should not produce a derangement of other parts of the system, more dangerous than those which it was intended to repair; and it was, from these circumstances, more than probable, that any proposal would appear inadequate to the object in view. He begged to assure the House, that he had not approached the subject with any idea of superior competence for a task which others had in vain undertaken, but had been influenced solely by that anxious desire which animated the head of the Irish government, to remedy the evils under which Ireland had suffered, and to advance one step, at least, on the road of amelioration and improvement. He might have flattered himself that a measure brought forward in this spirit, and with this object, would have received the general, if not the universal concurrence of the House; and although he had been apprised that this was not likely to be the case, he nevertheless did not despair of so explaining the measure as to entitle it to the favour and approbation of the House. If, indeed, there were any persons who entertained an idea of finding in this bill a sanction for those wild and erroneous schemes which had been recently given to the public, or who con-
1030
1031
1032
1033
1034
l
1035
1036
1037
Sir H. Parnell
said, he was happy to observe, that the government had at length taken the important question of Irish tithes into their consideration. Such a step ought to have been taken years back. That it had not, was not his fault; for at a very early period after he had the honour of a seat in that House, he had called the attention of parliament to it. The measure had made some progress by the liberal manner in which the right hon. gentleman had that night introduced it into the House; but the evil was so great as to require the application of a more general remedy than the one proposed. The chief evil of the system was not to be found in the amount of tithes received by the clergy, for he believed that the clergy in general acted with great generosity and humanity, but in the manner in which those tithes were too frequently collected. There was a wide difference between the tithes which a clergyman could take by law, and those which he took by custom; indeed so wide, that a clergyman might disturb a whole county
1038
s
d
s
d
l
s
d
1039
Sir J. Newport
thought it would be better to press no measure at present, rather than the one under discussion. He was convinced, that if the parochial clergy of Ireland could be polled without their names being disclosed to their episcopal superiors, four-fifths of them would be in favour of a commutation. Such a commutation had been promised at the time of the Union; and it remained for those who had made the promise to show why it had not been carried into effect. Out of eleven or twelve counties in which the tithe on potatoes was levied,
1040
Mr. Plunkett
said, it would not be fair dealing with the government, called on as they had been to introduce a remedial measure, to interpose at the outset, before its details could be known. He denied that this bill would stand in the way of an ulterior measure founded upon the general principle of commutation. On the contrary, it would facilitate it, by establishing a nearer principle of valuation. For his own part, he could not see his way through the principle of commutation. On what principle would they commute? Would they give the clergy what was called a fair and liberal remuneration, or would they elect an arbitrary standard? The difficulty was, how to touch the property of the church without affecting the rights of property of every other description. Suppose they were to take the broad ground of right in their scale of estimate—then they must practically levy a larger sum than the clergy collected; for the actual receipts were nearer 1–20th than 1–10th. But the great difficulty in the way of commutation was, to draw a distinction between church and other property. If they opened the chapter of the church, they would be next called upon to open the chapter of the landlord. He must, from his own professional experience, deny that tithes were the cause of local disturbances is Ireland, unless so far as tithes were an ingredient in property; for it was against property that the insubordination was directed, and against that alone. His right hon. friend attributed the disturb-
1041
s
s
Mr. Spring Rice
said, that from the speech of the right hon. and learned gentleman, it was quite clear that all hopes of a commutation were at an end. If a fair and equal system of commutation were adopted, he would venture to stake the whole success of the measure on the approbation of the parochial clergy; but a proposition like that now brought forward would be totally ineffective. Would the right hon. and learned gentleman accede to a commission emanating from the Crown, the object of which should be to inquire into the practicability of commuting tithes, and which should be instructed to lay the information it might collect before that House? More good might be expected from such a commission; for while Irish members, session after session, were talking about what was proper to be done, nothing was effected. As to this commission, however, the House must call for it, or, he was afraid, it would never be constituted. It would be necessary that some gentle violence should be used with ministers on the occasion; but, anticipating the happiest results from it, he was most anxious to see it carried into execution.
Mr. Dennis Browne
declared, that from the time when he was quite a boy—for the last 50 years, the tithes and their collection had disturbed the peace of Ireland. The peace of his country never could be secure whilst such a system continued. He was in favour of a commutation but he would vote for the present
1042
Mr. Dawson
said, he should certainly support the motion. But he must be allowed to argue this question as one of property. No body of men had so clear a title, perhaps, to their property, as the clergy possessed to tithes. It was a right so ancient, as to be, perhaps, anterior in its origin to any now existing. He would briefly consider the effect of rent and tithes as operative in producing the present distress. The rent generally bore more severely on the peasantry than tithes. In Ulster, the tithes were extremely moderate, and compositions were generally admitted. The law of agistment was there unknown, and that law he considered as one of the prominent causes of discontent. In Connaught, the people were free from the tithe on potatoes, but the law of agistment was in full operation. Still, however, little dissatisfaction prevailed. The rich man was contented, because his pasture paid no tithe; and the poor man experienced comparative content, because his food was also exempted from the operation of the tithe system. In this province compositions were scarcely ever entered into, except when a rich grazier wished to convert a part of his pasture into arable land. In Leinster no potatoe tithe was demanded; and it was worthy of observation, that those counties were the most disturbed in which that tithe was paid. Munster was the great source of all the complaints made against tithes; and it appeared to him, that the law of agistment there was the real cause of the evil. It was not the rapacity of the clergy which produced such disastrous consequences. They hardly received the 1–20th part of what they had a right to claim; and ample time was allowed for payment. It would be asked, if tithes were so moderate, and the clergy so forbearing, why was this general outcry raised against them? The reason was this—the population of Ireland consisted of Catholics, Presbyterians, and Protestants. The members of the Protestant church formed a comparatively small portion of the community. But in their hands all power was placed, and they constituted the landed proprietors of the country. If they found their rents not regularly paid, they were sometimes apt to attribute the circumstance to the tithe system. So that religious, political, and self-interested feelings produced this outcry.
1043
Mr. O'Grady
viewed the tithe system as the great cause of the disturbed state of Ireland. The bill would not do all that he wished, but it would do something. He would not support any kind of commutation that would put in the pockets of the clergy of Ireland more than they had at present; which, in fact, was already too much. The tithe system operated as a heavy tax on food and labour, and tended to discourage the cultivation of waste lands. Waste and barren lands were exempted from the operation of the tithe system, which was a sort of premium for keeping them in that useless state. The hon. gentleman then proceeded to point out the hardships which the farmer suffered under the existing regulations for enforcing the payment of tithe. If he gave his note, and failed to pay it, a decree was had against him; then a monition, which took him into the Assistant Barrister's Court; and ultimately he had an appeal to the Judge. These vexatious proceedings weighed him down by their expense. There was, however, a summary mode of recovering tithe to the amount of 5
l
1044
pari passu,
The Marquis of Londonderry
said, that while the question was under the consideration of ministers, he should be sorry to see gentlemen enter into any discussion which would have the effect of pledging them to one particular line of proceeding to the exclusion of every other. For himself he was sincerely anxious to adopt such a course as would produce permanent relief to Ireland. It had been said, that in Catholic countries the tithes had been totally abolished. He should be sorry that this should operate in any other way than as a caution against those dangerous and revolutionary doctrines, the yielding to which had produced such devastation in the world. This bill would produce many good effects, and, among others, that of removing the middle-man in the tithe system. His right hon. friend, in bringing it forward had shown that he looked at the question with the enlarged views of a statesman, anxious to preserve the estates of the church on the one hand, while he secured the property and happiness of the people on the other. His right hon. friend had not stated that he was decidedly against all commutation, but had left it for future decision. He must deprecate the decisive tone in which hon. members had spoken. Some of them seemed to consider it quite as easy a matter to commute tithes and to settle the value as it was to buy or sell a quarter of wheat. He should tremble for the whole property of the country if parliament were not to sanction the principle, that the possessions of the clergy were to be touched with as much delicacy as those of any private individual. He begged it to be understood, that ministers had by no means decided against a commutation, if it could be effected on the principle of a full and lair equivalent. At present, leave was only asked to bring in a better bill than an hon. baronet had, for three sessions, been pressing upon the House.
1045
Mr. Hutchinson
was disposed to give leave to bring in the bill, without however pledging himself to support it, or committing himself in any way against the necessity of a commutation of tithes in Ireland. If leave were refused, ministers, in despair, might abandon the subject, or at least have a fair excuse for doing so. He begged to remind the noble marquis, that during the discussions on the Union, Mr. Pitt, besides impliedly promising emancipation, had particularly alluded to the tithe system of Ireland as a crying grievance.
Mr. Carew
contended, that there could he no repose in Ireland until a commutation was effected.
Mr. Daly
said, that although he should not object to the bringing in of the bill, he would oppose it in every subsequent stage. He would move next session for the appointment of a committee to inquire into the propriety of a commutation of tithes.
Sir N. Colthurst
thought a commutation necessary, with a view to the tranquillity of Ireland, and the security of the established church. He would not consent to any commutation that did not meet with the approbation of the clergy.
Mr. Foster
contended, that the effect of the bill would rather be to excite than to tranquillize Ireland.
Mr. R. Martin
said, he would vote for the introduction of the bill, and he should vote for it in all its stages.
Colonel Forde
supported the motion as a stepping-stone to a full consideration of the whole question.
Leave was given to bring in the bill.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Friday, June 14.
STATE OF IRELAND.
The Marquis of Lansdown
rose, in pursuance of notice, to call their lordships' attention to the state of Ireland. In doing this he was conscious that he could not be accused of precipitation. After all that had occurred since the meeting of Parliament relative to Ireland—after the promises which had been made that the state of that country should be brought under the attention of Parliament—after the change which had been made in the government of Ireland, without producing those advantages which had been expected from it—after the period to which the present session had
1046
1047
1048
"When scourged by famine, from the smiling, land,
The mournful peasant leads his humble band;
And while he sinks, without one arm to save,
The country bloom:—a garden and a grave."
1049
l
l
l
l
1050
l
l
l
l
l
l
1051
1052
1053
1054
1055
l
d
s
s
1056
1057
l
1058
The Earl of Liverpool
said, he felt the full force of all that had fallen from the
1059
1060
serfs
1061
1062
l
l
1063
1064
1065
l
1066
The Ear of Limerick
supported the resolution, and said, that the crisis had arrived; when, if the attention of parliament was not called to the state of Ireland, the most lamentable consequences would ensue. Generally speaking, no
1067
The Lord Chancellor
said, that the small, number of appeals from Ireland did not lead him to suppose that the people were dissatisfied with the decisions of the judges. He had made a calculation of the number of days that would probably be occupied in hearing and deciding the appeal causes now on the list, and he found that the English, Irish, and Welsh appeals might be dismissed in 50 days, while 400 days would most likely be insufficient for those from Scotland only. Why the Scotch were so dissatisfied with the determinations of their judges, he did not pretend to decide; but certain it was, that the Irish did not appear to have the same grounds of complaint. On the subject of tithes, he could not avoid expressing his deep regret that a noble marquis had never spoken of them but under the terms of tax and impost. With the utmost deference, he would tell that noble marquis, that the nine-tenths of the estates belonging to him might be just as fairly so characterised, as the one-tenth that was the property of the clergy. To the noble earl who had last spoken, he would also say, that he had just as much right to interfere with the receipts of the noble earl's estates, as the noble earl had to interfere
1068
The Marquis of Downshire
expressed his disappointment at the manner in which the resolution had been met by ministers. The great objection to tithes in Ireland was, that they were a tax upon all improvements, and therefore retarded the progress of civilization. The noble earl had spoken of the advantages of a resident clergy, but in many instances, parishes were united: consequently the livings were very extensive, and in proportion to the extent, the advantages of residence would be diminished. In one diocese of Ireland, consisting of 210,000 acres, one clergyman held a living of 34,000 acres. Part of this land was waste; but the wide surface of the living of course prevented the clergyman from fully discharging the duties of his office. Ought not this defect to be remedied? He had no doubt that the noble marquis at the head of the government of Ireland was well inclined to turn his attention to the numerous evils which existed in that country; but he was persuaded that the noble marquis would find it difficult to arrive at the truth; for; there was no country in which the truth was elicited with more difficulty than in Ireland. The, Police bill, he was persuaded, would have the effect of disgusting many respectable magistrates, whose attendance at the petty sessions was most salutary. He admitted, that the absence of the great landed proprietors was a serious evil. Much might be accomplished if they would devote a small portion of their time and incomes to the improvement of the condition of their country. If they could not reside, they might appoint agents of education and respectability, who would not be content with being heard of merely at those periods of the year when rents became due.
The Earl of Donoughmore
declared, that he had never heard a speech more devoid of party feeling than that of his noble friend, who originated the present discussion. The noble earl, however had answered that speech as a minister of the Crown, and as if it had been an attack on the government of Ireland. He as highly respected the character of the illustrious person at the head of that government as any man could do. He had witnessed the manner in which that noble lord conducted
1069
Lord Ellenborough
said, that the noble earl opposite had told their lordships, that the present distressed state of Ireland was owing, not to the laws of the country, but to the state of society there. Now, he
1070
1071
1072
The Earl of Darnley
said, that a revision of the magistracy of Ireland might be attended with much benefit, but that the measure now pending could only have the effect of disgusting those who were in the commission. He was a decided advocate for the commutation of tithes in Ireland.
Lord Holland
said, that the motion of his noble friend was, to take into immediate consideration the state of Ireland, with a view to bettering the condition of the people, and the establishment of tranquillity on a firm basis. On that motion the noble earl opposite, in one of the most extraordinary speeches be had ever heard, had alluded to the different states of society, ancient and modern, and had moved the previous question; meaning thereby, as he presumed, that the motion was a
1073
1074
1075
1076
1077
1078
"Mortua quin etiam jungebat corpora vivis,
Componensmanibusque manus atque oribus ora,
Tormenti genus! et sanie taboque fluentes
Complexu in misero, longa sic morte necabat."
The House divided: Contents, present, 35. Proxies, 25–60. Not Contents, present 66. Proxies, 42–108. Majority against the motion, 48.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, June 14.
KENT PETITION—REFORM OF PARLIAMENT, AND REDUCTION OF THE INTEREST OF THE PUBLIC DEBT.
1079
Mr. Honywood
rose to present a petition from the county of Kent, complaining of Agricultural Distress, and praying for Parliamentary Reform. There was a concluding paragraph tacked to it, the introduction of which no man regretted more sincerely than himself; he meant that rider which called upon parliament to make a reduction in the interest of the national debt, as soon as that House should have reformed itself. Had government, two years ago, adopted that economy and retrenchment so loudly called for by the distresses of the country, they would never have heard such a sentiment from the freeholders of Kent.
Sir E. Knatchbull
admitted, that the meeting was numerous and highly respectable. The meeting was convened for the purpose of considering the distressed state of the country, and the expediency of parliamentary reform. The meeting took place, and very little was said about agricultural distress, but a great deal about reform. Every thing went on peaceably, until a gentleman (he supposed he must call him so, for he said he was a freeholder) thought fit to propose the rider alluded to. In his opinion, it was the lamest rider a Whig horse ever had to carry. When the clause was proposed to the meeting, a considerable pause, as if of astonishment, ensued. Sadie time elapsed before any body had the confidence to second the motion. At last an individual seconded it. During the whole of the time, the great Whig leaders who had called the meeting were silent land expressed no opinion with respect to the clause. A noble lord (Darnley) opposed the rider, as recommending a breach of public faith, and no doubt With a feeling of strong repugnance at seeing the aristocracy of the county dictated to by such a character as Cobbett. Had his honourable colleague and the noble lord called upon the meeting to oppose that rider, they would have vindicated the high, character and unblemished honour which the county of Kent had ever maintained. The person who moved the rider had stated, that the main object of parliamentary reform was, a reduction of the interest of the national debt. If that was so, his objections to parliamentary reform were strengthened and confirmed. He was perfectly persuaded that this disgraceful rider would never have been adopted, if the Whig-
1080
Mr. Honywood
said, that this petition did not emanate merely from the Whig leaders. The requisition had been signed by a number of persons who had never called themselves Whigs, and who were once the enemies of reform. With respect to the rider, be had opposed it at the time, and he utterly disavowed the sentiment it contained.
Lord J. Russell
could not help expressing his surprise, that if, as the hon. baronet stated, so large a majority of the meeting were opposed to this proposition, he had not himself brought forward some counter resolution. The truth was, and it was, a melancholy truth, that persons not of the lowest order, nor seditiously inclined, but possessing considerable property in the county, found themselves in a state or approaching ruin, and in the wreck of their fortunes, upon hearing any proposition which bore the appearance of relief, they caught at it, as drowning men catch at straws, without any intention of injuring the government or the constitution of the country. With regard to parliamentary reform, he had been applied to by several of his friends to know whether it was his intention to renew the motion which he had lately made, and he now begged to state, that upon the first favourable opportunity he would renew his attempt to effect a just, necessary, and constitutional reform. With respect to the part of this petition, which prayed for a just reduction of the interest of the public debt, he knew of no such as a just reduction of that interest, and considered parliamentary reform wholly unconnected, with the public debt. Even if he were disposed to say that late war was entered into, and persisted in against the will of the great majority of the people—a proposition which he was by no means ready to admit,—he should still contend, that that House was the legal representa-
1081
The Marquis of Londonderry
said, he was not in the House when the petition was read, but he hoped that no objection would be made to its reception. However strongly he might reprobate the particular paragraph in question, he did not apprehend that it formed any objection to the petition being received. On the contrary, he thought it would be highly useful that this petition of the county of Kent should remain on the records of parliament, to warn other counties against being betrayed into the avowal of principles so disgraceful to themselves, and so calculated to bring ruin or the country. It was not with any surprise that he had heard the noble lord opposite disclaim a doctrine so unjust, so flagitious, and so pregnant with ruin and degradation to the country; but the noble lord must forgive him for saying, that he had heard part of his observations with great pain. The noble lord said, that he could never consent to such a measure, except in a case of overwhelming necessity. BY what process of reasoning could the noble lord couple the word
1082
Lord J. Russell
said, he had studiously qualified his expressions, by stating that he meant not a gratuitous necessity, but such a necessity, as would be felt alike by all parties in that House. He meant to put the strongest possible case of necessity; such a case, for instance, as when we were utterly unable to pay the interest of the debt, or when the presence of a foreign enemy at our gates rendered the independence and safety of the country paramount to every other consideration.
The Marquis of Londonderry
said, he was happy to hear the anxiety of the noble lord to explain his expressions, but the case put by the noble lord could only justify the nation in postponing the performance of its engagements, and not in consenting to the violation of them. He exceedingly lamented, that the leaders of that meeting, for the sake of their station and character in the country, had not rescued themselves froth the disgrace of having such a proposition carried.
1083
Lord J. Russell
said, he was ready to retract the word "consent" if the noble marquis wished it, but he really was not aware that the noble marquis was such a critic in language. He thought that the Whigs had been carried away by the feeling of the whole meeting, which feeling had been mainly produced by the measures of the noble lord opposite.
Mr. Calcraft
said, that if the two representatives of the county had made the statements to the meeting which they had made this evening, there would not have been fifty voices for the amendment. He lamented that they had not made known their indignation against such a proposition. The meeting had agreed to it from utter ignorance on the part of many, and many, from not having heard it at all. Those who called the meeting ought to have stood till this time, combating the amendment, rather than have allowed it to be attached to their petition. If they had acted so, the person who had proposed it, and who was not known as a freeholder, would soon have been obliged to take his horse and ride away. He disclaimed the amendment as not expressing the sentiments of the meeting, and had he not been engaged in duties which he conceived to be more important in that House, he could have successfully exposed the weakness and fallacy of the proposition. It was said I that gentlemen were taken by surprise; but when men undertook to manage public meetings, they ought to be prepared for emergencies of this sort. He had reason to know that the individual who proposed this rider had not the slightest expectation of seeing it adopted.
Sir E. Knatchbull
said, that if his hon. colleague had joined him in opposing the proposition, or met him half way, Cobbett and his amendment would have been consigned to merited disgrace.
Mr. J. Smith
was convinced, that the great body of the freeholders of the county were incapable of supporting so flagitious a proposition. It was a severe mortification to him to find that the county of Kent was the first to come forward to petition parliament to break faith with the public creditor.
Mr. Brougham
said, that two objects seemed to be in the view of the noble lord opposite, and the worthy baronet, one to cast blame on the leaders of the Whig aristocracy; the other, to attack all public county meetings through the sides of the Kent meeting. And well they might
1084
1085
Mr. Honywood
said, that a noble friend of his would also have explained to the meeting the fatal consequence of the proposition, had it not been that he was fatigued by being squeezed up waggon.
The Marquis of Londonderry
denied having said a word against county meetings generally. All he had said was this,
1086
Mr. Brougham
said, that however objectionable or unjust the proposition of the petitioners might be, it was not more so than the conduct of the noble marquis respecting the restriction, and the subsequent resumption of cash payments.
Lord Clifton
said, it might seem odd for a man to accuse himself; but he did think that the Whig leaders had wanted spirit at the meeting. How Mr. Cobbett had got possession of the meeting he could hardly conceive, unless from the circumstance of his having spoken towards the close of the meeting, and amidst that confusion which generally attended the breaking up of such bodies. But, notwithstanding the objectionable character of the rider, he believed the sentiments expressed in the petition to be the sentiments of a great proportion of the freeholders of Kent; and he hoped that future meetings would take warning how they annexed to their petitions sentiments and. principles of a revolutionary nature.
Mr. Secretary Peel
thought, that the manly and becoming confession of the noble lord had done ten times more towards setting his party right with the people of England, than the defence which had been made for them by the hon. and learned member. But, when the noble lord expressed his astonishment how Mr. Cobbett could have influenced the meeting, he put a query which, in fact, he himself had answered. Mr. Cobbett had succeeded in influencing the meeting, simply because he had not been manfully resisted. What was the charge against the meeting in question? Was it blamed for having met to petition parliament for retrenchment? No; it was blamed for having proposed an unjust and iniquitous measure. The more decided the opposition of the Whig leaders to Mr. Cobbett's proposition, the greater had been their blame that they had not stood forward, and explained to the men of Kent the impropriety of the course they were following. If the being squeezed in a waggon was an excuse for one individual, it could not be an excuse for all. After all, he preferred the manly proposal, for a downright reduction of the interest of the debt,
1087
Mr. Bennet
said, he was not surprised that the right hon. secretary was desirous to do away the disgrace which attached to the pillage in the first instance of the public creditor, and the pillage afterwards of the public debtor, which had been committed by the government. These profligate and abandoned examples had corrupted the moral, feelings of the country; though, after all, he did not believe that the objectionable proposal could be considered as the act of a discussing body.
Mr. Western
was astonished at the consummate assurance [Hear, hear!] with which the right hon. gentleman had denounced the men of Kent, for an expression wrung from them in a moment of irritation. Why had not the friends of the right hon. secretary come forward to face and to instruct the meeting? If only one-tenth of the county was favourable to the rider, why had not the other nine-tenths come forward to oppose it? It was too much for gentlemen to suppose, that public justice was due to no one but to the public creditor. Why was it not equally to be measured to the public debtor?
Mr. Hume
contended, that the words of the petition could, in fairness, be construed to mean no more than a similar reduction in the interest of the debt to that lately made by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. The right hon. gentleman had reduced the interest of the 5 per cents to 4 per cent, and had hinted that then per cents might ultimately be reduced to 3. Now, there was no reason to suppose that the petitioners did not mean such a reduction. When ministers had plunged the country into a state in which those who not long ago were in a state of comparative comfort, had no prospect before them but a gaol or a poor-house, they ought not to be over critical about the terms of a petition.
Sir F. Burdett
thought it was hard that, his hon. friend, the member for Kent, should be fallen upon in the way the he had been by both sides of the House, inconsequence of his omission to do what few of the most experienced public men would have had presence of mind to do in his
1088
s
s
s
1089
Mr. Monck
would go as far as any man for the payment of debts public or private, and would live on bread and water to discharge them; but the public faith had been first broken in the year 1797, when paper had been substituted for the metallic currency. The contracting of 800,000,000
l
Mr. Wilson
could not agree, that there was any analogy between the English Bank-note and the French assignats. Were they to attempt to treat contracts in the way proposed, they would plunge the country into inevitable ruin. He did not see how the gentlemen opposite could blame the resumption of cash payments. He was sure that until they had found that some of the consequences of that measure were ruinous, a great majority of them were in favour of it.
Mr. Philips
attributed all the evils which the country was suffering to the suspension of cash payments in 1797, and trusted that the country would never again be agitated by a return to that system.
Mr. Lockhart
said, that whatever might be urged against a paper currency, this country would never have been able to carry on the war to the extent it had done, without its aid. Like Oliver Cromwell, who, finding that he could not purchase provisions for his forces, voted a general fast, the chancellor of the exchequer, finding that he had not a sufficient quantity of gold, voted that paper was equal to it in value; and it became so much so, as to answer his purpose. This, however, was no reason why the argument should be turned against those, who, feeling the evils brought upon them by the system,
1090
Mr. J. Martin
thought that nothing could be more insulting to parliament, than to call upon them to do that which those who made honest. As he believed that a great majority of the petitioners were ignorant of the effect of what they asked, he would consent that it should be received. Feeling, however, that the demand was in its nature unjust, he trusted that parliament would not separate without expressing their opinion upon it. They had, the other evening, declared that they would not debase the coin of the country: let them now agree to a declaration, that, they would not defraud the public creditor.
On the motion for printing the petition,
Mr. Brougham
observed, that when the men of Kent were blamed for calling for a reduction of the interest of the debt, we should recollect what had been done by parliament on former occasions. With respect to the prayer of the petition he could not agree to it. He thought that, in justice and good policy, we were bound not to touch the principal, and to pay the interest as long as we could; and he doubted not that if economy were practised, we should be able fully to satisfy the public creditor, without severely pressing upon the people. But if this economy and reduction did not take place, then would come that necessity which would prevent the possibility of his being paid. The right hon. secretary had praised the manner in which the petitioners had made the request, and had said, that it was more manly than any round-about and insidious attempts at the same object. If the right hon. gentleman meant to allude to the intentions of gentlemen on his (Mr. B's.) side, he must tell him that he was wholly mistaken; but if he wished to apply them where they were so well deserved, let him look around and he would there find the abettors and supporters of a fraud carried on by insidious,
1091
Mr. Peel
said, he never did deal in underhand insinuations. He had adverted to propositions made in that House, both by the learned gentleman, and by the hon. member for Shrewsbury, founded on a supposed necessity, when the public faith could not be preserved. Such anticipations were calculated to produce that necessity, which never should be contemplated in that House, any more than in private life it should be contemplated, that a case of highway robbery might be justifiable.
Mr. H. G. Bennet
said, he would repeat, that the public had no right to pay more than they had borrowed, and that if they borrowed 20
s
s
The Marquis of Londonderry
said, that if the hon. member chose to become the advocate of revolutionary measures, he must find some better pretext than the reasoning which be had put forth. His argument about not paying 30
s
s
s
Mr. Bennet
said, that no vote of his had ever gone to defraud the public creditor or debtor. Let the noble marquis mark that!
Mr. Ricardo
was clear, that if the public creditor had at one time received 30
s
s
s
s
Mr. Hume
was sorry that such opinions with respect to the payment of the public creditor should be held by his hon. friends; but, though he differed from them, he could not shut his eyes to the fact, that
1092
Mr. Honywood
said, that there was not one person in the county who was aware of the intention to introduce the obnoxious clause into the petition.
Ordered to be printed.
ALIENS REGULATION BILL.
On the order of the day for the second reading of this bill,
Sir James Mackintosh
said, that no man who consulted his own personal satisfaction would think of addressing the House at any length, with such a thin attendance of members, and particularly after its patience had been nearly exhausted by the alarming nature of the subject which had engaged its attention for the greater part of the evening. They had been occupied in considering one of those unhappy contests between different classes of the same community, some of whom were endeavouring to shift the burthen from their own shoulders, on those of their neighbours. Such attempts, how, ever unwise in their nature, nevertheless went to prove the extent of that misery, which could so far goad men's minds as to make them assent to propositions which a little calm consideration would induce them to reject. Such subjects were calculated to excite the anxious attention of parliament; but that upon which he now, rose to address them possessed no such attraction; particularly as it had been so frequently discussed within a few years. Still, however, Alien bills had never been brought to their present stage, and the grounds upon which they were
1093
1094
1095
1096
de medietate linguœ
1097
Stare super vias antiquas,
1098
1099
Non meus hic sermo;
1100
espionage
1101
extra-tradition
1102
"fuge crudeles terras."
1103
1104
"while European freedom still withstands
The encroaching flood which drowns her lessening lauds,
She sees fir off, with an indignant groan,
Her native plains and empires once her own."
1105
Mr. Plunkett
said, it was impossible for his hon. and learned friend to address any assembly without deeply riveting its attention. His hon. and learned friend possessed powers which enabled him to give an interest to any circumstance which he thought was connected with the subject of debate, and to press into his service arguments and matters, which, in the hand of any other person, would be deemed foolish and irrelevant. The truth of this had perhaps, never been more strikingly exemplified, than by the uninterrupted attention with which the speech of his hon. and learned friend had been listened to on the present occasion. It would be his (Mr. P's) task to draw back the attention of the House to the question before them, from the consideration of which they had been diverted by the speech just delivered. The House would excuse him if he did not attempt to follow his hon. and learned friend, supposing he had the ability to do so, through the unexpected range which he had taken. The question was not with respect to the actual relations of this country with Russia, Austria, Italy, Turkey or Greece, or the relations which we might hereafter have with Russia, in the event of a revolution taking place in Poland; the question was not what was or what might be the state of Europe, but whether the Alien bill should be allowed to continue in force for two years longer. He felt that a considerable difficulty was imposed on him in presuming to offer his opinion upon a subject involving so many constitutional questions. The difficulty of his situation was not a little augmented, by the tone which had prevailed in the debate of a former night, as well as upon the present occasion, which was of such a nature as almost to render it necessary for any person who proposed to sustain the measure, to enter on a defence of himself. [Much cheering from the Opposition.] And he was compelled to do this, too, the House would give him leave to say, under
1106
1107
1108
ne exeat regno.
1109
1110
1111
1112
1113
1114
1115
1116
Mr. Scarlett
was surprised, that his right hon. and learned friend should have ar-
1117
toto cœlo
of ne exeat regno
capias
1118
Mr. Hume now moved "that the debate be adjourned till Monday." Upon this the House divided: Ayes, 16; Noes, 166. The question that the bill be now read a second time, being then put, the House again divided: When there appeared: Ayes, 108; Noes, 72: Majority for the second reading, 36.
1119
List of the Minority.
Abercromby, J.
Lambton. J. G.
Allen, J. H.
Lennard, J. B.
Anson, hon. G.
Mackintosh, sir J.
Baring, H.
Martin, J.
Barrett, S. M.
Milbank, M.
Bennet, hon. H. G.
Monck, J. B.
Brougham, H.
Moore, P.
Browne, D.
Newport, sir J.
Byng, G.
Nugent, lord
Calcraft, J.
Normanby, visc.
Calcraft, J. H.
Ord, W.
Cavendish, C.
Osborne, lord F.
Clifton, lord
Palmer, col.
Coffin, sir I.
Palmer, C. F.
Colbourne, N. R.
Pares, T.
Crompton, S.
Philips, G. jun.
Creevey, T.
Power, R.
Denison, W. J.
Powell, hon. W.
Dundas, hon. T.
Robinson, sir G.
Duncannon, visc.
Rice, T. S.
Ebrington, visc.
Robarts, A.
Fergusson, sir R. C.
Robarts, G.
Fitzroy, lord C.
Rumbold, C.
Folkestone, visc.
Scarlett, J.
Forbes, C.
Smith, W.
Graham, S.
Stanley, lord
Grattan, J.
Stewart, W. (Ty.)
Griffiths, J. W.
Tavistock, marq.
Guise, sir W.
Tierney, rt. hon. G.
Gurney, R.
Warre, J. A.
Gaskell, B.
Western, C. C.
Haldimand, W.
Williams, W.
Hobhouse, J. C.
Williams, John
Hollywood, W. P.
Wilson, sir R.
Hume, J.
Wood, alderman
Hutchinson, C. H.
TELLERS.
Jervoise, J. P.
Althorp, visc.
Kennedy, T. F.
Denman, T.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Monday, June 17.
NAVIGATION LAWS.
The Earl of Liverpool
rose to move the second reading of the antient Commercial Statutes' Repeal bill, the Importation of Good's bill, and the Navigation act Amendment bill. He observed, that these three acts completed the revision of the Navigation law, and the statutes relative to foreign trade. The first bill, though it did not repeal all the ancient statutes relative to commerce, did repeal no less than 300 of them. This repeal, however, was not made by sweeping clauses: for each of the ancient acts was substantially recited or specially described. The bills before the House would rid the Statute book of many enactments now useless, and remove many difficulties with which the trade of the country was embarrassed. From the circumstance of so many statutes being
1120
1121
entrepôt
The Earl of Harewood
did not object to the principle stated by the noble earl as to freedom of commerce tending, by increasing the wealth of other countries, to augment our own, but thought, that to carry such a principle into full effect the means ought to be affoded to our own manufacturers of entering into competition with those of foreign countries; for instance, with regard to the woollen manufacture, the duty imposed upon foreign wool tended to increase the price of the manufactured article, so as to prevent it, in a great degree, from entering into that competition.
The bills were read a second time.
Earl Bathurst
called the attention of the House to the Colonial Trade bill, and the West Indian and American Trade bill. The noble earl described the state of the law by which the trade between the United States and the West Indies was at present regulated, and the departures which had been made from the principle
1122
The Marquis of Bute
said, that when measures were proposed which would give additional encouragement to the manufacture of sugar, it was to be feared that they might also increase the slave trade. He therefore wished some measure to be brought forward for the better registration of slaves. When an enactment for this object was proposed, it had been argued, that it was a matter which ought to be left to the colonies themselves. The legislatures of several of the colonies had indeed passed laws for the registration of slaves, but he doubted the efficiency of those acts. He was prepared to contend, that the parliament of the United Kingdom was competent to enact a general law for the registration of slaves. Such a law was strictly a measure of trade; and he never had heard the power of parliament to regulate the trade of the colonies disputed.
The bills were read a second time.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Monday, June 17.
LABOURERS WAGES.]
Mr. Littleton
presented two petitions, one from the miners, iron-makers, and coal-masters of Dudley, praying, that the House would enjoin a more strict observance of the law, which directs that labourers should be paid only in money, and not in provisions or other commodities. The hon. member complained that the law was open to perpetual invasion; that it exposed the poor man to the hardship of taking such provisions, and at such prices, as the master chose; and that when the House came to legislate between the labourer and his employer they ought to be tender of the interests of the former. The health and industry of the poor man were his only portion, and, therefore, the House Should
1123
Mr. Robinson
was of opinion, that the existing law was bad, and that no law could be framed, that would not be evaded, and lead to perpetual interference between the employer and the employed. In some cases, masters might make payments to their labourers in provisions which were bad, but there was no way of preventing this but by the imposition of penalties; and, notwithstanding all the penalties that could be imposed, still it might be possible to evade the law. If such a law were to be re-enacted, he would object to it, upon the ground that it was at once unnecessary and inefficient.
Mr. D. Gilbert
thought the law inefficacious and unnecessary. The competition of trade was as full a protection to the workman who was paid in provisions as to the man who received his wages in specie.
Mr. Ricardo
thought it impossible to renew so obnoxious an act. Mr. Owen prided himself upon having introduced the provision system. He had opened a shop at New Lanark, in which he sold the best commodities to his workmen cheaper than they could be obtained elsewhere; and he was persuaded that the practice was a beneficial one.
Lord Stanley
thought the measure injurious, as tending to excite misunderstanding between the labourer and the employer, which was very injurious to the former, as a labourer when turned out of one establishment could not easily find employment in another.
Mr. Monck
objected to the payment of workmen in commodities, but not to paying them in provisions. On the continent, the practice of farmers was, to pay their labourers as much as possible in provisions; and the same practice would be extremely beneficial in this country. His hon. friend (Mr. Curwen) had adopted it with the greatest success.
Mr. Hume
said, the practice in Scotland was, to pay in provision, and he had never seen that practice attended with ill consequences. He trusted the law would be repealed.
Ordered to lie on the table.
SCARCITY OF PROVISIONS IN IRELAND.
Mr. V. Fitzgerald
begged to ask a right hon. gentleman, what farther relief was contemplated for the distresses of Ireland; and how the funds already ob-
1124
Mr. Goulburn
assured the right hon. gentleman, that, from the moment the Irish government determined to assist the people, every course had been taken which could expedite such assistance and render it available. A committee had been formed in Dublin, by order of the lord lieutenant, to communicate with those districts in which the greatest distress prevailed; and certain funds which had been left in the lord lieutenant's hands against exigency, by the act of 1817, had been immediately placed at that committee's disposal. In addition to this, he (Mr. G.) had submitted a measure for the employment of the poor upon public works. That measure was divided into two branches: the one empowering the lord lieutenant at once to use all sums which had been presented by grand juries for such public purposes: the other, placing a farther sum of 50,000
l
Mr. John Smith
said, that, from facts which had come to his knowledge, as a member of the London Tavern committee, he could not but be surprised at the speech which the right hon. secretary had just delivered. The Dublin committee might have done all in its power, but it had not done sufficient in the way of relief; for the last accounts from Ireland were more calamitous than ever. He would state facts to the House, on which it might rely. In the county of Clare, there were now 99,639 persons subsisting on charity from hour to hour. In Cork,
1125
Mr. Spring Rice
said, that in the county of Limerick, out of a population of 67,000 persons, 20,000 were subsisting on charity. However great the sums placed at the disposal of the London Committee, it was impossible, even if they trebled their amount, that they could do more than relieve the present suffering, and that only in a very slight degree. He trusted that measures of employing the poor would be resorted to, and speedily; for while the legislature deliberated, the people perished.
Sir E. O'Brien
said, that if an effort was not made to relieve the Irish before harvest, they would fall upon the new crop so eagerly and prematurely, that next year would be equal to this in misery.
Sir J. Newport
said, that unless means were found to employ the population of Ireland, the foundation of an ulterior evil would be laid, which would not only exist through this or through the next year, but would strike at the root of all industry for a long period to come. Large as the means, and great as the benevolence of this country unquestionably were, those means and that benevolence were incapable of affording efficient relief, unless the means of existence were drawn from the immediate neighbourhood of the sufferers. The aid that might be afforded ought to take the shape of reward for labour, rather than that of a boon to mendicity.
Mr. Secretary Peel
perfectly agreed with the right hon. baronet, that this was not a mere pecuniary question. The importance of the subject lifted it above the ordinary rules of financial calculation. The question was not, whether a sum of money should be advanced to Ireland. The Irish government were endeavouring to give relief in every possible way: not with strict regard to the principles of political economy, for unhappily the case was one that compelled them to set all ordinary rules at defiance. Engineers were engaged to see what works could
1126
l
SCOTCH BURGHS ACCOUNTS BELL.
On the motion for recommitting this bill, Mr. H. Drummond moved an instruction to the committee that they have power to divide the bill. This was agreed to, and on the motion that the Speaker do leave the chair,
Lord A. Hamilton
declared his decided opposition to such a bill as the present being considered in any degree adequate to redress the abuses complained of by the inhabitants of the royal burghs of Scotland, and confirmed by the three reports of committees of that House. To call it a remedy for these admitted abuses, was a total misapplication of terms. No two things could be more opposite than the reports of the committees of that House and the bill of the learned lord. The bill referred only to the accounts of the burghs. Now, the regulation of the accounts did not constitute a tenth part of the admitted abuses in the administration of these burghs. It did not meet the paramount abuse of self-election, from which alone so many mischiefs originated. The learned lord was mistaken, if he thought such a measure would satisfy the petitioners. Since its introduction almost every royal burgh had petitioned against it. Not a solitary petition had been presented in its support. It was not in the nature of things, that with the feeling of burgh reform that existed in Scotland, such a bill could satisfy the just claims of the people.
The Lord Advocate
said, he considered the bill consistent with the report of the committee up stairs, and that it went directly to remedy the evils complained of. He would receive with attention any amendment which was calculated to remove the grievances complained of, but he would oppose himself to any violation of the chartered rights of the royal burghs.
Mr. J. P. Grant
denied that the bill was at all founded on the reports of the committees of that House. Those committees detailed a variety of abuses to which the present bill not even adverted. As to chartered rights, he knew of no rights, in virtue of which self-elected magistrates assumed the power to vote them-
1127
Mr. Hume
denied that the bill afforded the smallest chance of relief. No effectual relief could be given, unless by a modification of the absurd and dangerous principle of self-election. The defect of this measure was, that it did not go to the root of the evil. Its remedies were mere palliatives: the great spring of all the mischief was left untouched, provisions were enacted which could be of no real use, and proceedings in the Exchequer were to be instituted against a corrupt magistrate, which might not terminate, before the parties had descended into their graves. A great deal had been said with regard to the sacredness of chartered rights. Under this name, malversation, and all the varieties of abuse, had too long enjoyed impunity. It was not possible to point out a more wasteful or unjustifiable expenditure than that of the Scotch burghs. To correct this, was the avowed purpose for which the bill was introduced. The chartered rights, held up as worthy of so much reverence, had been violated whenever it was deemed expedient. What he complained of was, that this measure went to perpetuate that root of all the evil and corruption which they deplored, and the existence of which was no where denied—the power of self-election. Against the continuance of such a power he protested, and he must declare himself grievously disappointed that the learned lord had not introduced a more efficient measure. The learned lord had neglected the opportunity of realizing a permanent good for his country, and establishing on a solid basis his own reputation. Since, however, there were parts of the bill which some of his friends conceived might be beneficial, he would not resist its farther progress, although he feared that the effect would be, to perpetuate the system of self-election, and doom the inhabitants of Scotch burghs to a continuance of the abuses set forth in their petitions.
Mr. W. Smith
could not but approve of that part of the measure by which legal proceedings might be commenced against a corrupt magistrate, and in the event of conviction a penalty of 500
l
1128
Lord Binning
said, it could not be denied by any man, that the charters in question were originally granted for the benefit of the parties receiving them. The object of the present measure was, without trenching upon them, to remedy the abuses which had crept in, and become as it were established under the sanction of custom. It had been urged that these charters were in themselves injurious, and had been often violated on former occasions. To this proposition he never could assent. If the convention of Scotch burghs had ever interfered, it was an interference without authority. It was under these impressions that the committee had acted, in preparing the new system of regulation which had been submitted to the House.
Mr. Maxwell
argued against the system. He considered its origin as being a revolution, though made by a king. Its first institution was the act of a weak king, advised by an imbecile set of counsellors. He approved of that part of the bill which imposed fines in cases of corrupt practices.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Tuesday, June 18.
MARRIAGE ACT AMENDMENT BILL.
The Duke of Richmond
presented a petition from Arthur Chichester, esq. referring to the case of the marquis of Donegal, complaining of the retrospective effect of this bill, and praying that it might not pass into a law.
Lord Ellenborough
1129
1130
bona fide
1131
1132
Lord Stowell
rose and addressed their lordships for the first time, but in a tone of voice that rendered his speech for the major part inaudible below the bar. He began by adverting to the importance of the subject, and observed, that whilst it was impossible to deny the evils of which the law as it now stood was occasionally productive, yet the reference he entertained for those great names under whose auspices the marriage law was established, had often checked the desire he felt to see it reformed. Various bills of this description had, during the last few years, travelled up to their lordships' House, and, notwithstanding the changes which they underwent in their progress, had failed to receive the approbation of their lordships. He should be glad if the present measure were to prove more fortunate than its predecessors; but in order to become so, it was not enough to point out defects which ought to be supplied, or evils that required a remedy, but it should be made evident that the proposed alterations would not lead to consequences still more mischievous and deplorable. The length of time, also, during which the law as it now existed had continued, and the prodigious interests on which it had operated, must cause them to hesitate and take a full view of all the difficulties that surrounded a question of this nature.—Havity, said thus much, he would add, nevertheless, that he had heard with much pleasure many of the observations which had fallen from the noble baron. He could not, however, agree with him in one branch, of his doctrine, because in his (Lord S's.) view of the subject, the marriage contract was entirely within the competency of a civil jurisdiction. It might not be so in, savage life, where the essence of the engagement consisted perhaps in an appeal to Heaven; but in civilized states in which there was a matrimonial law, it was held that the Supreme Being left it to society to consider age and circumstances—to prescribe forms, and exercise a controlling authority over the whole subject. Dangerous consequences might possibly arise from leaving it altogether to private judgment to determine by what ceremony the
1133
ab initio.
1134
ab initio;
1135
l
1136
1137
The Earl of Westmoreland
warmly supported the bill, which he regretted had not passed two or three years before. Many atrocious acts of robbery and injustice might then have been prevented; and the number of such acts was, he feared, even now, daily increasing. He did not doubt, indeed, that they would Continue to prevail, and to set all religion, all justice, and all humanity at defiance, unless parliament should interfere, and rescue the country from the gross iniquities to which it was now subject. The law, as it now stood, was not the ancient law of the land: it was not only a departure from, but a direct subversion of that ancient law; its intention was, to prevent clandestine marriages, and its operation, to destroy those which were just, and ought, therefore, to be binding. As to what had just fallen from the learned lord, he would beg leave to ask him, whether the marriages which be said were null and void, must not become void by judgments of courts, in order to their being so considered? He wished to see the law extend its protection over youth and property; but it was quite as necessary to guard against other species of fraud and spoliation. Surely it could not be denied, that the law was nugatory as regarded its own provisions. These might all be set aside by various expedients, by a journey to Scotland, or a voyage to France, or even by a marriage in which the banns were published with a certain degree of secrecy. Minors, by a subsequent marriage, after full age, might also remedy every defect, except, perhaps, the illegitimacy of their first-born.—The bill contained two principal clauses, the one prospective, and the other retrospective; but he proposed to consider them together. Their lordships would immediately proceed to amend the act; and thus prevent progressive nullities. No great injustice could be done by preventing the operation of the existing act, when, if this bill be not passed, nullities would be pronounced, and injustice would be committed. He wished to protect those who complied with the law, as far as they were
1138
1139
facie ecclesiœ.
presenti in futuro,
1140
in jade ecclesiœ,
1141
The Lord Chancellor
said, the question was not now, whether the bill should pass, but whether the retrospective clause should remain part of it. In his opinion, the bill ought to be divided, and the retrospective and prospective clauses made separate measures. He did not now give his opinion on either, but wished to state that, they stood on distinct grounds, and that the one might be agreed to by those who might reject the other. In defending the retrospective clause, it had been assumed that the marriages which it would legalize were real marriages. They were not so: they were no marriages at all. The parties might marry again to-morrow; and the act would, therefore, declare as marriages, what, before it passed, were not marriages. The act of George 2nd, pronounced Marriages null and void, unless celebrated under certain circumstances. They were, in consequence, null and void; and this clause would substitute a marriage for a transaction which was not entitled to be considered as one. But leaving this retrospective clause for future consideration, he must say, that he could not agree to the prospective clauses as they stood. It was better, in his opinion, that the parties should know, as soon as they were married, whether they were married or no, than that they should be left in an uncertainty as to whether they had contracted a valid matrimonial engagement or not. No man who had his heart in the right place would permit a clause to pass which allowed parents or guardians to deliberate for a number of years, whether they would consider the marriage of their children or their wards as void or valid. He would put the case of a cruel or capricious father, who should be displeased at the very early marriage of his daughter (for imprudent marriages were likely to be contracted chiefly by very young persons), and who had it in his power to dissolve it immediately.
1142
The Earl of Liverpool
could not agree to the postponement of the bill. He
1143
Lord Redesdale
opposed the prospective clause, and recommended, that in future all marriages Should be celebrated in pursuance of banns and not of licences.
The Earl of Harrowby
was of opinion, that where a party had obtained a marriage under a false affidavit of his own, and afterwards invalidated that marriage, the sentence of nullity pronounced in consequence should operate as a conviction of perjury against the wrong doer.
The first clause was then agreed to.
On the motion for agreeing to the second clause, the object of which is to give parents and guardians the power of voiding marriages, until the parties attained the age of 21,
Lord Holland
defended the clause, allowing that it might be susceptible of amendment, but maintaining, that by its adoption, the existing law would be materially improved. If the clause, however, should be rejected, he should still think the bill eminently serviceable. The clause was drawn in strict analogy to the law of the country in other respects.
The Earl of Liverpool
thought it would be desirable to introduce into the clause a provision, that any suit for rendering a marriage null and void, must be commenced within a twelvemonth of the solemnization of the nuptials. He recommended that the Chairman should report progress, in order to give their lordships time to consider this suggestion.
The Chairman accordingly reported progress, and asked leave to sit again.
HOUSE.OF LORDS.
Wednesday, June 19.
MARRIAGE ACT AMENDMENT BILL.
The House resolved itself into a committee on this bill. On the clause for giving to parents and guardians a certain period after the marriages of minors without consent to institute suits for annulling such marriages,
The Archbishop of Canterbury
said, that every means that could be devised by human ingenuity, ought to be resorted to for the purpose of preventing improper marriages, but that when those marriages had been celebrated under the solemn sanction of religion, they ought to be indissoluble; nor could he conceive any thing more repugnant to religion or morality that persons should be placed
1144
The Archbishop of York
expressed his entire concurrence in the opinion delivered by his most reverend brother, and observed that the principle of legislation ought to be—"Those whom God hath joined, let no man put asunder."
The Earl of Liverpool
maintained that the sound principle of legislation was to throw every obstacle in the way of improper marriages; but when they had been solemnized, they ought to be indissoluble.
Lord Ellenborough
re-urged the grounds on which he called upon the committee to prevent any further evil arising from the nullifying of marriages for want of consents, or defect of form, under the operation of the marriage act, and stated his intention of moving to extend the operation of the clause to the rendering valid all marriages which had taken place since 1754, the date of the marriage act, with the exception of those which had been declared null, and of those in which the parties aware of the nullity of the first marriage, had contracted a second marriage; and also with a proviso, that dignities, honours, and property, whether they had descended to the children, of any such marriage, or, in consequence of its acknowledged nullity, to the heir at law, should remain in the possession of those persons to whom they had descended and their descendants, with some other amendments.
Upon the amendments of lord Ellen-borough a short discussion took place, in the course of which
The Earl of Liverpool
said, it was his intention to introduce a clause to prevent this act from extending to any causes now pending, or to be instituted before a competent tribunal within the next twelve months.
Lord Holland
was of opinion, that the operation of the whole measure now before their lordships would be destroyed if the noble earl's proposals were agreed to.
1145
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Wednesday, June 19.
COUNTY COURT OF MIDDLESEX.]
Mr. Lennard
presented a petition from 4,000 of the householders and traders of Middlesex, complaining of the conduct of the county clerk of Middlesex. He knew nothing of the truth or falsehood
1146
Mr. Courtenay
said, that the petition did not represent the feeling of the county of Middlesex, but emanated from individuals actuated by the worst motives. He denied, on the authority of the chief judge of the court, that any fees had been taken by the chief clerk, which were not sanctioned by act of parliament. Even if such a grievance bad existed, it was not a subject for the interference of parliament, since there was a specific mode of redress pointed out by the act. Under these circumstances, he should move, that the petition be rejected.
Dr. Lushington
asked, whether it was candid to attribute malignant motives to 4,000 individuals, and to move for the rejection of the petition, upon the unsupported
ipse dixit
1147
s
Mr. Bennet
thought, the House was bound to inquire into the allegations of the petitioners.
The Attorney General
stated, that the act of parliament specified the legal fees, and in the event of exaction, the remedies. The petitioners should therefore have sought redress in the mode indicated by the law.
Mr. Hume
expressed his astonishment that the first law officer of the Crown should set his face against investigation. They were not the friends of Mr. Heath, who wished to damnify his reputation by the rejection of the petition.
Mr. Wynn
said, that if the petitioners had confined themselves to the grievances, he should not oppose the reception of the petition; but when they attacked the character of the judge, on
ex parte
Mr. Hobhouse
said, that to reject the petition of the 4,000 persons was, to use a common saying, carrying the joke a little too far. It was, forsooth, to be rejected because it implicated the learned gentleman who presided in the court. But, was not his character much more likely to be affected by a refusal to receive the allegations of 4,000 persons who declared themselves to be aggrieved?
After some further conversation, the petition was ordered to lie on the table.
TITHES, AND THE CHURCH ESTABLISHMENT
Mr. Daly having, at the request of Mr. Secretary Peel and several other members, consented to postpone until next session his promised motion on the subject of tithes in Ireland,
Mr. Hume
immediately rose, and said, that as the hon. member for Galway had declined proceeding, it was his intention to avail himself of the opportunity to bring the subject of Tithes, and the Church Establishment of Ireland before the House. It was well known, that he had long ago given notice of a motion on this subject; but he had delayed it in deference to his majesty's ministers, till he should see what measures they would bring forward.
1148
l
1149
always bearing in mind, that those who had vested interests in that property were justly entitled to enjoy them, That was a point on which he wished distinctly to be understood.
1150
1151
*
*
1152
*
1153
l
l
l
l
l
s
s
s
1154
s
s
s
l
s
d
s
s
d
s
s
s
d
s
d
s
s
1155
s
s
d
l
l
s
s
s
1156
1157
1158
l
l
"To the right hon. lieut.-gen. lord
1159
(Signed) "E. HUNTER,
"W. TWIBILL,
"Churchwardens."
1160
*
*
1161
*
l
l
*
† Vol. I, c. 14, page 181.
1162
1163
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
1164
s
l
s
l
l
l
s
s
1165
1166
1167
1168
l
l
l
l
l
1169
l
l
l
l
Money Florins.
Florins.
The Lutheran Confession
255,472
Victuals converted into Money
288,846,
Calvinist Confession
827
Victuals converted into Money
1,226
Catholic Confession
188,322
Victuals converted into Money
41,694
Stipends to a foundation for females
6,760
Together, 786,147 florins, or about 37,348
l
In the kingdom of Bavaria;—the population, 3,560,000;—religions, Catholic, Lutheran, and Calvinist, all equal; clergy all paid by the state;—In the budget for 1819 were the following entries;—For worship 1,195,000 florins; For education, 692,000; in all, about 132,777
l
In the grand duchy of Baden; with a population, in 1819, of 1,019,785; religions, Catholic, Lutheran, and Calvinist, all equal; and the clergy all paid by the state;—In the budget for 1819 were the following entries; viz. for particular institutions for Worship, 33,964 florins; For universities, gymnasiums, &c. 110,978 florins; Salaries of clergy and teachers, 318,000 florins; Support of churches and school-houses, 50,000 florins; in all, 512,942 florins; equal to about 36,333
l
1170
In several of the cantons of Switzerland, the religion was exclusively Catholic; and in others exclusively Calvinist: in some cantons both religions were allowed. In all the cantons great changes were introduced by the French Revolution. In most of them, the tithes (where tithes existed), and the church property, were sold, and salaries to the parochial clergy assigned out of the proceeds. Proprietors of titheable lands were allowed to purchase up their tithes at a moderate valuation.
In the Austrian dominions the church had large revenues, which the emperors charged heavily whenever they wanted money. The emperor Joseph seized the whole property of several convents, churches, &c.
In the kingdom of Wirtemberg;—the population 1,395,462; the Catholic, Lutheran, and Calvinist religions, all equal, and the clergy all paid by the state; in the budget for 1820, presented by the finance minister to the States of Wirtemberg, the clergy and schools were classed as follows:—
sterling. He had been thus particular in stating how the church property had been regarded, and how the clergy were supported, in other countries, in order to do away the impression which the statements of the right hon. gentlemen opposite, might make on well meaning persons, that there would be danger to the religion of the country, by meddling in any way with the tithes or church property in Ireland. Precedents so numerous as to what had been done in other countries, with advantage to the state, and to religion, proved that we might do the same, if we should think proper, without apprehension of any bad consequences: and the more recent example of the tithe a agistment in Ireland deserved particular attention. If the income of the Irish bishopricks were, as he believed it would.
1171
The abuses in the distribution of church preferment, in the frequency of non-residences, and pluralities, would be seen by a reference to the returns laid before the House last session. He had made an abstract of each diocese for that purpose, and would state, as examples, some instances in Armagh, Derry, Cashel and Emly, which he considered deserving special notice, and likely to give some idea of the extent of the livings and non-residence; but no public documents, he (Mr. H.) knew of, would afford the House any correct information as to the value of the church property, properly so called, forming the chief income of the bishops and the dignified clergy.
In the diocese of Armagh there were 50 resident rectors and vicars, and 11 non-resident; there were 17 curates resident. Of the pluralists, sir Thomas Foster held the union of three rectories in Armagh, of 4,670 acres extent, with 17 acres of glebe and house. He had another living of one rectory and two vicarages in Dublin diocese, containing 12,800 acres, with 30 acres glebe and a house, where the duty was performed by a curate at a salary of only 75
l
l
l
1172
l
l
s
In the diocese of Derry, there were 32 resident rectors, and 15 non-resident; there were six curates resident and one absent. James Saurin, the dean, had an union made by patent in the reign of James 1st, of three parishes, of an extent of 89,600 acres, near the city of Londonderry. There were also three perpetual curacies, but no return by which their extent can be estimated. This benefice contains three glebes, one of 600 acres, one of 150 acres, within one mile, and one of 600 acres, within three miles of Londonderry. The duties of that large district were performed by the clean, assisted by 6 curates. The income of that living must he immense. The rev. William Knox had two rectories and vicarages, with 84 acres of glebe, and two houses, but no extent of rectories returned. The duty done by curates, at 75
l
l
l
1173
s
In the diocese of Cashel and Duly there were 23 rectors resident, and 15 non-resident; 7 vicars resident, and 7 non-resident; 4 curates resident, and one absent. R. G. Armstrong had rectorial and vicarial tithes of the union of Ballintemple of four parishes, containing 5,868 acres, a glebe of 20 acres, and a house. He was also vicar of Rathcole in Ossory, and had vicarial tithes of 3,810 acres: the duty was performed by a curate of an adjoining parish for 20
l
l
s
1174
l
l
l.,
l
l
l
l
1175
It was evident from the inquiries which were directed to be made, in 1806 and 1819, that his majesty desired to be informed of the extent of each benefice; but, whether the fourth query was not precise enough, or from some other cause, the bishop of Elphin was the only one, in the 22 dioceses, who had complied with that order. In that diocese the returns appeared to have been taken in acres from the church allotments; but, from not specifying the kind of land, it was impossible to form any estimate of the value of these few benefices returned as too small to afford comfort to the incumbent; for instance, Killion and Killronan, were returned as an union of 6,347 acres, the incumbent non-resident for want of a glebe; and the whole benefice was stated as
too small
1176
l
It was not merely from the benefices being held by the dignitaries of the church, a practice so general in every diocese, that the incomes of the resident clergymen were so small, as to render it necessary to unite several parishes into one benefice, to make up a proper income: But it appeared, by the returns, that several of the bishops still received a proportion of the tithes from benefices. In the report of the bishop of Clonfert and Kilmacduagh this practice was fully explained; where, out of 59 parishes, the whole number in the diocese, 44 paid the
quarta pars
1177
Although, from the vague manner in which the returns were given, it was possible that some mistakes might be detected in the statements he had made, yet sufficient abuses were pointed out to show the necessity of obtaining fuller information on all these subjects. Unless the House went to the root of the evil, it could not obtain the object it had in view. There could be no content in a poor country where the church income was so large, and so unequally distributed; where there were so many non-residents, and, more particularly, where those, who chiefly contributed to that income, did not belong to the church they were compelled to support.
He begged pardon for thus long intruding upon the attention of the House; but he felt, that, with the knowledge of these facts, he should have failed in his duty, if he had not proceeded with a specific motion, after the hon. gentleman had abandoned his. Would Ireland be satisfied with a bill, to permit the leasing of tithes, if all parties agreed? Would England be satisfied with it? Was it not then necessary something more efficient should be done, something calculated to pacify that country? It would be vain to expect peace in that unhappy country, so long as this question of tithes remained unsettled; and the first step should be to ascertain the whole revenue of the church establishment in Ireland, the particular value, and state of each See, and by what right the dignitaries of the church were receiving so large a portion of the revenue from the benefices, leaving the poor resident curates, to be provided for out of the public purse. Unless they embarked in this comprehensive inquiry, it would be in vain to hope for any redress of evils which had been centuries in maturing their fruits. He begged once more to guard himself against the imputation of meddling with any man's
1178
Mr. Ellice
, in rising to second the motion of his hon. friend, could not refrain from the expression of his gratitude to him, for forcing upon the attention of the House this most important questions He came into the House prepared to support the motion of his hon. friend opposite (Mr. Daly), and he regretted that that motion had been abandoned. He knew, indeed, the deep interest which his hon. friend always took in the affaire of his native country, and the integrity of his views; but he lamented that a question so deeply involving the interests of Ireland Should be postponed by gentlemen who were so much more nearly interested in the condition of their own people. He was the more strongly impressed with the necessity of adopting some conciliatory measures for Ireland, when he found they were called upon to re-enact the frightful and odious insurrection bill, for still coercing that unfortunate country. When he saw such a state of things it struck him, as an Englishman, that if his constituents were suffering all the horrors of famine, oppression and misery, which now afflicted that unhappy country, it would become his imperative and uncompromising duty to force upon government, even if he gave his general confidence to any set of ministers, the immediate necessity of instituting an inquiry into the grievances of the people, and at least of affording that redress, which a reform of this odious system promised, while they
1179
1180
1181
1182
Mr. Dennis Browne
said, he was a warm friend to the principle of a commutation of tithes, but had never heard a speech so well calculated as that of the hon. mover; to destroy those feelings which happily prevailed, for the purpose of promoting so desirable an alteration in the tithe system. He therefore cautioned those who were determined to press that consideration upon parliament early in the ensuing session, how they listened to the hon. member, or associated themselves with the revolutionary sentiments which he had just avowed. That hon. member had disclaimed the principle of commutation, as not being enough for his purpose; but nobody besides himself had ever whole tenure of the church property of Ireland. He earnestly implored his countrymen. To vote against the motion, which was calculated so completely to mar their own word, and utterly to disconnect themselves from any liability of being deemed participators in those revolutionary and monstrous measures which the hon. member had propounded.
Sir J. Newport
said, that, in the exercise of his duty, he had more than once had to record his dissent from the proceedings of successive governments of Ireland, in consequence of their leaving unremedied many of the evils which agitated the public mind. He was induced to make this remark, because he had heard that evening some gentlemen express their readiness to leave the matter for the present undiscussed, on the sort of promise which had been given on the part of government, to come forward next session, either with a statement of the measures which they might in the mean time have adopted, relative to a change in the system of tithes, or with a fair acknowledgment that none such had been determined upon. His objection to all this was, that upwards of five years ago, the noble earl at the head of his majesty's government had declared in the other House, that government had then for some time had the same subject under their consideration, and that, al-
1183
l
1184
l
l
l
1185
1186
Mr. Goulburn
rose to express his decided disapprobation, both of the original motion and of the amendment. The object of the amendment was to pledge the House to take the subject of tithes in Ireland into its consideration early in the next session, with a view to assign to the clergy a full and liberal equivalent, fairly assessed and levied. He would not then enter into a discussion whether it was possible, considering all the various and complicated interests that were involved in this subject, to come to any satisfactory system of commutation But be was sure that every gentleman would admit, that if such a system were practicable, it would require great and serious consideration; it would demand full and patient inquiry, and that it would be necessary to make provision and arrangements for the equivalents for tithes, which were to be considered in very different points of view, because they were applied to parishes placed under very different circumstances. With regard to the abstract question of the commutation of tithes, if it was proposed to proceed upon the principle of justice—if a full and fair equivalent was to be given for the property to be taken away, and if the offer were voluntarily accepted by the clergv—
1187
1188
1189
1190
1191
l
1192
Mr. Daly
stated the circumstances under which he had withdrawn his motion and supported the amendment because he preferred a pledge from parliament to the partial measure brought forward by the secretary for Ireland.
Mr. S. Rice
referred the House to the distinct pledge given by Mr. Perceval on this subject, as well as to a similar one made by the present lord Maryborough some years since, on a question from the hon. member for Queen's county. He
1193
Mr. Secretary Peel
did not believe, that the present motion was calculated to promote tranquillity in Ireland; for if parliament were to give such a pledge, and should aftewards be unable to redeem it, the worst consequences might result from the disappointment of the hopes which it would excite. He objected generally to the principle of giving pledges in one session as to the course which parliament would pursue in another. He had given much consideration to this subject, and he felt himself bound to state, lest his opinions should be misconceived, that a commutation of tithes was liable, he would not say to insuperable, but to very great objections. He protested against the whole statement assumed in the speech of the hon. member for Montrose. Scraps of newspapers, cases in courts of law, and petitions presented to that House, were not authority to which he was disposed to pay much respect. He entirely protested against the principles laid down by the hon. member.
Mr. Brougham
contended, that all the grounds of resistance to the motion stated by the right hon. gentleman furnished the strongest materials on which to found the propriety of its being carried. The ministers of the Crown afforded no hope as to any specific relief. All they pro-
1194
Mr. Hutchinson
said, that the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Peel) apprehended danger from the possibility of a premature pledge by that House being misconceived in Ireland. Was there not however a much more aggravated danger to be apprehended, in the state of distraction and despair to which Ireland was reduced, when the people of that ill-treated country learnt that the House had refused the pledge? If that was
1195
Mr. Plunkett
said, that the amendment proposed by his right hon. friend appeared to him to be both premature and dangerous. His hon. and learned friend opposite (Mr. Brougham) had stated, that the members of that House had placed the stamp of their rejection upon the proposed bill. He knew nothing of such a rejection, but he was sure that if an unjust cry was not raised against it, it would be productive of benefit to Ireland. But he should like to know what measure was to proceed from the wisdom of the gentlemen opposite. What plan were they inclined to bring forward? His right hon. friend (sir J. Newport) admitted that the clergy were not too amply paid; but the hon. member for Montrose denied that, and said that they were too largely and too liberally paid. How could they then agree upon any measure? He maintained that principles both dangerous and alarming had been laid down in that House that night, amounting to nothing less than spoliation and robbery. [Cheers.] He was glad that that position was cheered. What! would it be denied that tithes acted on the same basis as rents? Was the lay impropriator entitled to tithes?—["Yes!" from Mr. Hume.] Then upon what principle deny that tithe to the church which was allowed to the lay impropriator? He wished to address his right hon. friend opposite. His mind was above the vulgar arithmetic which would stoop to countenance such an assertion. He was sure that his right hon. friend was incapable of maintaining such doctrines. If they were true with respect to tithes, they were true with respect to the land-holder, and the fund-holder, and to every corporation: and that which was to be commenced by spoliation and robbery was to be effected by rebellion and resistance. [Cheers.] The hon. members opposite cheered; did they
1196
Mr. D. Browne
said, he should vote for the amendment.
Sir N. Colthurst
would also vote for the amendment, but disavowed all participation in the doctrines laid down by the hon. member for Montrose.
Colonel French
entirely concurred in the amendment, but conceived that the Irish ought first to be permitted to try the operation of the present measure.
Mr. Dawson
conceived the amendment was premature.
Sir E. O'Brien
supported it.
Mr. R. Martin
meant to vote against it, because he relied upon the justice and wisdom of the Irish government to investigate with all possible attention this momentous subject. They had already proposed a unanimously admitted good; and he trusted they would not stop their career of benevolent legislation.
Mr. Hume
said, he had little to reply to, as he always considered his case made out when, in the absence of arguments, the hon. gentlemen opposite had recourse to hard words. He was, in some degree, prepared for such a course; but he would remind hon. gentlemen, that a man could often see a mote in his brother's eye when he could not perceive a beam in his own. He would remind the hon. and learned gentleman who accused him of spoliation and robbery, that if to meddle with the tithes and to take them away from the clergy was a spoliation and robbery, he himself had, on a former occasion, concurred in the robbery of the church, by sitting in that Irish parliament which took away the tithe of agistment, and also in the British parliament which confirmed that act. So had the right hon. member near him (Mr. Denis Browne). He had
1197
The House then divided: For sir J. Newport's motion 65. For the other orders of the day; 72. Majority 7.
List of the Minority.
Bernal, R.
Forde, M.
Brougham, H.
Grattan, J.
Bennet, hon. H. G.
Graham, S.
Browne, Denis
Glenorchy, lord
Browne, Dom.
Grant, J. P.
Browne, J.
Griffith, J. W.
Benett, John
Hume, J.
Butterworth, J.
Hutchinson C. H.
Creevey, T.
Hill, lord A.
Clifton, visc.
James, W.
Colbourne, N. R.
Kingsborough, visc.
Cole, sir C.
Leycester, R.
Calvert, N.
Lamb, hon. G.
Calthorpe, hon. F.
Latouche, R.
Cuffe, J.
Lennard, T. B.
Colthurst, sir N.
Monck, J. B.
Duncannon, visc.
Martin, J.
Dundas, hon. T.
Maberly, W. L.
Daly, J.
Maberly, J.
Ebrington, visc.
Newport, sir J.
Ellice, E.
Normanby, visc.
Fergusson, sir R.
O'Brien, sir E.
Fitzgerald, lord W.
O'Grady, S.
Fitzroy, lord C.
Philips, G. jun.
1198
Price, R.
Smith, J.
Parnell, sir H.
Townshend, lord C.
Power, R.
Wood, alderman
Palmer, C. F.
Western, C. C.
Robinson, sir G.
White, Luke
Ricardo, D.
Williams, W.
Rowley, sir W.
Whitbread, S.
Robarts, G.
TELLERS.
Stewart, W. (Ty.)
Calcraft, J.
Smith, S.
Rice, T. S.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Thursday, June 20.
MARRIAGE ACT AMENDMENT BILL.
On the motion of lord Ellenborough, the House resolved into a committee on this bill.
Lord Redesdale
stated the purport of some further clauses which he intended to move. Their object was, to prevent fraudulent marriages, either by licence or banns. If persons married under false names, he proposed that, their identity being proved, the marriages should stand good. An affidavit to be made on taking, out banns as well as licenses, and perjury in either case to be punished. The affidavits for banns to be made before a magistrate, and the expense of the proceeding to be only one shilling. His wish certainly was, that they should be granted free of expense.
Lord Ellenborough
expressed his gratitude to his learned friend for his valuable suggestions, which he was most happy to adopt into the bill.
Lord Redesdale
expressed his apprehension that the retrospective clause would have a tendency to introduce new subjects of litigation into families.
The Lord Chancellor
never could agree to the retrospective clause, unless other qualifications were introduced into it, and feared that great mischief would ensue unless care was taken to protect the rights of property.
The Bishop of Chester
gave notice, that, early next session, he would move an amendment to the marriage act. He did not do so now because the object he had in view was totally different from that which the present bill embraced. His object was, to authorize the celebration, of marriages in the chapels of populous parishes, where they could not take place now.
The amendments were then agreed to and the bill, as amended, was ordered to be printed.
1199
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Thursday, June 20 1822.
CANADA GOVERNMENT AND TRADE BILL.
Mr. Wilmot
brought in a bill "to make more effectual provision for the Government of the Provinces of Lower and Upper Canada, and to regulate the Trade thereof."
Mr. Ellice
considered the bill of great importance, and suggested, that the discussion on it should be taken in the committee upon some open night.
Mr. Wilmot
approved of the suggestion of the hon. member, and would fix the committal of the bill for the 1st of July.
Sir J. Mackintosh
agreed, that the bill was a most important measure, since its object was, to consolidate the two provinces of Canada, by effecting a union between them; and incorporating their legislatures. He did not mean to object to the course of proceeding suggested; but, without bringing into question the competence of parliament to pass such a bill, or the convenience which might be expected to result from it, he felt an insuperable objection to agree to the measure without affording ample time to the people of the provinces, and the legislatures by which they were represented, to express their opinions with respect to it. He felt alarmed at passing a bill affecting the most sacred rights of the people of the provinces at so late a period of the session. It was the practice of the House, not to pass a private bill affecting the rights of only two individuals before the parties had been sufficiently informed of its nature; surely, then, it would not sanction a measure for uniting two provinces, without affording to the inhabitants the fullest time for expressing their Opinions with regard to it. He would oppose the passing of the bill during the present session.
Mr. Wilmot
regretted that the hon. and learned gentleman should pledge himself to oppose the bill before he had heard the peculiar circumstances which rendered it necessary. He did not think it was necessary to apply to the people of the provinces for their consent to the measure, since their present constitution was derived from an act of the British legislature. He trusted that when the hon. and learned gentleman came to hear the statement which he (Mr. W.) intended to submit to the House, he would withdraw his objections to the passing of the bill.
The bill was read a first time.
1200
SCOTCH JURIES BILL.
Mr. Kennedy
moved the second reading of this bill; and called upon the lord advocate to prove that the measure proposed was unwise and uncalled for. His objections to the existing mode of appointing criminal juries in Scotland were briefly these. In the first place, the lord advocate had the power of committing for trial, without the intervention of a grand jury. Secondly, in the high court of justiciary, the selection of petty juries lay almost entirely with the judge. The sheriffs, before circuit, sent lists from their various counties to the judge; the judge from those lists, nominated the 45 jurymen who should meet him at each assize town for the purposes of business; and the very same judge afterward, in court, selected from his own list of 45, the jury of 15 by which prisoners were to be tried. The third objection was, that neither prosecutor nor prisoner, as the law now stood, had the power of challenge except for cause. There was not that right of challenge so necessary to the purity of trial—the challenge for supposed prejudice, favour, or affection. If these practices were objectionable in the high court of justiciary, in the minor, or sheriff's court, their operation was still more dangerous. The sheriff, who was judge of that court, selected the jury altogether: he made out the first list, struck the 45, and selected the 15: after this, the verdict was only the decision of a majority; and yet there was no challenge, except for cause, allowed the parties. In Edinburgh, where the sittings of the court of justiciary were permanent, the principle was the same: the judge picked the jury of 15 from lists supplied to him by the clerk of justiciary. The measure by which he proposed to remedy these evils was extremely simple, though two-fold in its operation. He meant to deprive the judge of the power of selection from the 45, leaving the choice of the 15 to be determined by ballot; and, of course, as a corollary upon that proposition, the right of challenge for favour would follow. The hon. member then complained of the opposition which his bill had received from the lord advocate, and read a circular which that learned person had transmitted to the sheriffs of counties just previous to the head courts of May, 1820. In that circular, the lord advocate invited county discussions upon the measure, and intimated that his own opinion was by no
1201
1202
ex officio
1203
1204
The Lord Advocate
observed, that the object of the bill was, to render the proceedings in criminal cases in Scotland more similar to the English practice. Now, although such a proposition might be good in theory, yet, unless it was shown that great and serious evils arose from the course now pursued, he thought no sufficient ground was laid for so material a change. Nothing appeared more just than that counsel should be allowed to prisoners on their trial; yet the experience of courts of law, showed that no practical injustice was sustained by disallowing them. The present system in Scotland had existed for a length of Lime which it was now difficult to trace, and he had never heard of its causing the slightest oppression. By the articles of the union, each country was to retain its own laws; and though he did not of course doubt the power of parliament, yet this was a reason for its not interfering on a question which related exclusively to the advantage of Scotland against the sentiments of the people of that country, If the people of Scotland were unanimously against the reform meditated, he thought parliament would hardly adopt the plan recommended. When the bill was brought in, there was not a single petition from Scotland on the subject. He had communicated copies of the bill to the Scotch counties, which held their meetings on the 30th of April, with his opinion respecting it; and, with the exception of Lanark, every county, had manifested a desire that no alteration should take place. The judges were perfectly willing to surrender their powers, if it should be the opinion of parliament that they could not retain them for the benefit of the public. The gentry of Scotland, he was well assured, were averse to any change of the criminal law, and believed that other projects of reform were in view—a belief that was certainly countenanced by some parts of the hon. gentleman's speech. The Scotch system of criminal law would stand the test of comparison with any other. Its chief tendency was to deal mercifully with the accused party: and of this truth he could not furnish a. more decisive illustration
1205
Sir J. Mackintosh
observed, that the objections of the learned lord to the bill were on two grounds, general and specific. The general grounds were, in the first place; that the proposed reformation of the Scotch law was founded on theory. This was an argument by means of which the enemies of the most salutary reformation were accustomed to disguise their hostility to common sense. It was the observation of a great wit, that no man was an enemy to reason until reason had become an enemy to him. He believed there were no spontaneous enemies to reason; but when men were interested in opposing it, they used hard words to cover the design, and one of these was the word theory, which was very frequently used of late as argument against every plan of improvement. In the second place, the learned lord objected to the bill on the ground that there was no distinct grievance alleged or proved; and, in the third place, he stated that this measure was not called for by the people of Scotland, and indeed was objected to by them. Now, he would remind the learned lord, that all those objections had been made before, in opposition to that great act of reformation, the abolition of the heritable jurisdictions, and had been set aside by lord Hardwicke, and over-ruled by the British parliament, to the great advantage of the country which experienced the beneficial effects of their enlightened decision. He then read some
1206
1207
1208
"While e'en the peasant boasts these rights to scan,
"And learns to venerate himself as man."
Lord Binning
said, that in the speech which the House had just heard, it had been rather insinuated that an old and intimate friend of his had mixed himself up with a late unfortunate affair, in such a way, that on a recent trial the individual in question (lord Meadowbank) was necessarily absent from the justiciary bench. This insinuation rested on a letter, in
1209
Mr. Twiss
said, he would support the bill the more readily, because it stood alone and apart, and did not necessarily imply that any further changes would be the consequence. The noble lord had adverted to the preliminary advantages enjoyed by a criminal in Scotland; but if at the time of trial he could not obtain a fair and impartial jury by means of the right of peremptory
1210
Mr. secretary Peel
agreed, that the only principle that ought to guide the House was, whether the administration of justice in Scotland could be improved? He was disposed to think that it was not fit to alter the old system of judicial selection; but the more firmly it was adhered to, the more proper did it seem to grant peremptory challenges. He should, therefore, vote for the second reading, and in the committee an amendment could be proposed in order to preserver that part of the existing law with which the House ought not to interfere. As selection, he doubted much whether a better jury might not be chosen by the judge thaw was likely to be obtained by ballot.
The bill was read a second time.
IRISH BUTTER TRADE.
On the order of the day for going into a committee on the Irish Butter Trade,
Sir N. Colthurst
said, he was extremely sorry that this question had not been brought forward by some member of government. In his opinion, protection ought to be extended to every branch of agricultural produce; and, when it was allowed, it ought to be made adequate, and effectual to the intended object, otherwise it was mere delusion. In 1816, a right hon. gentleman (Mr. Robinson. proposed a duty of 25
s.
s.
1211
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
Mr. Hudson Gurney
said, he was glad to find, from the speech of the hon. gentleman, that the government had at last begun to resist the exorbitant demands of the Irish. It seemed to have passed as a matter universally understood, that the people of England were to pay every thing, and the people of Ireland nothing. [Hear, head] It was notorious, that the rents extorted from the peasantry of Ireland, were higher than any that were paid in England; and, to keep up these rents, we were now called upon to tax the butter of the citizens of London. He remembered voting in a minority of five against a duty on the importation of rape seed, in the discussion on which a right hon. baronet below him (sir J. Newport) had gravely argued, that it was right so to tax the clothiers of Yorkshire, as it might have some tendency towards inducing somebody to drain some bog with a long
1212
Mr. Robinson
said, that though he meant to oppose the proposition, to was on grounds very different from those just stated by the hon. gentleman. He did not object to this proposition, because he felt any unwillingness to give protection to the manufactures and agriculture of Ireland, but because he thought the circumstances of the case did not authorize protection farther than it had been carried. When, in 1816, he proposed the present duty, he certainly did say, that it was not intended for revenue, but for protection; and if it had not had the effect of a protecting duty, the same grounds on which he then brought it forward would naturally induce him to propose an addition, to accomplish the object he had in view. But that object had been attained as far as it was possible; because, however lower the price of butter might now be than it was some years ago, that article was not the only one that had diminished in value. Every species of agricultural produce had experienced a similar fall of price. And it should be observed, that the foreign butter, to which the duty applied, had also decreased in value; so much so, indeed, that, looking to the existing duty, with a reference to the reduced price of the article, it would be found equal to an impost of 50 per cent.; and if the hon. baronet's proposition were carried, the duty would be then equal to about 75 per cent. If the butter trade of Ireland could not support itself with such a protection as this, he knew not how it could be supported. With respect to the importation of butter from Ireland, so far from being less than heretofore, it was for the last two years, greater than it had been at any period. The importation of
1213
Sir J. Newport
complained of the observations which had fallen from the hon. member for Newton. What had that hon. member stated? That the House was constantly in the habit of granting relaxations to Ireland, more than to any other part of the empire. He denied this assertion, and would contend, that the relaxation of taxes to Great Britain was much more extensive in proportion than that which had been made to Ireland. This was proved by the report of the committee of 1815, which stated, that, since the Union, the taxation of Ireland had increased in a larger proportion, including the war taxes, than that of Great Britain. The hon. member had said, that he would concede any thing to make the peasantry of Ireland comfortable, but he would withhold every boon from the gentry. Now, he believed that the most effectual way of rendering the peasantry happy and comfortable was, to enable the gentry to spend their time amongst them [Hear, hear!]. He did not wish to use harsh terms, but he must say, that those observations had been most inconsiderately applied by the hon. gentleman. With respect to the question itself, they were told, that the consumption of butter had increased. But if four-fifths of that consumption was in favour of Holland instead of Ireland, then the present duty was not a protection, in the sense originally understood. Ireland, it should be observed, had but one manufacture to send to England—her other exports were native to her soil. With that one article she had to pay to England for her manufactures, and to pay rents to that large body of absentees who spent their wealth in this country. In consequence of the system that had been pursued, the exports of woollen from this
1214
l.,
Mr. Ricardo
said, the Irish gentlemen complained of want of protection, but what their rule of protection was he could not imagine. In this instance they had a protecting duty of 25
s.
Mr. S. Rice
said, that, borne down as Ireland was with excessive taxation, he did not think the principles of political economy, however true in the abstract, could be applied to her. It was true, that a great deal of butter had been imported from Ireland into this country, but it was lying in the merchants' warehouses unsaleable. If protection was not afforded to the butter trade, Ireland would become
1215
Mr. T. Wilson
concurred in thinking that the principle advanced by Mr. Ricardo, was not applicable to the present state of this country, and remarked that the butter shipped from Holland was of a better quality than that which came from Ireland.
Mr. Western
reminded the House, that when Adam Smith wrote, England could produce corn and butter as cheaply as any foreign country. The excess of taxation prevented us now from maintaining the same competition, and hence it was that protection became necessary. It was extraordinary that gentlemen should prefer a trade with foreign countries to a trade with Ireland, when it was clear that the latter course would increase the consumption of our manufactures, and thereby promote the prosperity of the country.
Mr. Huskisson
assured the House that he did not prefer the interest of foreign countries to his own, and that if he thought this additional protection would be of real and permanent benefit to Ireland, and of less injury to the country generally, he would give it his support. The hon. gentleman had compared the means of Ireland with those of Holland in the production of this article. Now, the fact was, that Holland was the most taxed country in Europe, not even excepting England. He objected to the present measure, because it would operate no relief to Ireland, and the effect of it would be, not to increase consumption, but, by raising the price of a bad article, to drive it altogether out of consumption. In the present state of Europe, it was peculiarly incumbent upon this country not to set foreigners the example of imposing additional restrictions on trade, but to convince them that it was our fixed determination to pursue that liberal system of commercial intercourse, which had been so auspiciously commenced.
Mr. Hutchinson
said, that the principle of protection was that under which the commerce of this country had flourished. He did not, however, dissent from the general principles of the hon. member for Portarlington, but he could not help regretting that they should be applied at a moment when they could not but be detrimental to a suffering and impoverished Country.
1216
Mr. Monck
expressed his conviction that the only mode of affording effectual relief to the agricultural interest was, not by raising the price of commodities, but by reducing taxation. The protection on the article of butter already amounted to nearly 60 per cent, and he never would consent to go on taxing the consumer for the sole benefit of the producer.
The motion was negatived.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Friday, June 21.
ROMAN CATHOLIC PEER'S BILL.
The Duke of Portland
rose to move the second reading of this bill. In doing this he could not refrain from reminding their lordships of what had been the state of Roman Catholic peers before the acts which the present bill proposed to repeal had passed. They would recollect that an act which passed in the reign of queen Elizabeth had excluded Roman Catholic members from the House of Commons. At this early period of the Reformation, when plots were supposed to exist against the new religion, it was not thought necessary to exclude Catholic peers from the House of Peers. In the reign of Charles 2nd, when the country was alarmed with charges of conspiracy, an act passed, by which Catholic peers excluded from their seats. This act of the 30th of Charles 2nd was afterwards repealed, and that of the 1st of William and Mary substituted in its stead; but if a jealousy of Roman Catholics was necessary in those times, it could not be contended that the same jealousy ought to exist now. At any rate, the jealousy ought not to be greater now than it was in the reign of Elizabeth, when the power of the church of Rome was in full vigour. The noble duke quoted the act of queen Elizabeth, which stated, that her majesty had confidence in the lords of parliament, and therefore that the act was not made to extend to them. Thus the law continued, allowing Catholic peers to sit in parliament till the 30th of Charles 2nd. During the whole period it never was objected to them that they acted in any manner hostile to the established religion. He could not, therefore, conjecture what reasons were to be urged against the present bill, and consequently could not be expected to answer them. In the time of Charles 2nd the jealousy and fears which prevailed afforded some pretence for the
1217
de novo
Lord Colchester
said:—My lords; differing entirely from the noble duke upon the important measure which he has brought under our consideration, I am desirous of stating briefly to your lordships, the grounds upon which I must endeavour to arrest its further progress. If, indeed, this day were set apart for declaring the sense of parliament upon the high and distinguished character of the Roman Catholic peers of the United Kingdom, the illustrious exploits of their ancestors, or their own personal merits, I beg leave to assure your lordships, with the most perfect sincerity, that there is no man living would concur more cheerfully or zealously than myself, in the expression or recognition of every sentiment which could redound to their praise and honour.
1218
**
*Stat. Eliz. 23, 29, 35.
† Strickland's and Swale's cases. Come. Journ. IX. 393, 501.
‡ 30 Car. II. st. 2.
§ In M. Fagel's Letter 10 Mr. Stuart. 1687.
║1 W. M. sess. 2, c. 1.
¶ St. 5 Anne, c. 8.
**
1219
*
*
1220
*
*
† Marriage act, 26 Geo. II. c. 33 excepting Jews and Quakers.
‡ Irish stats. 9 W. III. c. 1. § 8; 8 Anne, c. 3; 21, 22 G. III. c. 62; 35 Geo. III c. 21; 40 G. III c. 85; English stats. 31 Geo. III. c. 32, § 17.
1221
*
1222
*
† Lord Clarendon, Discourse on Religion and Policy; p. 667, 679.
1223
*
† Hist. des Variations, Sixiéme Advertissement.
‡ Circular Letter of Pius VII, to the Cardinals. 5th Feb. 1808.
§ 5th Feb, 1808.
1224
*
† Envoy of Prussia.
‡ Prince of Denmark.
§ See "Miraculous Appearance of the Images of the Blessed Virgin opening her eyes in various parts of the Roman state, between 9th July, 1796, and January, 1797, published at Rome, 1797, by D. Gio. Marchetti, Esaminatore Apostolico; with 962 Attestations, by persons of the highest rank and credit. 1 vol. 8vo. Also, The Miraculous Extases of the present pope at Savona, in June, August, and September, 1811, engraved and circulated throughout Italy.
1225
1226
Lord Erskine
said:—I have listened, my lords, to my noble friend with great attention and respect. I give him full credit for the state of the Catholic world in the papal countries he has so lately
1227
1228
at St. Omer's in France,
1229
1230
The Lord Chancellor
was of opinion, that this bill demanded nothing more or less than unlimited concession to the Roman Catholics. Give the Catholics this bill, and they could resist nothing here after which they ought to resist. If he could hesitate one single moment to grant any thing which the Roman Catholics could request or desire, provided the Protestant church was secure, he should act
1231
1232
1233
1234
1235
1236
Earl Grey
admitted, that the learned earl had introduced into the present discussion a great portion of legal learning; but its application to the question now before the House had not, he thought, been very distinctly pointed out by the learned earl. He would begin where the learned earl had concluded. He would say, that to the liberties of his country, as established at the Revolution, he was as firmly attached as the learned earl; and if he could see, in this bill, the most remote tendency to the destruction of any of the necessary securities for the maintenance of those liberties, no man would more eagerly resist such a measure than he would. But, believing that this exclusion was not the principle on which their ancestors had acted at the Revolution, but was, in reality, an exception, to the general principle; and seeing, the
1237
1238
onus
1239
1240
nem. con.
1241
1242
1243
1244
The Earl of Liverpool
said, it was on every account desirable to discuss this bill on its own merits, with as little reference as possible to the more extended measures. The noble earl had said, that this bill not meant as a step to the general question. Supposing, then, it were to exclude that general question, he would ask whether it was fit, if it passed, that nothing else should be done? For no measure could be more mischievous to the Catholics than passing this bill, if it were not intended to go further. Those, therefore, who had hitherto been most favourable to
1245
1246
1247
1248
pari passu;
1249
1250
1251
Lord Grenville
said, that his noble friend had called upon those who, on former occasions had been the friends of the general measure, to consider whether any advantage could be derived to it from the success of the present bill. As one of those who had always been favourable to the concession of the Catholic claims, he answered, that, from passing this bill, the greatest of all benefits would accrue—the benefit of doing justice. In comparison with this, he set at nought all which they had heard in the way of precedent and authority; all the statements and the documents which had been quoted; all the penal enactments for which the statute-book had been resorted to. His answer to all this was, "Be just, and fear not." If it was true, that six individuals only were aggrieved, or that this bill was even brought in to meet the case of one individual, and whether that individual was the highest of the lowest say, as he now said—their lordships were not at liberty to legislate upon what next might come to pass, or to speculate, hypothetically, upon what next might come to pass, or to speculate, hypothetically, upon what measure they were to take in consequence. Let their lordships hesitate as the might, here it was impossible that they could stop. With respect to the general question, his opinions upon it were borne out by those of the wisest men of this age. Their lordships had it in their power, by looking at it in its true light, and by divesting their minds of all that visionary terror which had that night been attempted to be thrown around it—to confer upon the British empire the greatest imaginable benefit. This question he viewed as a question of distribu-
1252
1253
*
*See Vol. V. p. 337, New Series.
1254
1255
Lord Redesdale
contended, that the right to exclude Catholics from the House of Peers, was as strong and as
1256
Lord Holland
said, that before he proceeded to answer the observations of those peers who had spoken against the measure, he wished the 71st standing order of the House should he read. [The order was accordingly read.—It provided, that no oath should be imposed, by bill, or others wise, upon a peer, with penalty attached in case of refusal, that he should lose his place in parliament, or privilege of debating.] Placed upon the only footing on which the House could properly decide it, the question came precisely to this—whether the time was come when it would be safe, just, or proper for the House to restore to their Catholic fellow peers the unconditional exercise of their privileges? It stood recorded upon the standing orders
1257
onus
1258
*See Parl. Hist. Vol. 35, p. 161.
1259
1260
1261
ipso facto
1262
The House then divided: Contents—present, 80, proxies, 49–129. Not-contents—present, 97, proxies, 74–171. Majority against the motion, 42.
List of the Minority, and also of the Majority.
MINORITY.
DUKES.
Darnley
Sussex
Cork
Somerset
Lauderdale
Grafton
Cassillis
Devonshire
Limerick
Portland
Ormonde
Buckingham
VISCOUNTS.
MARQUISSES.
Melville
Lansdown
Gordon
Bute
Granville
Downshire
Clifden
Conyngham
Downe
EARLS.
BARONS.
Derby
Clinton
Thanet
Decre
Essex
Howard of Eff.
Albemarle
Howard of Wal.
Jersey
Say and Sele
Oxford
King
Dartmouth
Grantham
Bristol
Holland
Cowper
Ducie
Harrington
Foley
Darlington
Berwick
Delawar
Braybrooke
Grosvenor
Amherst
Fortescue
Gage
Carnarvon
Grenville
Rosslyn
Auckland
Wilton
Dundas
Grey
Stewart, of Gar.
Harrowby
Calthorpe
St. Germains
Dunstanville
Morley
Lifford
Bradford
Alvanley
Aberdeen
Ellenborough
Elgin
Erskine
Roseberry
Crewe
Donoughmore
Stewart
Lucan
Cawdor
Caledon
Maryborough
Gosford
BISHOP.
Blessington
Norwich
Proxies.
DUKES.
Anglesea
Bedford
Queensbury
Brandon
Tweedale
Leinster
Sligo
Argyle
EARLS.
MARQUISSES.
Suffolk
Wellesley
Carlisle
Stafford
Waldegrave
1263
Guild ford
Duncan
Hardwicke
Anson
Ilchester
BARONS.
Spencer
Ponsonby
St. Vincent
Melbourne
Mulgrave
Sondes
Minto
Hawke
Somers
Ashburton
Charlemont
Sherbourne
Wicklow
Yarborough
Suffield
Abercromby
Kingston
Gwydir
Carrington
Glastonbury
Carysfort
Hutchinson
Granard
Lynedock
Breadalbane
Hill
VISCOUNTS.
Churchill
Hereford
Belhaven
Bolingbroke
MAJORITY.
DUKES.
Glasgow
York
Enniskillen
Richmond
Wemyss
Beaufort
Longford
Rutland
Falmouth
Northumberland
Kinnoul
Montrose
VISCOUNTS.
Wellington
Torrington.
MARQUESSES.
Hampden
Winchester
Sidney
Bath
Sidmouth
Cornwallis
Lake
Exeter
Exmouth
Northampton
BARONS.
Lothian
Willoughby de
Ailesbury
Broke
EARLS.
Bolton
Pembroke
Dynevor
Bridgewater
Walsingham
Denbigh
Bagot
Westmorland
Montague
Stamford
Kenyon
Winchelsea
Selsey
Cardigan
Rolle
Shaftesbury
Bayning
Plymouth
Bolton
Scarborough
Northwick
Aylesford
St. Helens
Bathurst
Redesdale
Abergavenny
Arden
Talbot
Gambier
Digby
Combermere
Mansfield
Harris
Liverpool
Colchester
Romney
Glenlyon
Powis
Ravensworth
Manvers
Stowell
Lonsdale
Delamere
Harewood
Rocksavage
Verulam
ARCHBISHOPS.
Whitworth
Canterbury
Brownlow
Dublin
Eldon
BISHOPS.
Farnham
London
Belmore
Worcester
Courtown
Bangor
Aboyne
Lincoln
1264
St. David's
Oxford
Salisbury
Llandaff
St. Asaph
Exeter
Ely
Ossory
Chester
Clonfert.
Proxies.
DUKES.
Balcarras
Clarence
Carrick
Marlborough
Mayo
Dorset
O'Neill
Manchester
Charleville
Gordon
Morton
Newcastle
VISCOUNTS.
MARQUESSES.
Dudley and Ward
Salisbury
Maynard
Thomond
Middleton
Ely
Tyrone
Cholmondeley
Arbuthnot
EARLS.
Carleton
Huntingdon
BARONS.
Abingdon
Le Despenser
Rochford
Audley
Coventry
De la Zouche
Poulett
Vernon
Ferrers
Rivers
Stanhope
Rodney
Macclesfield
Douglas
Pomfret
Broderick
Portsmouth
Wodehouse
Buckinghamshire
Ribblesdale
Harcourt
Manners
Radnor
Beresford
Strange
Oriel
Mountedgecombe
Forrester
Malmsbury
Saltoun
Craven
Napier
Chichester
BISHOPS.
Nelson
Durham
Norwich
Winchester
Cathcart
Chichester
Beauchamp
Carlisle
Howe
Gloucester
Stradbroke
Peterborough
Home
Bristol.
Kellie
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, June 21.
WAREHOUSING BILL.
Mr. Wallace
1265
Mr. Ricardo
expressed his regret, that the right hon. gentleman had been induced to postpone this measure. He hoped he would take into his serious consideration the state of the silk trade, which was now labouring under peculiar disadvantages, and which might compete successfully with foreign countries, if the present high duties, which gave so much encouragement to contraband traffic, were reduced. The Spitalfields act was another grievance to which this trade was exposed, which he hoped government would see the necessity of repealing.
Mr. Ellice
agreed in the necessity of reducing the duties on the raw material, in order to enable the silk manufacturer in this country to compete with the foreigner.
Mr. Wallace
said, that previous to the next session, the silk trade would become the object of his most serious consideration. He agreed that at present the trade was suffering under peculiar privations, not one of the least of which was the being debarred the advantage of free labour.
The further consideration of the bill was put off for three months.
EMPLOYMENT OF THE POOR IN IRELAND.
The House having resolved itself into a Committee of Supply,
Mr. Goulburn
said, that at so late an hour, and so perfectly conversant as hon. members must be with the grounds upon which his present motion was brought forward, he should not detain the House with any statement of the reasons that induced him to submit it, but should simply move, "That a sum, not exceeding 100,000
l.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Monday, June 21.
INFLUENCE OF THE CROWN.]
Mr. Brougham
rose to submit his promised motion on this subject. He began by observing, that the House had now for the last six years been engaged very laboriously, and he would not say altogether unprofitably, for the country, but he wished he could add more beneficially, in
1266
*
*
1267
Influence of the Crown, see Parl. Hist. vol. 21.p. 340.
1268
1269
*
1.
*
1270
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.,
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.;
l.
l.
l.
l.
1271
l.
l.
1272
1273
1274
l.;
l.
l.;
l.
1275
l.
1276
l.
1277
l.
l.
in majorem cautelam,
l.,
l
l.
1278
1279
l.,
1280
*
*
1281
l.,
l.;
l.,
1282
l.
l.
l.
l.
1283
1284
1285
1286
"—faithful found
Among the faithless—'
1287
1288
1289
1290
de facto
1291
1292
1293
1294
sub silentio,
1295
in prospectu,
de facto.
Cintra
1296
1297
vox populi
1298
1299
The Marquis of Londonderry
hoped he should receive the indulgence of the House while he endeavoured to follow the hon. and learned member through his long and eloquent address. The hon. and learned member had commenced by observing, that the influence of the Crown had increased to the injury of the interests of the country, and particularly as it affected the parliament. It would, however, be for the House to decide how far that influence had been extended, either in parliament or by other means. The hon. and learned member had not only proposed a resolution, but expressed his determination to follow it up, if carried, by some remedial measure. What that remedial measure was to be, the hon. and learned member had not clearly stated. It, however, had slipped out in the conclusion of his speech. And what was it? Why, nothing short of parliamentary reform. This was the question to which the hon. and learned member wished to pledge the House by his resolution. Now, he had no objection in the world to the hon. and learned gentleman's attempting to reform the parliament. It had been attempted before in the course of the present session, and the hon. and learned member had a right if he pleased, to return to the charge; but he ought not to do this under the weak disguise of diminishing the influence of the Crown. Having said thus much, he felt it necessary to observe, that he agreed with the hon. and learned member in some points. He admitted that the influence of the Crown was a just object of parliamentary jealousy. But whatever that influence might be, he maintained that the House was composed of materials too sound and too sound and too durable to be acted upon or corrupted by it. The influence of the Crown might perhaps be excessive; if so, reduce it; but let the question of reform, if at all introduced, be made a distinct and separate question. The hon. and learned member had taken the year 1780, and compared the influence of the Crown at that period with what it was at present. The hon. and learned member had compared the army and navy at the two periods; but he must be allowed to say, that the hon. and learned member had not at all ventured to come to close quarters. The hon. and learned member had in the
1300
l.
l.
l.
1301
l.,
1302
1303
1304
l.
1305
l.
l.
l.
1306
l.
l.
l.
l.,
l.
1307
1308
1309
Mr. Bennet
said, he rose to address the House with considerable diffidence, after the eloquent and argumentative speech of his hon. and learned friend, and the able speech, for so he must in candour call it, of the noble lord. The noble lord had assumed pretty nearly the same tone which one of his predecessors had adopted when Mr. Dunning brought forward his celebrated motion. But, what was the answer of that House to the then minister? The answer then given was the same which ought now to be given. The minister was left in a minority. The country found that the interest of the Crown, in every department of the state, was too strong for the interest of the people, and therefore the House acceded to the proposition. The noble lord had gone through the different departments of the state, and he (Mr. B.) deemed it necessary to touch upon some of them. What, he would ask, was the amount of revenue at present collected? He did not look so much to the amount, as to the expense of its collection, and the influence necessarily connected with it. In 1792, the expense of collection was little more than one million: in 1822, it was between four and five millions. Was it not, therefore, impossible to deny that the influence of the Crown had increased in the same ratio? There were between 18 and 20,000 civil officers, whom the Crown nominated and paid, and who were directly under its influence.
1310
1311
l.
1312
*
1313
Mr. Stuart-Wortley
said, if the bill of indictment against the House of Commons, which had been preferred by the hon. and learned gentleman, and the hon. gentleman who had spoken last, was a true one, he should feel disposed to become a reformer, and the sooner they began a reform the better. He asserted, however, that the charge against the House of Commons had been made on false grounds, as the hon. and learned gentleman had assumed reasons for the votes of that House, which, if he had read the history of his country, he might have known were not the real ones. The motion of the hon. and learned gentleman, professing to be for the reduction of the influence in the Crown, really did nothing to that end, but went directly to parliamentary reform.; as did also the speech of the hon. gentleman (Mr. Bennet) who had recently proposed measures for the reduction of that influence. Now, he would say that there was no need of a reform in parliament, and that the gentlemen opposite might not mean to destroy the monarchy, yet that reform must lead to its destruction. If the influence of the Crown was strong in that House, they should recollect that on all important questions the House of Lords had gone with the Commons, except on one important occasion, when the Commons, having attempted to dictate to the whole country, had been successfully resisted by the House of Lords, supported by the people. To come to close quarters with the hon. and
1314
sub silentio.
1315
1316
Mr. Secretary Peel
rose to rescue his constituents from an unjust imputation. The distinguished body which he represented (the university of Oxford) might, he said, refer for an answer to the imputation, to their general conduct. As to the particular facts mentioned by the hon. and learned gentleman, they did not hear out the specific charges. Those charges, he understood, were founded on the election of lord Grenville, as chancellor, at a particular period; and, on their allowing a measure to pass in silence in 1817, which they had protested against in 1807. When they looked at the high character of lord Grenville—to his attachment to our ecclesiastical establishment—to his general line of policy—to his opposition to the principles which had marked Abe early part of the French war—when they remembered the station he had held in the university, as one of her most distinguished scholars, and as a member on the foundation of one of the most illustrious of her societies—and when they considered that his opponent was lord Eldon, the lord chancellor—the learned body that' chose him stood sufficiently vindicated, both as
1317
Mr. Brougham
briefly replied. He observed, that the right hon. secretary was naturally anxious to preserve the reputation of those who sent him to that House, but he had been misinformed as to the nature of the remarks on their conduct. He (Mr. B.) had not blamed them for choosing lord Grenville. Quite the contrary. He had said, that lord Grenville was every fit and proper person, for some of those very reasons urged by the right hon gentleman. But he did think, that in spite of all his natural and acquired talents, and of other qualities—all of which in his opinion should be recommendations, but some of which were more likely to be disqualifications at Oxford—if it were not for his near approach to power, lord Grenville would not have been elected. This showed the influence of the Crown out of doors as well as within, and the magnitude of the power it was their business to limit. As to the bill of 1807 they opposed it, not on the score of the king's conscience, but its own merits. He complained much less of those who yielded to those scruples, unconstitutional as such a compliance was, than of those who raised the cry of "No Popery," caring as much for popery as for the king's conscience, and as much for the king's conscience as for the opinions of William the Conqueror. It was the doctrine of the hon. member for Yorkshire, that it was the duty of the House to give its confidence to any ministers until they had proposed some measures that proved them to be unworthy of confidence. This he denied. It was the duty of the House to be satisfied as to the fitness of the persons, before, by their misgovernment, they had led the country into misfortunes. During the last war, the country was, as it were, struggling for life, when France
1318
The question being put, "That the other orders of the day be now read," The House divided: Ayes, 216: Noes, 101.
List of the Minority.
Abercromby, hon. J.
Calcraft, J.
Allen, J.H.
Calcraft, J. H.
Althorp, Visc.
Calvert, C.
Barham, J. F. jun.
Carter, John
Baring, A.
Cavendish, lord G.
Benyon, B.
Cavendish, C.
Bernal, R.
Coke, T. W.
Birch, Jos.
Colburne, N. R.
Bright, H.
Crespigny, sir W. De
Brougham, H.
Crompton, S.
Browne, Dom.
Creevey, t.
Byng, G.
Davies, T. H.
Bentinck, lord W.
Denman, T.
Benett, J.
Dundas, hon. T.
1319
Denison, W. J.
Powlett, hon. W.
Ebrington, Visc.
Price, R.
Fitzroy, lord C.
Prittie, hon. F. A.
Fitzory, lord J.
Robinson, sir G.
Frankland, R.
Rice, T. S.
Graham, S.
Ricardo, D.
Grant, J. P.
Rowley, sir W.
Grattan, J.
Robarts, A.
Griffiths, J. W.
Robarts, G.
Glenorchy, lord
Rumbold, C.
Guise, sir W.
Russell, lord J.
Gaskell, B.
Scarlett, J.
Hamilton, lord A.
Scott, James
Hobhouse, J. C.
Sefton, earl of
Honeywood, W. P.
Smith, S.
Hume, J.
Smith, W.
Hurst, Robt.
Stuart, lord J.
Hutchinson, hon. C. H.
Tavistock, marquis of
James, W.
Taylor, M. A.
Jervoise, G. P.
Tierney, rt. hon. G.
Kennedy, T. F.
Titchfield, marquis of
Lamb, hon. G.
Tennyson, C.
Lambton, J. G.
Warre, J. A.
Lemon, sir W.
Western, C. C.
Lloyd, sir E.
Whitbread, S. C.
Lennard, T. B.
Whitbread, W. H.
Leycester, R.
Williams, J.
Maberly, J.
Wilson, sir R.
Maberly, W. L.
Wood, alderman
Macdonald, J.
TELLERS.
Mackintosh, sir J.
Bennet, hon. H. G.
Martin, J.
Duncannon, visct.
Maule, hon. W.
PAIRED OFF.
Maxwell, John
Aubrey, sir J.
Milbank, M.
Barham, J. F.
Monck, J. B.
Baring, H.
Moore, P.
Curwen, J. C.
Mostyn, sir T.
Ellice, Ed.
Newport, sir J.
Hill, lord A.
Nugent, lord
Lushington, S.
Normanby, lord
White, L.
Plamer, col. C.
Fergusson, sir R.
Phillips, G. jun
HOUSE OF LORDS
Tuesday, June 25.
NAVAL AND MILITARY PENSION BILL.]
The Earl of Liverpool,
in moving the second reading of this bill, said, it would be, in their lordships' recollection that in the various discussions respecting the peace establishment, it had generally been represented as too expensive. It had been contended on the other hand, that its magnitude arose from its including charges which did not fairly come under the natural character of a peace establishment, such as the half-pay for the army and navy, which alone exceeded the whole amount of the peace establishment at the close of the American war. Under these circumstances it had occurred to minsters whether it would not be advisable to
1320
bonâ fide
l
1321
l
1322
The Marquis of Lansdown
said, that having been one of those who had strongly recommended the reduction of taxes, he could not withhold his consent from a bill which would have that effect, at the same time the observations made by the noble earl rendered it necessary for hint to qualify his consent. There had hither to been two modes of proceeding with respect to public burthens: either to increase that which we bore ourselves in order to relieve, posterity, or to remove the weight, from t our own shoulders and place, it on those of posterity. It had been reserved for the noble earl to act on both systems at once, by creating a sinking fund of five millions, to extinguish so much of the national debt, and, in the course of the same session, adding 2,800,000
l
1323
The Earl of Lauderdale
agreed with the sentiments expressed by the noble earl opposite, that the sudden check given by peace to the increased demand occasioned by war, had been the chief cause of the agricultural distress. He then took a view of the proposed measure. It would put annually 2,800,000
l
l
Lord King
said, he had heard a great deal about a sinking fund, but wished to know whether there was one or not; for until the nine or ten millions due to the Bank were paid off, the money raised under that denomination must go to the discharge of that debt. His noble friend had exposed the absurdities of this bill, the principle which it contained, that of reducing taxation, covered a multitude
1324
The bill was read a second time.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Tuesday, June 25.
CONDUCT OF THE LORD ADVOCATE
Mr. Abercromby,
in rising to submit his promised motion, said, he could assure the House, that whenever he rose to address them on any subject, he felt it necessary to solicit their indulgence; but on the present occasion he felt it particularly necessary to claim it; seeing that the subject to which he wished to call their attention related exclusively to the people of Scotland. It was a grievance affection them alone; but he trusted that on a great public question; the right of the people of every portion of the empire to a redress of grievances would be fully recognized. If he should be able to show, that the learned lord advocate, and his colleagues in Scotland, had connected themselves with the Press of that country, in a way which was incompatible with the duties of their situations—if he should make it appear that a system had been adopted in that country to traduce through the medium of the press, the public and private character of individuals, by means which every man of feeling must detest, and in a manner which no man who was alive to a sense of honour or character could bear—if he could show that this had been countenanced and encouraged by the learned lord and his colleagues—if he could prove that he had abused his high authority, that the forms of the law had been perverted, and perverted from bad motives—if he could prove these facts to the satisfaction of the House, be did expect that they would not allow evils of such a nature to be without a remedy—even though they should exclusively apply to Scotland. In the course of his speech, he would not state any thing which he did not firmly believe to be a fact. He had a narrative of plain facts to support the conclusions to which he should come. With respect to the time of bringing the motion forward, he had given notice of it before the holidays, but had put it off from the 20th until after a trial, which he should assert was most improperly delayed from time to time. The trial was the expected one of William Murray
1325
1326
pro loco et tempore,"
1327
1328
1329
l
1330
1331
1332
1333
1334
1335
1336
1337
1338
1339
1340
l
l
l.,
1341
1342
pro loco et tempore,
1343
1344
1345
1346
s.
1347
primâ facie
1348
The Lord Advocate
said, he felt it a painful duty to be obliged to rise upon this occasion. There were few men whose conduct had been so arraigned: he believed it had happened to no man before him to be thus arraigned before the Commons of England. Nothing could be more difficult than the task which he had to discharge upon this occasion. He felt that in approaching this discussion, his character, credit, and future happiness were at stake. But, while he said this, he did not mean to complain either, of the manner or the time of bringing forward this motion. He certainly was not prepared, from the nature of the notice given by the learned member, to expect such a statement. He thought from the notice, that there would be merely a general inquiry into the Press of Scotland and no more. When Mr. Whitbread made a motion respecting the lord advocate of that period, he first moved fur certain documents, which put the House and the country in possession of the charge; and the lord advocate was, fully prepared to meet it. With him, however, it was different: he now heard, for the first time, many of the charges which he was called upon to answer. He did not, however, complain of this, but he must be pardoned for saying, that he, owed the learned member no particular, obligation for the course he had pursued. Still he entertained no hostile feeling: he knew the learned member's brother well. Of the learned mover he had no other knowledge than as a member of that House, and an able advocate at the bar; and he was sure that the learned member's character was not likely to suffer from the able manner in which he had introduced his motion. But, in common fairness, the charge ought to have been brought soon after the alleged offence. All the facts were made public ten months ago. In August, 1821, the Correspondence was known to the world. During this interval, it had been said all over Scotland, that he did not dare to face the House of Commons. But, though he had been present on the first day of the session, and for two months afterwards. The learned member had given
1349
l
1350
1351
primâ facie
1352
l
l
l
1353
s.
l
l
l
1354
l
l
l
1355
l
l
1356
1357
1358
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, that upon all occasions like the present, when individual character and personal interests were involved, they had secured to the individual the indulgence of the House, as far as was consistent with strict justice. Upon such topics it was generally usual, and it was always wise to abstain from topics which appealed to men's passions, and led them from the exercise of their calm and sober judgment. Upon the present occasion the learned mover, not with the intention of doing so in all probability, had appealed to some topics highly calculated to create an undue prejudice against his learned friend. One was his allusion to time widow and children of the late sir A. Boswell, and another to the death of Mr. Scott; an individual who unfortunately lost his life in a similar manner. He did, therefore, think that the learned gentleman would have better discharged his duty by abstaining from the mention of these circumstances. Then, again, he had brought forward the language of Mr. Hope and Mr. M'Neill, used in a private conversation in a private place, and with a private client. He took this to be a very bad precedent to set; and if it had created any prejudice against his learned friend, he called upon the House to discharge it altogether from their minds. Let the House look at the case which it was called upon to decide. A notice had been given by the learned gentleman, that he should call the attention of parliament to the conduct of the lord advocate, as connected with his interference with the public press. It was three months since that notice had been given, and not the smallest intimation had, in the interim, been afforded, that the learned gentleman meant to call in question the conduct of any other persons. The House, then, was bound to discuss the case upon that notice; and they were, asked to decide it upon the single speech of the learned gentleman, and the papers which he had read to the House. He would first allude to the conduct impute to the lord advocate with respect to the paper called the Correspondent. The learned gentleman attempted to show, that, notwithstanding all which had passed
1359
animus
1360
l
l
l
1361
extremum jus,
1362
l
1363
Sir J. Mackintosh
said, it was painful to him to rise at so late an hour, and, he might add, that it was not very consistent with his temper to offer himself as a voluntary accuser, or as the supporter of any accusation; and he declared, that nothing but a sense of what was due to public justice and public decorum, nothing but a desire to protect private life from slander, and to prevent the field of public discussion from being turned into an exhibition of indecency, vulgarity, barbarity and blood, could have induced him to enter himself as an accuser of a public officer, towards whom he had no hostile feeling. What had always advantageously distinguished this country from other free states was, the decency with which public discussions had been conducted. Occasional indecencies, occasional excesses, these were to be expected, and these were to be found in all parts of history; but systematic attacks on the sanctuary of private life, and systematic violations of the laws of decency, were reserved for our own unfortunate times. The grave question now before the House was, whether the public prosecutor in Scotland had not mixed and blended himself with this criminal system—whether he had not afforded it his encouragement in secret, until he had been detected and dragged to light—and whether the House of Commons could avoid inquiring into the proof that had been adduced? The right hon. secretary had said, that they wished to decide on the speech of his hon. and learned friend: they wished to do no such thing; they wished to inquire. The right hon. secretary said, it was not enough that an objectionable paragraph should have been found in a paper to subject the person who had patronized it to a criminal charge. But, the paper in question had not occasionally broken the law: it had continually, systematically, professedly, dealt in private slander. The right hon. secretary had alluded to a commendation which had formerly been bestowed by him (sir J. M.) on the conductor of a newspaper (Mr. Perry), for having in a long career avoided encroachments on decency, and abstained from private calumny and slander. But, was there a man so un can did as to suppose, that he had meant to assert, that in.40 years of zeal and hurry, the individual might not have transgressed the
1364
1365
1366
diverso intuitu,
primâ facie
do minimis non carat lex,
1367
primâ facie
1368
animus
1369
primâ facie
1370
The Marquis of Londonderry
said, that the heads under which he would consider the subject were; first, the connexion of of his learned friend with the press; 2nd, the oppressive transaction in which Borthwich was concerned; and 3rd, the proposition to call two persons before the committee and to make certain inquiries of them. Now, at what time was such a proceeding proposed? At that period of the session, when such an inquiry could not be gone into, with a view to substantial justice. It was proposed, too; on the eve of a legal prosecution, in which his learned friend would be overhauled as to the proprietorship. It was said that inquiry was all that was proposed; but parliament always sanctioned the principle, that it was no small infliction to be sent to a committee of inquiry above stairs. What was imputed to the learned lord was, not any violation of his official duties, but what he had done as an. individual freeholder of Lanarkshire. It had been assumed that the papers were a mass of private scandal, and what all must join in reprobating. But what had been read to the House he would not pronounce a libel without seeing the context. It could not fail to be remarked, that hon. members opposite never complained of the conduct of the press, until they fancied that some particular person or family connected with them had been libelled. He was informed that the Clydesdale Journal was a paper like the Morning Chronicle, which upon a former occasion the learned gentleman (sir J. Mackintosh) had elevated to such a pitch. He understood it was in general a paper of fair character. What the character of the Sentinel was, he did not know, but it was too much to hold his learned friend eternally responsible, for what might be published in that paper. With respect to the Beacon, it appeared that that paper had been established upon good principles, and had for some time been conducted in a manner that could not be complained of. As soon as it appeared that the paper was impro-
1371
l
1372
Mr. Lockhart
concurred with the noble marquis in thinking that there was nothing in the conduct of the lord advocate which could touch his character as a gentleman; but when he was told that there was nothing to affect him as a constitutional lawyer, he must object to that opinion.
After a short reply from Mr. Abercromby, the House divided: Ayes, 95; Noes, 120.
List of the Minority.
Allen, J. H.
Jervoise, G. P.
Althorp, viscount
Kennedy, T. F.
Baring, A.
Lamb, hon. G.
Baring, H.
Lambton, J. G.
Barnard, viscount
Lemon, sir W.
Bennet, hon. H. G.
Lloyd, sir Ed.
Bernal, R.
Lennard, T. B.
Brougham, H.
Lushington, S.
Butterworth, J.
Leycester, R.
Benett, John
Lockhart, J. J.
Bentinck, lord W.
Maberly, J.
Buxton, T. F.
Macdonald, J.
Calcraft, J.
Mackintosh, sir J.
Calcraft, J. H.
Martin J.
Calvert, C.
Maxwell J.
Cavendish, C.
Milbank, M.
Cavendish, H.
Monck, J. B.
Coke, T. W.
Mostyn, sir T.
Colbourne, N. R.
Newport, sir J.
Crompton, S.
Nugent, lord
Creevery, T.
Normanby, visc.
Calthorpe, hon. F.
Philips, G. jun.
Davies, T. H.
Palmer, C. F.
Denman, T.
Powlett, hon. W.
Dundas, hon. T.
Price, R.
Duncannon, visc.
Prittie, hon. F. A.
Dennison, W. J.
Robinson, sir G.
Ebrington, visc.
Rice, T. S.
Ellis, hon. G. A.
Ricardo, D.
Fergusson, sir R. C.
Rowley, sir W.
Fitzgerald, lord W.
Robarts, G.
Fitzroy, lord C.
Robarts, A.
Folkestone, viscount
Rumbold, C.
Grattan, J.
Russell, lord J.
Grenfell, P.
Scarlett, J.
Griffith, J. W.
Sefton, earl of
Glenorchy, lord
Smith, John
Guise, sir W.
Smith, W.
Gurney, R. H.
Smith, S.
Gaskell, B.
Smith, G.
Hamilton, lord A.
Stuart, lord J.
Hobhouse, J. C.
Tavistock, marquis of
Honywood W. P.
Taylor, M. A.
Hume, J.
Tierney, rt. hon. G.
Hutchinson, hon. C. H.
Titchfield, marquis
James, W.
Tulk, C.
1373
Western, C. C.
Wood, alderman
Whitbread, S. C.
TELLERS.
Williams, J.
J. P. Grant
Williams, W.
Abercromby, hon. J.
Wilson, sir R.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Wednesday, June 26.
MARRIAGE ACT AMENDMENT BILL.]
The report of this bill being brought up,
The Lord Chancellor
expressed his approbation of the provisions introduced, with a view prospectively to prevent improper marriage, upon the principle, that a marriage once contracted ought to be indissoluble. He thought the retrospective enactments had no connection with the prospective clauses, and that they ought to form a separate bill. These retrospective enactments went to make valid, with certain exceptions, all marriages that had taken place by licence since 1754, the date of the Marriage act, which would otherwise, under the operation of that act be deemed null and void. But their lordships should be aware, that whilst these enactments went, generally speaking, to legalise the marriages of the superior classes of society that had taken place by licence, they took no notice whatever of the other classes who had been married by banns, and who, in the case of fraudulent banns, were left to all the consequences of void marriages, and the bastardising of issue. He stated several cases in which the retrospective enactments would operate most injuriously with regard to the rights of parties now entitled to property, in consequence of the invalidity of marriages, which would now be rendered valid, and concluded by reading several amendments, which he should propose in a subsequent stage. The principal objects of these amendments were to declare all those marriages invalid which had been decided to be so in actions or suits in courts of law or equity, and to enact that the rendering marriages valid as proposed, should not affect any deeds or instruments respecting property settled or sold, under the belief that such marriages were null and void.
Lord Ellenborough
said, he could see no reason for a separation of the prospective and retrospective parts of the bill. He did not believe that, under the operation of these retrospective enactments, evils would arise in any degree equal to those which had arisen, in con-
1374
The Lord Chancellor
The Earl of Harrowby
said, the retrospective clause was calculated to quiet the apprehensions of families, but at the same time affected the property of others, who, as the noble and learned lord stated, were not in the situation of having violated the existing laws.
After a short conversation, the retrospective clause, as amended by the Committee, was agreed to.
The Earl of Liverpool
moved, as an amendment to the first proviso, that this act do not extend to any marriage, with respect to the validity of which any snit is now pending.
The Marquis of Lansdown
said, that if there was a class of persons entitled to the protection of their lordships, it was those who had contracted marriages, under an ignorance of the operation of one of the most mischievous and immoral laws that had ever disgraced the legislature of the country. He vas prepared to go back to every case where no actual possession had been created by the sentence of a court of law, and he should therefore oppose the amendment.
The Earl of Westmorland
said, there were two classes of persons who would be affected by this measure, one class who were seeking to avoid, and the other to confirm, their contracts, by resorting to a court of law, and the effect of the amendment would be to deprive the latter class of the power of carrying into effect the honourable intention of confirming existing engagements.
The House divided on the amendment—Contents, 28;. Not-Contents, 67.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Wedesday, Jane 26.
VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT.]
M. A. Taylor
said, he was encouraged, in bringing this important subject under the view of the House, by the, result of a similar proposition of his in the last session, which had been negatived by only four votes. He trusted that on the present occasion, the House would agree
1375
l
l
l
l
1376
1377
1378
1379
The Attorney General
said, he was something surprised at the conclusion of the hon. member. Why had he not moved at Once to repeal the act? Why lose his time in taking a committee, when the house had already before it all the materials necessary to its decision? The exertions; of the lord chancellor were too universally acknowledged, to require any description. The learned lord sat from October in one year, to September in another; and often gave up holidays to the despatch of any pressing business. A little attention to the returns before the House would show that, except as to appeals, there was no material arrear of business before the chancellor. The hon. member had cited an instance of an amicable suit which had lasted 12 years. Now, he would put it to any gentleman conversant with chancery practice, whether such a suit, unless under peculiar circumstances, could endure for 12 years. Since the vice-chancellor's court had been established, the lord chancellor had been a good deal occupied in the hearing of appeals: but that must inevitably happen where the power of appeal existed, and where parties were not satisfied. In estimating the quantity of business got through by the lord chancellor, the House ought to look at the number of motions taken before that learned judge. Each motion, in many cases, amounted to the hearing of a cause. Appeals, very frequently, were taken in the share of mo-
1380
Mr. John Williams
said, that with respect to the dispatch of business in the court of the learned lord, he was com-
1381
Mr. Twiss
said, that all the arguments now advanced against the vice-chancellor's bill had been anticipated at the time when that bill was first brought forward, but which were not then considered powerful enough to prevent the House from adopting it. Since the erection of the vice-chancellor's court, the entire number of matters disposed of by the lord chancellor was 11,320, by the vice-chancellor 17,881. The appointment of the vice-chancellor's court had reduced the arrear of causes less than one half. He therefore saw no reason for carrying this restless activity of change, so much the rage of the day, into the highest court of law in the realm. In a great judge they were not merely to look at the number of causes dismissed within a year, but to the effect of his judgments in the way of precedent. He would venture to say, that when the decisions of the present lord chancellor should be consulted by future lawyers, they would be looked up to as monuments of legal excellence.
Mr. M. A. Taylor
said, that what he had stated remained unanswered, and he would, year after year, take the sense of the House upon the subject, if he should divide but two.
The House divided: Ayes, 51; Noes, 108.
MINISTERIAL PENSIONS BILL.]
Mr. Creevey
said, he rose to submit to the House the consideration of the Ministerial Pension bill of 1817. He had formerly moved certain accounts as grounds of ulterior proceedings which he would now propose for repealing the bill. No task could be more difficult than to call upon that House to take away 42,000
l
1382
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
1383
1384
l
1385
1386
l
l
1387
l
s
l
l
s
l
l
l.,
l
l
l
1388
l
s
l
l
l
1389
1390
Mr. Bankes
professed himself to have been a party to the principle upon which the acts of 1813 and 1817 were founded. On the first of these occasions, the hon. gentleman declared there was something so unjustifiable and abominable in the measure adopted, that he could not recur to it without shame. Now, what was that principle? The abolition of useful offices; the reduction in salary of overpaid ones; salary commensurate with duty; and at the same time carefully made adequate as compensation for the duties discharged. The hon. gentleman had said, that, in 1782, Mr. Burke did not act upon this principle. But what Mr. Burke said on, the subject of laying down all useless or overpaid offices, without exception, was this,—that it would be bad service to the state to take away from the Crown the means of tempting talents into its service. As for the hon. gentleman's complaining that these pensions, and compensations had been settled without any message from the Crown, the gentleman could not but be aware, that the Crown must be a party to every bill of this sort. The hon. member had contrasted the bills which he (Mr. B). had brought in, with that which formed the subject of debate. He did not hesitate to say, that believed the two bills which he had formerly introduced, would, if they had passed, have been found more effective than the present bill. The hon. member had assumed, that the existing bill was also his work. This he denied He did not mean to defend the bill altogether: he thought it defective, in several points, and particularly with respects the periods of service, which were too limited. The bill, however, contained much that was good; and, if it were repealed, it would be necessary to return to the state of things which existed before the measure was passed; and, therefore, the object of the motion must be considered to be not so much the repeal of the bill, as the restoration of sinecures. Was the House prepared for this? Would any man deny that the bill had effected an improvement upon the former system; or say, that was not better to have pensions, however large, than to revive sinecures? If the House were to agree to the motion, it would establish a most extraor-
1391
Mr. H. G. Bennet
said, he considered the bill a fraudulent measure. Under it, very few offices had been abolished, and not many regulated. He objected to the whole of the present system. He had satisfied himself by inquiry, that since the Revolution, all the great offices of state had been given as bribes to families, for the support of ministers when they had lost the confidence of the country. Those offices were not bestowed as rewards for public services, but as pay for political prostitution. He chiefly objected to the present bill, because it held out inducements to political adventurers to enter that House, who, by prostituting the talents with which Providence had gifted them, arrived at situations of rank, and, after two years' service, retired upon a pension for life. He must deny that the country would be a loser by the repeal of the bill. He did not believe that the House, even constituted as it was, would agree to a pension of 3,000
l
1392
Mr. Bankes
said, that the attack made on him by the hon. member was most unfounded. He would appeal to the whole course of his parliamentary conduct against such an insinuation, which, in justice to himself, he must term false.
Mr. H. G. Bennet
said, that with every possible contumely, he returned the term "false," in every sense in which it was used by the hon. member.
The Marquis of Londonderry
said, he could not, without the utmost indignation, listen to the attacks which had been so profusely and so unwarrantably made on the characters of individuals by the two hon. members. Those hon. members could not be ignorant of the inconsistency of their arguments on the question of rewards to public servants. They ought to be aware, that the reform of Mr. Burke allowed of rewards to public servants who had filled high and important situations. The speeches, however, of the hon. members, however they might affect to approve the principle of that measure, presented the most disgusting system of inconsistency he had ever met with; for though they had been sticklers for the bill on a former occasion, which admitted the justice of such rewards, they now came forward to oppose them, with the evident view of attacking the character of a nobleman, in whose case the principle had been applied. The character of his noble friend (lord Sidmouth) was, however, too exalted to be affected by such insinuations; for he would assert, that a more able and efficient minister of the Crown had not existed than he had proved himself. By his talents and exertions he had contributed mainly to the salvation of the country in an hour of danger and peril. Having those opinions with respect to the character and talents of his noble friend, it was not without feelings of disgust that he had heard the gross attack upon him, in which he had been compared to one of the door-keepers of that House. Such language never ought to have been used in the observations of one gentleman upon
1393
1394
Mr. Brougham
said, he rose to protest against the tone and language which the noble lord had dared to use.
The Marquis of Londonderry
rose to order, and said—When any hon. member uses the word "dare," as applied to any remark made by any other member, I apprehend it is quite inconsistent with the order of parliamentary proceedings. If the term is applied to any observation used by me, it is irregular; for at the time of my making a remark which could call for such en expression, it was the learned member's duty to have interrupted me. The learned member has neglected to do so, and I now appeal to the chair whether he is regular in the expression he has used.
The Speaker
said, that, undoubtedly, if the use of the word "dare" were to be interpreted in the sense in which the noble lord took it, it would be quite disorderly; but the House would allow him to say, that the term was one which was frequently used in debate without any offensive intention on the part of the member using it.
Mr. Brougham
maintained, that he had a right to impugn any minister of the Crown for presuming (if he must be driven from his former word) to accuse a representative of the people, engaged in the honest discharge of his duty, in language such as no member of that House had, ever ventured to employ. Disgraceful! disgusting! There might be some members who deemed his hon. friend's speech disgraceful, but he (Mr. B.) was not one of them: there might be some who considered them disgusting, but he belonged not to that class. It was one thing, however, to think, and another to utter such language; and never in his life had he heard such expressions uttered in that House as those which had been launched by a minister of the Crown at the head of a representative of the people. He should feel for any member who was treated in this most novel and unparliamentary, fashion; but, in the present instance, he felt for a dear, long tried, and much valued friend, for whom he entertained all those sentiments to which the excellence of his heart, the manliness of his character, and the inflexible integrity of his public conduct justly entitled him. With respect to the general question, he would only
1395
The Marquis of Londonderry
said, he had used the words "disgraceful and disgusting" in no other than a parliamentary sense, and did not apply them to the general scope of the argument of the hon. member. When he heard the hon. member compare his noble friend to a doorkeeper, and undertake to prove that all the great families, from the period of the Revolution, had been corrupted by grants, similar to those conferred on lord Sidmouth, he considered those two declarations both disgraceful and disgusting; and though he wished it to be understood that he used these expressions in a parliamentary sense, he did not upon reflection consider that he had at all misapplied the terms.
Mr. Creevey
said, that as the hon. member for Corfe-Castle had moved as an amendment, that the House should proceed to the other orders of the day, and as his (Mr. C.'s) object was to put his resolutions upon the Journals, he should merely band up to the Speaker his first resolution. If it was negatived, he should then move his other resolutions, as the other orders of the day were proposed to be read. He did not, however, intend to divide the House upon any of his resolutions, except the first.
The question being put, "That the other orders of the day be now read, the House divided: Ayes, 143. Noes, 42. Majority against Mr. Creevey's first resolution, 101.
List of the Minority.
Bennet, hon. H. G.
Denman, T.
Bernal, R.
Dundas, hon. T.
Brougham, H.
Dennison, W. J.
Calvert, C.
Fergusson, sir R. C.
Carter, J.
Folkestone, visct.
Davies, T. H.
Grattan, J.
1396
Guise, sir W.
Robinson, sir G.
Haldimand, W.
Rice, T. S.
Hobhouse, J. C.
Ricardo, D.
Honeywood, W. P.
Rowley, sir W.
Hughes, W. L.
Robarts, A.
Hume, J.
Robarts, G.
Holdsworth, T.
Smith, J.
James, W.
Smith, W.
Jervoise, G. P.
Taylor, M. A.
Lennard, T. B.
Western, C. C.
Lushington, S.
Whitbread, S. C.
Maberly, J.
Wilson, sir R.
Maberly, W.
Wood, alderman
Milbank, M.
TELLERS.
Monck, J. B.
Creevey, T.
Newport, sir J.
Duncannon, visct.
Palmer, C. F.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Thursday, June 27.
NAVAL AND MILITARY PENSIONS
The House having resolved itself into a committee on this bill, lord King moved the following preamble, which, he thought was more suitable than the one which now preceded it:—
"Whereas an impatience of taxation, no less ignorant than irresistible, pervades all ranks of his majesty's subjects, and it is highly expedient to afford some relief; and whereas the
minimum
l.,
1397
l.
Lord Harrowby
observed, that the measures of ministers were often called absurd, but he should be glad to know whether this preamble was an example of the sense of the other side of the House.
The motion was negatived.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Thursday, June 27.
ALE HOUSES LICENSING BILL.
Mr. Bennet
Lord Cranborne
said, there were several
1398
Alderman C. Smith
thought the bill objectionable in many parts, and that it pressed too heavily on the publicans.
Mr. Monck
would support any measure calculated to check the monopoly of the brewers, the effects of which fell entirely upon the poor, who were often obliged to drink a deteriorated and unwholesome beverage, and that, too, at a dear rate.
Mr. Calcraft
objected to the clause which gave an appeal to the quarter sessions, in case of licences, from the decision of the petty sessions. Unless this clause was withdrawn, be would oppose the bill.
Mr. Peel
said, there were several useful regulations in the bill, and therefore he hoped it would pass; but he wished the hon. mover would consent to withdraw or modify the clause which, took the discretionary power from the magistrates.
Mr. Bernal
said, it was using the bon, mover rather hardly to say that this bill was not in favour of the publicans, seeing it was founded on the petitions of many of that numerous body, and the committee was attended by their solicitor. He thought the clause restricting the discretionary power of the magistrates most salutary.
Mr. Alderman Wood
complained of the wanton acts of authority, which, under the present licensing system, often deprived men who had committed no offence, of the means of livelihood; and said, that such an act as a man's not taking off his hat to the parson of the parish, might cause him to lose his licence. They could not, therefore, too soon put under proper control this arbitrary power of the magistrates.
Mr. Bennet
vindicated the principle of his bill, which, he said, went to destroy the monopoly of the brewers, to break down corrupt influence, to prevent the arbitrary destruction of property, and take away from magistrates the power of doing that in dose chambers, which they dare not do in open court. These principles remained in the bill as at first, and were not affected by the alterations which he had been induced to adopt. It was, therefore, rather hard that members who at first supported the bill, should
1399
The House divided: For the third reading, 38; For the Amendment, 21. The bill was then read a third time and passed.
SLAVE TRADE.
Mr. Wilberforce
began by observing, that as parliament had some years ago come to a determination to abolish the Slave Trade, it was incumbent upon it to endeavour to make the measures it had agreed to for its abolition as complete and effectual as possible. For that purpose, application had been made to several foreign powers for their assistance, and the object of his motion was, to obtain the production of the correspondence which had taken place between them and this government. The hon. gentleman proceeded to take a review of the policy which had been pursued by the various European states, and by America, with reference to this interesting subject. The Cortes of Spain had, in a manner highly creditable to themselves, passed a law, inflicting a severe penalty on any one who should be found dealing in slaves, and directing the instant manumission of the slaves themselves. He was unable to speak with equal praise of the conduct of the old government of Portugal. That government had long resisted the applications of the British government on the subject, until at length, wearied out with the intreaties of the latter, the Portuguese government had consented, on the understanding that they should receive some commercial conces-
1400
1401
1402
1403
The Marquis of Londonderry
did not rise for the purpose of opposing the mo-
1404
Sir J. Mackintosh
said, that though it was much to be lamented that a great opportunity had been lost by the government of this country for putting down the abominable Slave Trade, yet he was bound in candour to say, that since the summer of 1815, the noble lord and his colleagues had not been wanting in their exertions to put an end to the traffic. But where solemn treaties had been entered into and shamefully violated, he could describe such conduct by no other name than perfidy. Where declarations were made in the face of Europe in favour of the abolition of the Slave Trade by the very powers who afterwards promoted that trade, he could give to such conduct no other name than that of hypocrisy. He lamented much to say, that the continental governments had proved that they were proof against all the statements of atrocity that from time to time had been made. In violation of solemn treaties, they persisted in promoting that abominable trade. The only hope that remained of bringing them to any sense of shame or justice, was by frequent appeals to the feelings of civilized men. Those governments were now placed beyond the reach of human justice; and their crimes could not be punished by human laws; but perhaps they might not always be in a situation not to feel and to dread the execration of mankind. With respect the government of Portugal he could scarcely say that that government had been guilty of a breach of, faith. From the beginning Portugal almost bade defiance to the moral judgment of Europe. At one period, indeed, Portugal sold to
1405
1406
After some farther conversation, the address was agreed to.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, June 28.
MR. SAURIN'S LETTER TO LORD
Mr. Brougham
said, he had that morning read in the public papers an account of a transaction, which, whether it were true or false, was of such a nature, that every man who had a due regard to the prerogative of the Crown, the privileges of parliament, and the purity of the administration of justice, must see it could not be allowed to pass without notice. He alluded to a letter purporting to be written by William Saurin, at that time filling the high situation of attorney-general in Ireland, and purporting to be addressed to no less a personage than lord Norbury, the chief justice in the court of Common Pleas in the same country. The purport of the letter was con-
1407
Mr. Secretary Peel
did not know whether, it was incumbent upon him as secretary of state, to answer the question of the learned gentleman; but as the personal friend of Mr. Saurin, he could not sit silent after it had been asked. As might naturally be expected, he was not prepared either to admit or dispute the genuineness of the letter in question. He could believe the learned gentleman, when he said, that it was with pain and reluctance that he came forward to take notice of this document—a document purporting to be private, and yet found in the public streets—a document which the person who found—if such, indeed, were the fact,—ought to have returned to the owner, instead of publishing it as he had done. He could not say, he repeated, whether the letter was genuine or not; but this he would say, that he would rather, ten thousand times over, be the person who wrote that letter, even though it were ten thousand times worse, than the person who, after finding it in the street—if, indeed, he did find it there—made so infamous and disgraceful an use of it.
SALT DUTIES.
Mr. Brogden
brought up the report on the 12th resolution, relative to the payment of the naval and military pensions.
1408
Mr. Curwen
said, that government ought to attend to the strong call of the country to abolish the remnant of the Salt tax. The continuation of this tax, could not be for the sake of revenue. Patronage was the real object. For so paltry a sum as 200,000
l.,
Mr. Leycester
said, that the disinclination evinced to relinquish this duty, appeared to him to be a part of the ministerial horror of plentiful produce and abundant markets. There could be little doubt that this obnoxious remnant of taxation was retained at the solicitation of the collectors of it. The repeal of this tax would purchase for ministers the good humour and good opinion of the country; and as these commodities were evidently growing dearer and dearer every day, the right hon. gentleman could
1409
l
l
l.,
Mr. J. Smith
supported the amendment, but was anxious that the surplus of revenue should not be abandoned, lest public credit should be prejudiced.
Mr. Denison
wished this odious tax should be repealed. He was anxious that the public creditor should receive his dividends, and thought that every effort ought to be made punctually to pay him, but when that had been made, all had, in his opinion, been done, that was necessary.
Mr. Lyttleton
considered the advantage to be gained by retaining the trifling remnant of this tax, to be by no means equal to the inconvenience attending the pressure of it.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
regretted that an arrangement which, when first proposed, appeared to give general satisfaction, should be disturbed by this amendment. If the House determined on the total repeal of this tax, he should be compelled to abandon his resolution of repealing a part of the leather tax. He was satisfied that a partial repeal of both taxes would be more beneficial than the total repeal of one of them. He had been accused of a desire to retain the tax, on account of the patronage; but the fact was, that the Treasury had nothing to do with the patronage. The officers were all appointed by the board of Excise. The saving, on the head of collection, in case of a total repeal, would be very, inconsiderable, as the officers employed for this tax were employed also for other purposes; and very few of them could be dismissed. The Irish fisheries were under none of the restrictions which had been complained of; so that the argument as to the inconvenience in that respect, fell
1410
l
Mr. Wodehouse
objected to their clinging to the wretched remnant of a tax, the produce of one-fourth of which must be spent in paying the officers who collected it.
Lord Althorp
contended, that it was impossible for the Chancellor of the Exchequer, with any regard to his own character, to carry into effect his threat not to relieve the country from any part of the leather tax, if the whole of the salt tax were repealed.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, he had always made the reduction of the leather tax dependent Upon the measures adopted regarding the salt tax.
Colonel Wood
said, he should always vote upon principle against isolated motions for repeal of taxes. Instead of sweeping away different taxes, the proper way would be to lower all taxes, to a certain extent.
Mr. R. Martin
said, that on the western coast of Ireland the people found no market for their labour, but in the manufacture of kelp. H stated this in behalf of the famishing population of that part of Ireland, assuring the House, that if this remaining duty on salt were repealed, the whole of the persons in that part of Ireland would have no 'market whatever for their labour.
Mr. Lushington
said, the question was, whether the House would disturb the financial system which his right hon. friend had recently introduced? His right
1411
Mr. Wetherell
said, he would oppose the motion, because, without going into a consideration whether the leather tax ought to be preferred to the salt tax, he thought, that tax after tax could not, with safety to the country be remitted.
Mr. Scott
said, that the time had arrived for taking off many of the burthens imposed on the people during the course of the late war. There were two modes of granting relief from taxation. The one was by taking off taxes altogether; the other by reducing them, and retaining a little of every tax. He was in favour of the former mode, because, if an entire tax were taken off, it would relieve the people more than if the same nominal amount were remitted from two different taxes. If a tax were reduced, so as to leave 200,000
l
s
s
d
Sir F. Ommaney
approved of the partial repeal of the salt tax, but could not vote for its total abolition. Government had made great efforts to contract the public expenditure; and much individual suffering had been the consequence. Let the House look at many of the public servants who had been employed 14, 15, or 20 years. They were reduced to a
1412
The Marquis of Londonderry
said, he would endeavour to call back their recollection to the evening when his right hon. friend brought forward his proposition for a relaxation of the taxes, and when he (lord L.) congratulated the House on the unanimity which that measure appeared to produce. He would ask, when his right hon. friend afterwards proposed new measures with respect to the leather tax, and to the salt tax, with reference to the fisheries, whether there was not a tacit pledge that the latter subject would be pursued no farther? After what had been done by his right hon. friend, he did not think the gentlemen opposite had taken the tone which they ought to have adopted on this occasion. They ought not now to take advantage of what his right hon. friend had previously done, to press for other measures which could only retard and embarrass the business of the country. There was a very great distinction between the situation in which they now stood, and that in which they were placed at the commencement of the session. They ought to consider what quantity of taxation had already been remitted, and how far the House was bound by its own acts to preserve the interest of the public creditor. At one time it was an option between tax and tax; but that was no longer the case; and election had been made, and it was with reference to that election that the reduction of the 5 per cents took place, which enabled ministers to give up the leather tax, and to grant other relief. That transaction was placed on the records of parliament: it was the most important financial measure of the session, and now formed a part of the law of the land. Therefore, though originally it might have been an option between the salt tax and the leather tax, it had ceased to be so; and to call for a repeal of both would be a virtual retractation of the votes given in the present session. He was happy to find that his right hon. friend had, with that manly firmness and integrity which belonged to his character, refused to give up the salt tax. After having offered his resolution to the House
1413
Mr. S. Wortley
said, that if called upon to make an election betwixt the total repeal of the salt tax or part of the leather tax, he should prefer voting for the total repeal of the salt tax; although he did not think that the repeal of either of them would much benefit the country.
The House divided: For the original resolution, 104. For Mr. Curwen's amendment, 92.—Majority, 12.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Monday, July 1.
THE BUDGET.
The House having resolved itself into a committee of Ways and Means,
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, it might be thought requisite for him make some apology to the House for submitting to it the general state of the financial operations of the year, before it had acceded to a large portion of the estimates which it was generally thought necessary to pass previously to any winding up of the statement of the public expenditure. It had generally been deemed proper to go through the whole of the votes of Supply before the Ways and Means were submitted to the House, containing a review of the operations of finance by which they were to be substantiated. He was obliged, however, to deviate from that course on the present occasion, owing to the late period to which the session
1414
1415
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
1416
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
1417
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
1418
l
l
l
s
d
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
1419
l
l
l
l
1420
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
1421
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
Having stated the receipts of the year at 54,253,000
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
1422
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
1423
l
Mr. Maberley
said, that the sinking fund was put forward by the right hon. gentleman, as what he might call the
hocus pocus
minus
l
l
l
l
1424
l
l
s
l
l
l
3
l
l
l
l
1425
l
l
l
Mr. Ellice
said, he wished to call the attention of the House to the result, if result it could be called, of the statements of the chancellor of the exchequer. He did not think that any gentleman would derive consolation from the determination to which government had come of keeping up the establishments of the country as they at present existed, without any reduction. The right hon. gentleman had told them, that the charge for 1824 was to be exactly the same as the charge for 1822. The second part of the result in question, was the state of the sinking fund.
1426
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
1427
l
s
l
s
d
Mr. Ricardo
said, that the chancellor of the exchequer had held out great hopes of what was to be expected from the sinking fund, and had stated, that a mere accident only had prevented all those hopes from being realized this year, but that next year we should receive its full and effective benefits. He (Mr. R.) feared, however, that we should go on as well had done, and that some accident or other would continue to prevent us from enjoying those benefit which the
1428
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l,
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
1429
l
Mr. Hume
considered the nominal amount of the debt to be of much less consequence than the actual yearly annuity which the public had to pay in perpetuity. In 1815, the clear permanent charge of the funded debt was 27,638,902
l
l
l
l
1430
Mr. Lushington
said, before he f had heard, the statement of his right hon. friend, he was satisfied, from his own knowledge of the public accounts, that there was what the hon. member for Portarlington described to be the only true sinking fund—a surplus of income, above all expenditure, of five millions. According to the judgment of the hon. member for Aberdeen, there was no surplus whatever; in the opinion of the hon. member for Portarlington, there was about one million surplus; but he thought he could convince him the real amount was very different, even according to the hon. member's own mode of stating it. He had stated the expenses of the army, navy, ordnance, miscellaneous, extra expense in Ireland, and Greenwich hospital, to amount to 17,815,000
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
1431
Mr. Calcraft
thought the right hon. gentleman had forgotten, in taking credit for 530,000
l
l
l
l
l
l
Mr. J. Smith
declared himself friendly to a sinking fund. When they looked at the amount of the debt due to the public creditor, they must he satisfied that a sinking fund could alone tend to its extinction. It was on this account that he had ever felt disposed to advocate the principle of keeping up the funds at the highest price. The right hon. gentleman might thus hope reasonably enough, that he should be able to reduce the interest due to the public creditor. There were two ways of effecting such a reduction of interest. One of them he should denominate as fraudulent and scandalous, as one which would involve the country in ruin, overthrow all the institutions of the country, and prove effectually destructive to the landed interest. The second, and the more equitable mode, was, to raise the price of stock so high that the individual creditor should be contented to take a smaller interest on his debt than he had received before. If government performed its promise on the subject of economy, he was not without hope that the 4 per cent stock might be reduced to a lower rate of interest, and perhaps the 3½ per cent. stock reduced to three. With regard to the present distresses of the country, he saw no reason to suppose that they would be permanent: he had never known any article at an extremely low price that did
1432
Mr. Brougham
said, that if; instead of dealing in fulsome panegyrics on his colleagues, the hon. secretary to the Treasury had come at once to the pinching view of the subject taken by the hon. member for Abingdon, he would have rendered more service to his colleagues than he had clone by the eulogiums which he had thought fit to pronounce upon them. What had these admirable ministers accomplished by all their unheard-of labours? The finance committee of 1817 had estimated the expense of the establishments of that year at 17,550,000
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
1433
The first resolution was agreed to. On the second being put,
Mr. Grenfell
begged to put a question regarding the Austrian loan, from which he was sorry to see no sum carried to the credit of the year. Last session the noble marquis had held out a hope that something might be obtained; and, certainly, when the debt was contracted, more solemn assurances of good faith could not have been given. In the whole, reckoning principal and interest, it was, he believed, 17 millions. He apprehended that some bonds were given at the time of the loan, and there seemed no reason why they should not be put up to auction: no doubt speculators would give something for them, and however little, it might be applied to: the public service.
The Marquis of Londonderry
said, that a negotiation was still in progress. From the state of the Austrian finances a moderate compromise only could be expected. It would be too much for him to give any assurance that some arrangement might possibly be made, but still he was not absolutely without hopes upon the subject.
On the resolution respecting a lottery,
Mr. J. Martin
declared be would take the sense of the committee upon it.
Mr. Hume
observed, that the chancellor of the exchequer had hinted that he would give it up, if some other tax were substituted. As the wishes of the country had been so often expressed against lotteries, he thought 200,000
l
Mr. W. Smith
was of opinion, that if lotteries were continued, one commissioner only was necessary. All of them had not been able to prevent their secretary from appearing on the list of public defaulters.
The committee then divided: For the resolution, 74; Against it, 34. The other resolutions were agreed to.
ALIEN BILL.
Mr. Secretary Peel
Mr. Hobhouse
said, that when he beard that it was intended to introduce this measure to the House, he stated that he
1434
1435
principiis obsta
1436
1437
1438
"nisi antea publice prohibiti,"
"publice."
"publice prohibiti"
1439
his
1440
1441
1442
1443
1444
1445
"For Satan, now is wiser than of yore,
"And tempts by making rich—not making poor."
1446
primâ facie,
1447
Mr. F. Robinson
said, the hon. member contended, that the present measure was inconsistent with the liberality and hospitality of the English character; that it was brought forward under false pretences, in subservience to the views of other states, and for the purpose of aiding them in preventing the general diffusion of liberty. The main ground on which he had rested his argument, that the bill was inconsistent with the spirit of the British constitution, was the language of Magna Charta. Now, the right conferred on aliens by Magna Charta was a right accompanied with an exception and a qualification, which proved that our ancestors, who established the right, foresaw Ate possibility of cases occurring, in which it might be necessary to impose restrictions. It could never be justly contended, that the law of England was tyrannical and oppressive, because it did not extend to foreigners those rights and privileges, which the natives of this country enjoyed. He denied that the conferring of this power was any, impeachment of those virtues of liberality, hospitality, and generosity, for which this country was distinguished. Could it be fairly imputed to any individual, who opened his doors to a party who sought
1448
1449
Mr. John Williams
said, he objected to the bill in every point of view, but he felt that no objection to it was more striking than the very principle on which it was recommended for adoption. The right hon. secretary and the right hon. gentleman who had just sat down, both called upon the House to invest the government with a dangerous; because discretionary, power, on the presumption that it would not be absused. Setting aside mere insinuation and surmise, not a single direct allegation had been made to prove the necessity of this bill. The right hon. gentleman had said, that particular emergencies might arise out of a particular crisis, but lie had not had the nerve to state that those emergencies had arisen, and surely it would be time enough to invest ministers with extraordinary powers when such a period had actually arrived. The learned gentleman opposite (Mr. Plunkett) had contended for the right of the sovereign to send foreigners out of the country by analogy, from his supposed right of restraining his subjects from quitting the country and he had referred to the writ of
ne exeat regno
ne exeat regno
1450
Mr. Hudson Gurney
said, he could not but think this bill had been opposed in speeches of outrageous exaggeration. He had never before given any vote on the measure, as feeling really incompetent to decide either on its necessity or its utility. But though he was by no means carried away by the extravagant declamation of the hon. and learned member for Knares-
1451
The question being put, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the chair," the House divided: Ayes, 142; Noes, 66.
List of the Minority
Abercromby, hon. J.
Denison, W. J.
Althorp, viscount
Evans, W.
Barnard, viscount
Fergusson, sir R. C.
Bennet, hon. H. G.
Fitzgerald, lord W.
Benyon, B.
Fitzroy, lord C.
Bernal, R.
Foley, J. H. H.
Brougham, H.
Folkestone, viscount
Benett, J.
Forbes, C.
Baillie, J.
Graham, S.
Cavendish, lord G.
Gurney H.
Cavendish, C.
Hamilton, lord A.
Colburne, N. R.
Honywood, W. P.
Davies, T. H.
Hume, J.
Denman, T.
Hutchinson, hon. C. H.
Duncannon, viscount
Hill, lord A.
1452
James, W.
Rowley, sir W.
Jervoise, G. P.
Robarts, A.
Kennedy, T. F.
Robarts, G.
Lamb, hon. G.
Rumbold, C.
Lockhart, J. J.
Scarlett, J.
Maberly, John
Scott, J.
Maberly, W. L.
Sefton, earl of
Mackintosh, sir J.
Smith, W.
Martin, J.
Stewart, W.
Maule, hon. W.
Warre, J. A.
Milbank, M.
Western, C. C.
Moore, P.
Whitbread, S.
Marjoribanks, S.
Williams, W.
Newport, sir J.
Williams, J.
Nugent, lord
Wood, alderman
Powlett, hon. W.
Ward, hon. J. W.
Prittie, hon. F. A.
TELLERS.
Palmer, C. F.
Hobhouse, J. C.
Ramsden, J. C.
Wilson, sir R.
Ricardo, D.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Thursday, July 2.
MARRIAGE ACT AMENDMENT BILL.]
On the order of the day for the third reading of this bill,
Lord Stowell
1453
Lord Ellenborough,
after so many days had elapsed since the nullity clause had been rejected by the unanimous sense of the House, was not prepared for this funeral oration in its praise. It had been rejected in consequence of the opinion expressed by the right rev. prelates, that marriages once solemnized ought never to be broken, and he had not heard one word since, in favour of its revival. The learned lord spoke of the present bill as giving premiums to undue marriages; he (lord E.) on the contrary, thought that the existing act gave those premiums. It induced men who were desirous of obtaining a woman's person, to marry her, knowing that her marriage could be broken whenever they pleased. The present bill not only prevented such immorality, but deprived adventurers of the prize which they had attempted to gain; for it took away all the property from them and sent them to pass the rest of their lives in Botany Bay. The learned lord seemed to think that marriage was ordained, not for the satisfaction of the persons married, but for that of fathers and mothers.
Lord Holland
said, it was with much surprise he had heard the learned lord describe this bill as a repeal of the ancient law of marriage. What, the ancient law which commenced in 1754? The fact was, that the bill restored a part of the ancient law of the country. The learned lord would punish every fraudulent marriage with nullity; but that very nullity which he thought capable of preventing fraud was really the premium for committing it. In a few instances the dread of nullity might affect the guilty party; but in 99 cases out of 100 it fell on an innocent victim. Both on the ground of reason and precedent their lordships were justified in passing this bill.
The clause was agreed to.
The Lord Chancellor
Lord Ellenborough
thought that the question of the knowledge of both parties, independently of any other objection, could scarcely ever be proved in a court of justice.
1454
The Lord Chancellor
said, he would divide the House on the question, if it was only to record his opinion of the measure.
The Ear of Liverpool
was not friendly to the retrospective clause as it stood. He wished an exception had been made, saving all suits pending. He could not, however, approve a clause such as that proposed by his learned friend which depended upon proof of a nature extremely difficult to be obtained.
Their lordships divided; Contents, 18; Not-contents, 68 Majority against the amendment, 50.
The Lord Chancellor
then proposed a clause for rendering valid, deeds, assignments, and settlements made by persons having claims on property affected by this bill. He should first propose it without the words "upon good and valuable consideration," and if rejected that shape, would propose it with those words.
The Earl of Liverpool
thought this qualification necessary to the retrospective clause.
The Earl of Westmoreland
conceived that it would lead to an inextricable labyrinth, and would, in a still more odious manner than the clause which had just been rejected, legalize marriages, but deprive children declared legitimate of the property to which they were entitled, because a third person had willed or conveyed away what had never been his own.
The Marquis of Lansdown
contended that the clause proposed by the learned lord would produce a monstrous state of things. It would declare children legitimate, but would disinherit them of their property: it would people that House with titled beggars, enjoying the honours of their ancestors, but stripped of the means of supporting those honours. If their lordships adopted this proviso, they would leave existing possession subject to endless litigation and fraud.
Lord Ellenborough
hoped, after their lordships had agreed to the retrospective clause, that any attempt to render it nugatory by provisos like the present, would prove unavailing. The course pro; posed was one, which, as guardians of the public morals, their lordships could hot adopt; for it would introduce a system of left-handed marriages in the true German style—marriages which gave legitimacy, but not property.
Lord Redesdale
contended, that to de-
1455
The House then divided: Contents, 27; Not-Contents, 51; Majority against the clause, 24. A second division took place on the same clause, but with the addition of the words, "for a good and valuable consideration." Contents, 31; Not-Contents, 48; Majority against the clause, 17.
The Lord Chancellor
then said:—My lords, ten days ago, I believe, this House possessed the good opinion of the public, as the mediator between them and the laws of the country: if this bill pass tonight, I hope in God that this House may still have that good opinion tent days hence. But to say the best of this measure, I consider it neither more nor less than a legal robbery; so help me God. I have but a short time to remain with you, but I trust it will be hereafter known that I used every means in my power to prevent its passing into a law.
On the question, that the bill do pass, the House divided: Contents, 41; Not-Contents, 18: Majority, 23.
PROTESTS AGAINST THE MARRIAGE
The following Protest was entered on the
Journals, against to the first enacting clause:
DISSENTIENT:—Because it appears to me, that the withdrawing the effect of nullity from the marriages of minors, had without the consent of parents, is likely to produce more and greater mischiefs than such as can fairly be considered as resulting from the general operation of the subsisting Marriage Act.
"STOWELL."
The following Protest was entered against passing the said bill:
"DISSENTIENT:—1st. Because the bill proposes to repeal retrospectively a law which has endured and been enacted upon nearly seventy years, governing the rights of persons and of property; and such repeal is, therefore, a dangerous precedent, destroying all confidence in rights founded on existing law, and threatening, by its consequences, the destruction of all law.
"2nd. Because the injustice and impolicy of repealing the law retrospectively, is acknowledged by the several qualifications introduced into the bill to limit the effects of such retrospective repeal; and yet clauses offered further to limit such effects were rejected, and many incon-
1456
"3rd. Because, whatever evils may have arisen from the effects, in some instances, of the law proposed to be repealed, the evil of retrospective repeal of a law which has so long endured is much greater, considered as a precedent, which may be used to justify the grossest injustice.
"ELDON, C. REDESDALE,
"SHAFTESBURY, COLCHESTER."
"DISSENTIENT:—1st. For the above reasons, and also because the bill is not, either with respect to marriages heretofore had without the consent of putative fathers, or heretofore had without the consent of natural and lawful fathers, founded upon misapprehension of the law creating any such general practice, as in my judgment can authorize the House to legislate, as in this bill, retrospectively with respect to such marriages.
"2nd. Because the House, having refused to insert clauses in the bill saving vested rights, and rights acquired by purchasers of estates for good or valuable considerations, from persons by the law of the land entitled to sell or settle such estates, appears to me, by this measure, to have acted contrary to the principles which have hitherto secured to the subjects of this country their property, and to have rendered the bill, if otherwise fit to pass into a law, such as no reasoning can sanction, and no precedents can justify.
"ELDON, C.
"SHAFTESBURY.
"COLCHESTER."
"For the second reason:—
"VERULAM, STOWELL.
"SIDNEY, CAMDEN."
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Tuesday, July 2.
SMALL NOTES BILL.
On the order of the day, for the second reading of this bill,
Mr. James
observed, that by the law as it at present stood, Bank of England One pound notes would cease to be a legal tender after the 1st of May next. He wished to know whether the present bill would make such notes a legal tender beyond that period.
The Chancellor If the Exchequer
re-
1457
Lord Folkestone
thought this a partial repeal of Mr. Peel's bill. Its object was to get one-pound notes into circulation. The House by passing it would incur afresh all the dangers of multiplied forgeries. He therefore trusted they would pause before they gave their sanction to it.
Mr. H. Davis
supported the bill, on the ground that the currency was not abundant.
Mr. James
said, that as the people were to have the option of receiving either bank notes or sovereigns, those who were so silly as not to demand gold in place of paper, deserved whatever might happen. He thought the bill would sanction a return to everlasting payments in paper, and he would divide the House upon it.
Mr. Curwen
hoped his hon. friend would not oppose a measure which was calculated to afford great benefit to the country. He knew that people generally preferred small notes to gold.
The House them divided: For the second reading, 47; Against it, 4.
EXCISE LICENCES REGULATION BILL.
Mr. Wodehouse
commenced by observing, that in 1802, five shillings covered all the expenses to which the maltsters were liable for their licences. Afterwards a gradual increase had been made in the price of them, until they now cost 4
l
s
l
s
Mr. W. Smith
seconded the motion.
1458
Mr. Bright
thought the motion of the hon. member was of a very important nature, and that the country was deeply indebted to him for bringing it forward. It appeared to him to be only necessary to bring the act in question before the House to obtain the repeal of it. He particularly, complained of the manner in which it had been smuggled through the House.
Mr. Lockhart
said, that in consequence of what had occurred with regard to this bill, it was his determination to move, next session, that it be a standing order of the House, that no bill, authorizing any taxation, or the regulation of any taxation, should be read a second time without being previously printed.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
contended that the act in question had not been hurried though the House, and declared that nothing could be farther from his intention upon any occasion than to take parliament by surprise. He was glad that there was a clause in this act enabling the House to reconsider it this session. The object of that clause, he would frankly confess, was, to make the tax local as well as personal.
Mr. W. Smith
insisted that the bill had been smuggled through the House, like several others introduced by the Treasury.
Mr. Lushington
denied that the bill had been improperly hastened, and said, that at the desire of the hon. member for Bristol, the third reading had been suspended for a week, as he wished to have an opportunity to look into its provisions, and yet he allowed the bill to pass in silence. The bill went to prevent harassing suits, and the hon. member for Bristol would find, that if it were repealed, his constituents would be in a worse condition than before.
Leave was given to bring in the bill.
REPEAL OF THE HOUSE AND WINDOW
Mr. Hobhouse
said:—In rising to propose any reduction of the taxation of the country, I am aware of the many objections which may be made to me, and of the many difficulties which naturally oppose any such proposition. I am aware that it is said, and undoubtedly with some reason, that nothing can be more vulgar, as nothing can be more easy, than to point to the diminution of the public burthens as the only measure that can make the nation happy and prosperous. The topic is, I must confess, sufficiently
1459
"—is twice blessed,
It blesses him that gives and him that takes."
1460
damnantur votis
*
*
1461
"—rerum primordia pandam,
Unde omnes
netura
Quoveeadem rursum
natura
1462
l
l
l
l
1463
"Serit arbores quæ alteri sæculo prosint."
1464
1465
GREAT BRITAIN.
Taxes and loans
119,570,620
Charges of management
3,663,622
IRELAND.
Taxes and loans
7,455,239
Charges of management
1,039,731,
Total
£.131,629,111
l
1466
1
l
l
l
l.,
l
One billion, four hundred and sir millions, four hundred and thirty-six thousands, one hundred and forty eight pounds sterling.
*
*
1793
£17,658,418
4
17,170,400
5
17,308,811
6
17,858,454
7
18,737,760
8
20,654,650
9
30,202,915
1800
35,229,968
1
33,896,464
2
35,415,096
3
37,240,213
4
37,677,063
5
45,359,442
6
49,659,281
7
53,304,254
8
58,390,255
9
61,538,207
10
63,405,297
11
66,681,366
12
64,763,870
13
63,169,845
14
66,925,835
15
69,684,192
16
70,421,788
17
59,437,259
18
57,650,589
19
59,667,941
1467
l
l
l
*
l
l
l
20
58,680,251
21
59,769,680
22
60,686,676
*
Years ending 25th March.
1793
£244,064,335
4
251,988,783
5
267,635,345
6
326,833,921
7
371,119,039
8
398,051,408
9
432,605,789
1800
447,620,128
Years ending 5th January.
1801
479,046,141
2
522,228,729
3
540,668,080
4
551,368,256
5
575,310,723
6
604,535,141
7
625,130,227
8
637,738,420
9
648,024,192
10
658,360,665
11
666,665,446
12
682,805,104
13
713,357,041
14
794,326,522
15
817,633,616
16
863,031,371
17
847,206,875
18
838,767,526
19
840,738,518
20
840,313,885
21
838,607,743
22
831,557,493
1468
*
*
1469
1470
s
1471
1472
1473
l
l
real
l
1474
1475
l
l
1476
l
l
l
l
l.,
1477
1478
l
1479
1480
ad valorem
l
1481
1482
1483
l
l
l
l
d
d
s
s
d
s
d
s
d
Rent. Windows.
Duties 1797
Duties 1820.
Addition per cent.
Houses of
£.50
25
9
0
£ 22
10
2
150
50
30
10
0
26
14
2
167
50
35
11
0
30
18
2
180
50
40
12
0
35
19
2
200
100
25
11
10
29
11
10
157
100
30
12
10
33
15
10
172
100
35
13
10
37
19
10
181
100
40
14
10
43
0
10
196
1484
l
l
1485
1486
l
l.,
l
1487
l.,
l
l
l
1488
l.,
s
s
s
s
d
s
d.,
s
d
1489
1490
l
onus
1491
l
1. "That it appears to this House, that the present amount of taxation is so burthensome and oppressive as to make it the duty a this House to adopt every means by which, without detriment to the state, that taxation may be reduced:
2. "That the benefits supposed to be derived from the establishment of the sinking fund are illusory, and that to impose or continue any additional burthens on the people for the purposes of its support, is highly inexpedient and unwise:
3. "That the tax levied on windows in Great Britain is unjust, unequal in its operation, and most oppressive to those especially who are least able to bear it; and that it appears to this House, that the said tax should be forthwith and immediately repealed."
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that the proposition went to the destruction of the sinking fund, and the annihilation of public credit. If any thing could make it more inexpedient, or more to be rejected by that House, it was, that it would be a most unjust departure from all those pledges which the House had
1492
1493
Mr. Maberly
denied that the opponents of ministers were constantly making attacks upon the public credit. He repelled that charge most distinctly. He and his friends were anxious to reduce taxation, but it had never been hinted, that it was to be reduced at the expense of any particular class. He said, that public credit ought to be maintained, and that if the public purse contained 60 millions annually, the public creditor was to be allowed first to put his hand into it and to take out 30 millions. What the opponents of ministers complained of was, that the other 30 millions were not properly expended. The right hon. gentleman contended that the people did not complain. How could they complain? Or if they did, of what use would it be, when that very complaint would be the signal for sending in executions for unpaid taxes? They paid only because they could not help it, and because the House turned a deaf ear to their petitions. As the public creditor would have been obliged to bear all losses, so he was entitled to enjoy all advantages; and it was not the opposition, but the ministry, who endangered public credit, by dragging from the people more than they could afford to pay. With respect to the great reductions since the peace, he must observe that the capital of the country was better able to bear 17,000,000
l
1494
l
Mr. Wynn
expressed his surprise at the position so broadly laid down by the hon. gentleman, that not a farmer in the country could pay his rent. If this were so, how happened it that when farms were to be let, there was still great competition for them, and that there was never any difficulty in finding tenants? The pressure upon agriculture was heavy, but not to the extent stated. For his own part, he had always been anxious that the establishments should be diminished, and brought as nearly as possible to the standard of 1792. The army at present was greatly below what in 1817 it had been thought possible to reduce it, with a due regard to the security of the country. The hon. gentleman asked, why were not the current expenses reduced? Did he recollect that the pay of the army had been very properly augmented since 1792; and did he wish that the public security should be hazarded, by now attempting an unjust reduction of it? True it was that the price of provisions had fallen, but it would be a considerable time before the price of other articles, and particularly the price of labour, would accommodate themselves to the price of provisions.
Mr. Robertson
contended, that it was impossible the country could go on under the present system, by which posterity was to be burthened for the sake of relieving ourselves. This system began with the American war, and if continued the nation must be ruined. Was it not better to meet the difficulty boldly and manfully, and not to shuffle if off upon our successors? He looked with much ap-
1495
Mr. Hume
did not take the gloomy view of our situation which had been taken of it by the hon. gentleman who had just sat down. He believed the resources of the country were sufficient to make it rise superior to all its difficulties. Let those resources be properly managed, and this might become the happiest country in the civilized world. But with this statement he must couple the declaration, that our affairs were not so administered as t lead to such a result. The system acted upon for the last thirty years, had brought the country to its present situation. He complained of the manner in which its finances were managed. The confusion which prevailed with respect to them, was strikingly exemplified on the preceding night, when three or four gentlemen, who spoke on the budget, had all taken different views if that which ought to have been so plain that no men who had learned the common rules of arithmetic should be able to differ about it. He, however, congratulated the House that next year the chancellor of the exchequer proposed to put an end to the sham sinking fund. He and his friends had been contending, that the right hon. gentleman's sinking fund was not a Teal sinking fund; and the right hon. gentleman himself admitted, this year, that a real sinking fund could only be formed from a surplus over the expenditure. Where was this surplus?—and what had the tight hon. gentleman been doing but lending himself to as complete a humbug as ever was practiced on any set of men. He agreed with the chancellor of the exchequer that the Excise duties were generally of a voluntary description. The increase in the Excise, coupled with the fact that individuals might, if they pleased, refuse to contribute to the Excise taxes, formed a strong proof that the country in general did not feel that depreciation which affected some branches of its industry. He was anxious that the chancellor of the exchequer should leave the voluntary taxes, and repeal those tint were involuntary. The House and Window tax was one of an involuntary nature; every
1496
Window-tax
House-tax
£
s.
d
£
s.
d
1792.
England
927,630
12
11
163,412
18
2
Scotland
31,963
1
0
6,702
19
9
1798.
Eng.
1,416,891
17
4
210,816
0
0
Scot.
61,757
4
6
9,548,
0
0
1813.
Eng.
2,325,455
0
0
1,037,634
0
0
Scot.
154,550
0
0
66,494
0
0
1820.
Eng.
2,417,683
0
0
1,166,343
0
0
Scot.
147,525
0
0
86,720
0
0
l
l;
l
l
l
l
1497
Mr. Monck
was of opinion, that the sinking fund was injurious to, the public, and not beneficial to the national creditor. Nine out of ten placed their money in the funds as a matter of mere investment; and all they wanted was, to have their interest secured. Instead of laying on fresh taxes to support a sinking fund, he would say, reduce taxation as a boon to the fund-holder, whose comforts and enjoyments must be increased in proportion as he found his income increase in value. The security of the public creditor did not depend on the sums paid into the Exchequer, but on the ease and facility with which those sums were raised and collected. If the collection of the revenue created discontent and disquiet in society, then he would say, that the situation of the fundholder was one of very great uncertainty. He should support the motion, although he could not agree that the repeal of the house and window tax would be so beneficial to the agricultural and manufacturing interest as the removal of some other taxes. He should, for instance, like the duty of 10
s
l
1498
Mr. Dennis Browne
agreed, that the taking off the house and window tax would increase the revenue by inducing the return of absentees; but he must object to it at the present time, because the reduction of such an amount of income would go to shake the public credit.
Mr. Calcraft
thanked his hon. friend for having brought forward this motion in so very able a manner. It was, he was aware, a reduction of 2,700,000
l.,
Mr. Maxwell
said, that in his opinion, ministers had brought themselves and the country into great difficulty by a return to what they conceived to be a sound currency. The only way of inducing absentees to return to this country, was to take off the taxes which rendered it impossible for them to reside here. He was satisfied that the
eau medicinale
IRISH INSURRECTION ACT.]
Mr.
1499
Sir R. Wilson
protested in the most unqualified terms against the measure, and trusted that an early day would be fixed for its discussion.
Lord Folkestone
said, the House would bear in mind, that when, at the opening of the session, this measure was introduced, the reason alleged for its introduction was, that Ireland was in a state of insurrection, and even of actual rebellion. Now, he would take the liberty of stating, that the suspension of the Habeas Corpus had not been carried into effect in a single instance. The information upon which the act had at first been passed, had been meagre; and the noble marquis opposite had pledged himself that the whole state of Ireland should be gone into. Many members had, no doubt, voted for the measure upon the faith of this pledge, which had not been redeemed. The noble marquis and others had said that Ireland was in a state of absolute rebellion. This had, however, been denied by the attorney-general for Ireland, who had described the whole disturbance in Ireland as being contemptible. The House had thus been induced to pass the bill under false pretences. The noble lord then referred to the papers on the table, in order to show that the state of Ireland had, instead of improving, become absolutely worse under the operation of the measure. The turbulence and violence had no doubt been put down, but then the putting of them down had been only temporary, and the spirit of the people had not been corrected. It would be dangerous to render permanent a measure which conferred such powers, and which had been found not efficient. [Mr. Goulburn said, it was intended to continue the measure only for one year]. One year would not be sufficient for ascertaining whether the measure would be beneficial or not. It had already been in operation for five months, and it had not done any good; there was, therefore, no presumption in favour of a measure which should continue for a year. He thought it wrong to delay the discussion, as the government, or at least several members of it,
1500
Mr. Plunkett
said, he had never declared that the state of Ireland did not call for the measure in question. He had only observed, that the disturbances in Ireland were in no way connected with religious feeling.
Mr. Denman
complained that the measure would be putting Ireland for ever out of the pale of the constitution. He thought the clause which refused costs to those who had been successful in actions against magistrates under the act, was peculiarly objectionable; and that, for the purpose of removing that and other offensive clauses, the bill should be entitled a "Bill to continue and amend the act in question."
Leave was given to bring in the bill.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Thursday, July 4.
CHIEF BARON OF IRELAND.]
The Marquis of Londonderry
, seeing an hon. member in his place who had given notice of a motion respecting the Chief Baron of Ireland, wished to ask him if he would object to postpone his motion to an early period of the next session? Under the present pressure of business, he thought
1501
Mr. Spring Rice
was anxious to take, in the first instance, whatever step might best promote the ends of justice; and in the next, whatever might be most consistent with the dignity and convenience of that House. It was true, that if the business were now hurried on, much inconvenience would arise from commencing proceedings at a period of the session when it was impossible to carry them to a conclusion. But there was another in convenience; that of keeping a charge pending over the head of an individual, without bringing the case forward. For doing this, which must be the consequence of acceding to the noble marquis's proposition, he hoped he should not be held responsible. He did not mean to say that any blame attached to the noble lord opposite, as, upon the whole, he considered the course which he had suggested to be the best that could be taken. There was, however, another consideration of some importance. It was proper to consider how far an individual could with propriety continue in the administration of justice against whom such a charge had been preferred. If any means could be devised to prevent this, so that the party might remain prepared to meet the accusation directed against him, without in the meantime acting as a judge, it would be very desirable that such an arrangement should be made.—The nobles
1502
PETITION OF THE CALCUTTA BANKERS.]
Mr. Brougham
said, that the claim of the petitioners arose out of a loan made by them to the Nabob of Oude, on the security of his territories. The money so advanced was borrowed to pay certain subsidies to the East India Company, and, being so paid, came into its coffers. The territory upon which the money was advanced had since been partitioned, and half of it had come into the hands of the company. Though the revenue of the territory thus acquired by the company amounted to 3,000,000
l
Mr. Robertson
said, that the money had been lent at a most extravagant and usurious rate. He therefore must deprecate the interference of parliament to compel the payment of it.
Mr. Wetherell
regretted to hear language which was calculated to excite a suspicion that this money had been advanced in the most questionable manner. The money was borrowed to pay a subsidy due to the company. The company was therefore bound to repay that part of the debt for which the territory was mortgaged, as a security, to the Calcutta bankers. Convinced of the integrity of the parties lending this money, and the liability of the company to pay this debt, he should support the motion.
1503
Mr. Hume
, instead of looking upon this as a matter fit for public inquiry, thought it a private subject. Lord Cornwallis had declared that the government ought not to interfere with matters of private debt in India; and if the marquis Wellesley considered the present subject fit for public interference, he had had abundant opportunities of promoting inquiry into the transaction. If the House tolerated an inquiry into this case, they would next session have 5,000 applications of a similar nature.
Mr. Prendergast
said, that in the pecuniary transactions in which he was engaged in India, instead of being remunerated for his losses, he had been obliged, on the principle that half a loaf was better than no bread, to accept one half of his claim in lieu of the whole. He was compelled to abandon the other moiety, to which he was equally well entitled on every principle of equity and right, to the vizier. He would afterwards move, that the papers connected with his own case be laid before the House.
Mr. Astell
defended the conduct of the company, and said, that if the House consented to entertain this petition, there would be no end to petitions of a similar nature.
Mr. Plunkett
thought the petition was a fit subject for a committee. A
primâ facie
Mr. Wigram
said, that the company ought not to be called on in this matter. It was nothing more than an account between the vizier and the parties who had been thus concerned with him. The vizier alone, or his representative, could be answerable for it.
Mr. P. Moore
was astonished that the hon. gentleman who was the professed agent for the petitioners could have been induced so far to sanction their petition as to bring it forward. It would not be fair to make the company answerable for debts of which they knew nothing.
Lord A. Hamilton
did not mean to say that the company were liable for the whole debt; but it appeared to him that they were liable to pay a part of it.
Mr. Wynn
thought there was such a
primâ facie
1504
Mr. Money
was most anxious that justice should be done, but on looking at the papers, he thought the main allegations of the petition were disproved.
Dr. Phillimore
said, that after looking attentively at the documents he did not feel himself competent to determine whether the claim was or was not established, and therefore he should vote for farther inquiry.
Mr. Ricardo
thought it would be most impolitic to grant a committee.
Mr. T. Courtenay
said, this was a claim, not of liberality, but of right, and there was no judicial tribunal either in this country or in India by which it could be decided. The application was therefore properly made to the House of Commons. If the House refused to refer it to a committee, they would be in fact, trying this difficult question themselves, and deciding it against the petitioners, without hearing evidence. The board of control might, undoubtedly, if satisfied of the justice of the claim, have sent their mandate to the court of directors, ordering them to send a dispatch to India, commanding the payment of the debt claimed. But what would have been said, if the board had thus compelled the payment of 150,000
l
Mr. Brougham
said, the hon. secretary to the board of control had put the question on its true footing. This was not a question of liberality, but a strict claim of right, and could not be decided by any judicial tribunal.
The House divided: Ayes, 82; Noes. 39. A committee was accordingly appointed.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Friday, July 5.
CORN IMPORTATION BILL.]
On the order of the day for going into a committee on this bill,
Earl Bathurst
said, he did not intend to go at all into the consideration of
1505
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
1506
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
1507
s
s
Lord Erskine
observed, that the object of the present bill was to repeal in part the Corn act of the 55th George 3rd. The principle of that act was, that the farmer could not afford to sell at a less price than 80
s
s
l
1508
s
Lord Dacre
thought, that as the measure could not produce any immediate effect upon the agricultural interest, as it looked only to prospective good, and might produce much present mischief, it would be better that it should be postponed for the present session. The question before the House was one of comparison, and he would ask bow the mea-
1509
The Earl of Harrowby
observed, that if they refused to legislate until all the causes alluded to by the noble lord were ascertained, their proceedings might be postponed for a century. Some of the obvious causes of the depression of price were the large quantity of foreign corn imported in 1818 and 1819, and three successive superabundant harvests. The evil against which they ought to guard most cautiously was that of too sudden a depression of price by unlimited importation when from any cause the price was raised so high as to open the ports, and he thought that in the present state of the circulating medium, 70
s
s
The Earl of Carnarvon
admitted, that the British agriculturist could not meet the foreign grower in the home market without some protecting duty; but when their lordships were about to establish permanent duties for the importation of corn, they should consider what ought to be the minimum of protection. If it were fixed at a rate which would constantly keep corn high, trade would be
1510
s
s
s
Lord Redesdale
maintained that the present was not the time for legislating on the subject, and described the bill as offering an encouragement to the same species of gambling which prevailed in Change alley. It was for the advantage both of the grower and the consumer, that the price of corn should be kept as near an average as possible; but this gambling system would give rise to perpetual fluctuations. One of the cause of distress, he conceived to be the taxation; for if it took two bushels now to pay what one bushel would pay before the agriculturists must feel it burthensome. The present measure was not calculated to give satisfaction to anyone: By waiting, they might have better information as to the foreign markets. He did not see why postponement should not take place, when it was evident that unless the price rose to 80
s
Lord Ellenborough
said, his reason for supporting the bill was, not because it was a permanent measure, but because it went to provide against an evil which might be attendant upon a sudden return of high prices. He admitted that the bill would give no relief to the farmer;
1511
s.,
The Earl of Darnley
said, he had always deprecated inquiries into this subject, because he was satisfied they would not be attended with any beneficial effect to the agriculturist. The distressed situation of the farmer had been truly described; for he had, in fact, to give twice the amount of produce now for his tax that he did some few years back. It had been truly said, that it would be impossible to continue corn at the high prices of 80
s
s
The Earl of Morley
said, that looking at the quantity of corn in the country, he did not think it an impossible case that the ports might not, as the law now stood, be opened before the next session. To guard against the chance, however remote, of a circumstance, the evil effects of which would be felt for years to come, he would vote for the present bill.
The House divided: Contents, 37; Not contents, 19. The bill then went through the committee.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, July 5.
MARITIME RIGHTS.]
Sir J. Mackintosh
rose, to put two questions to the noble marquis opposite arising out of subjects which materially affected the naval interests of Great Britain. The House was aware that the emperor of Russia had issued a Ukase, by which he claimed, as Russian dominion, the North-east coast of Asia, and the North-west coast of America, attaching thereby to himself an extent of coast of 5,000 miles; and, as a proof of the exercise of sovereignty over those limits, forbidding the ships of all other nations to come nearer than 100 Italian miles of that part of the Northwest American coast, within 51 degrees North latitude. He understood there were now several ships fitting out in the port of London, for the purpose of carrying on traffic with that part of the Northwest American coast, which had hitherto been claimed as our own. He wished, therefore, to ask the noble lord, whether
1512
The Marquis of Londonderry
said, that a copy of the Ukase had been received by government, through the Russian ambassador: and shortly after its receipt, a note, in answer, was addressed to the ambassador, stating, that as far as regarded the right of sovereignty and the maritime principle, the British government could not accede to the terms of the Ukase; but offering to enter into an amicable explanation, with a view to a friendly arrangement.
Sir J. Mackintosh
said, he had another question to put to the noble marquis upon another incident that affected the lawful navigation of British subjects. The House must have heard of a recent decree of the Spanish Court of Admiralty at Porto Rico, by which a British vessel, trafficking with Buenos Ayres, had been condemned as good prize on account of an alleged contravention of the fiscal and colonial laws of that country. Now, though he was convinced that by international law no state had a right to detain vessels as prize which were trading with territories over which she claimed dominion, but of which she had not possession, still he did not know of any other mode of checking the practice which Spain had recently adopted than by recognizing at once the independence of the territories which she considered as colonies dependent on her. He wished to ask of the noble marquis, whether he had received any information of the condemnation of a British vessel at Porto Rico for a pretended contravention of the law of Spain in trading with the Spanish colonies; and, if he had, whether he had taken any measures to prevent the repetition of a similar injury?
The Marquis of Londonderry
had no recollection of having heard of such an occurrence before. If the hon. member would mention the name of the vessel, it might bring the circumstance to his mind; but at present he had no recollection of any thing at all like it. He had not, to the best of his knowledge, received any information of the fact. If it had occurred, he should be obliged to any hon. member who would make him acquainted with the particulars of it.
1513
Dr. Lushington
said, that the name of the vessel was the lord Collingwood, that he had seen the decree of condemnation, and that if the noble marquis would permit him, he would forward a copy of it to him for perusal. In consequence of this decree, the insurances to that part of the globe had risen from 30 to 70
s
The Marquis of Londonderry
repeated, that the document in question had never been in his possession. He should, however, be glad to peruse it.
NATIONAL MONUMENT IN SCOTLAND.]
Lord Binning
moved, that the petition relative to the National Monument in Scotland be referred to the committee of Supply.
Mr. Hume
wished to know why the petition was to be referred to that committee?
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
was of opinion, that it naturally belonged to the committee.
Sir R. Wilson
objected to the proposition, as the petition was founded on an erroneous statement of the funds applicable to that purpose.
Lord Binning
stated, that the sum of 100,000
l
Mr. Bennet
objected to the principle of this proceeding. He had voted for the 100,000
l
Mr. Hudson Gurney
thought, under the present circumstances of the country—acting on a system of severe, and, in many instances, of very unjust reductions of public expenditure, famine in Ireland, and distress in England—it was impossible to vote 100,000
l
Lord Binning
said, that the question was not now what the style of the monument should be, but whether the petition should be referred to a committee.
Mr. Hume
said, that this was not a time for a hasty appropriation of the public money.
Lord Binning
expressed his astonishment at the novel course which had been taken on the present occasion. He would withdraw his motion for the present.
1514
ARMY EXTRAORDINARIES.]
The House having resolved itself into a committee of supply,
Mr. Arbuthnot
said, that in consequence of what had passed in the committee last session, every effort had been made to render the estimates of the army extraordinaries more perspicuous and detailed. He hoped the committee would allow that he had redeemed the pledge which he gave on that occasion. Formerly, the practice was merely to state the amount of the bills drawn from the colonies; but the committee would now find an abstract of the particulars. The vote to which parliament had agreed last year was 1,050,000
l
l
l
l
Mr. Hume
said, that though considerable improvement had taken place in the manner of making out these estimates, still he thought that the separate estimates for the colonies ought to be distinctly shown and explained. Where was there an account of the real revenues of these colonies? The revenue of Ceylon was 378,812
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
1515
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
1516
l
l
l
l
l
l
1517
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
Mr. Wilmot
contended, that the reduction proposed had nothing to do with the vote of 700,000
l
l
1518
Mr. Bennet
said, they had heard much of the importance of the duties entrusted
1519
l
l
d
l
Mr. Goulburn
would never consent that any of his majesty's subjects should be given up in the manner pointed out by the hon. gentleman. With respect to the fortifications erecting in Canada, they were rendered necessary in consequence of the Americans having built a considerable fortification on their frontier.
Mr. Huskisson
defended the propriety of employing colonial agents. The hon. member for Aberdeen had divided the
1520
Mr. T. Courtenay
said, he was surprised at the assertion of the hon. member for Shrewsbury, that the office of agent for the Cape, which he (Mr. C.) held, was an office that had no duty attached to it. That hon. member, in the whole course of his parliamentary life, never made a greater mistake. Precisely the same description of duties which his right hon. friend (Mr. Huskisson) had performed for Ceylon, he (Mr. C.) now performed for the settlement at the Cape. The duties connected with the agency for Ceylon were undoubtedly: more extensive than those which he had to perform, but then his salary was proportionably larger. He might appeal to h is hon. friends, whether he was not considered
a bore
1521
Mr. Brougham
said, that with respect to the agents, he was convinced that the right hon. gentleman and the hon. secretary were not overpaid: they were worth the money: they were in fact the friends at court of the colonies. But what they did for the colonies with his majesty's government, they did at the expense of the people of this country.
The Committee divided: For the original resolution, 82.; For the amendment, 55.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Monday, July 8.
SMALL NOTES BILL.]
Mr. Bennet
presented a petition from Mr. James Ferguson, of Newman-street, stereotype printer, praying that parliament would not sanction the Small Notes' bill, until they had satisfied the House, that they had used the best means in their power to frame a note, which furnished a better security than their present one, against the attempts of forgers.
Mr. Hume
hoped that the House would pass the bill for circulating small notes exchangeable for specie. Along with this, however, it became the bank to consider, that as the new bill would enable them to issue small notes during the term of their charter, it was doubly incumbent upon them to issue such notes as were least likely to be imitated. He knew very well, that an inimitable note was unattainable; but he also knew that the Bank had the means in their power of lessening the danger from forgery, by improving their own notes, and imposing additional difficulties upon the attempts to imitate them.
Mr. Pearse
said, that the Bank could have no other desire than to issue the best note they could for the security of the public. The utmost care had been taken by the directors. Commissioners appointed to inquire into the subject had sat long, and the result of their investigation was, that it was impossible to find any other plan of note which was not more easily imitated than the present one. The Bank engraver had imitated all the plans submitted by the commissioners.
Mr. Lockhart
agreed, that an inimitable
1522
Mr. Hudson Gurney
said, he must extremely doubt what had been said of the great facility of forging the notes of the Bank of England. If so, there would have been many forgers; but it was well known, that all the forged one pound notes came from one or two manufactories of them at Birmingham, in which considerable capital was employed, and that the Bank had never been able to come at the actual parties concerned in the fabrication—all the prosecutions having been of issuers, or of persons who dealt in the article. The country banks were protected, not by the excellence of their plates, but by the narrow limits within which their notes circulated.
Mr. Pearse
said, that the country bankers rarely prosecuted. They often paid the forgeries sooner than take any step which might affect the credit of their notes.
Mr. Ricardo
approved of the appointment of inspectors, particularly in the metropolis.
Mr. Hart Davis
said, that the Bank had lately received a million sterling of their notes from the country, without a single forgery.
Ordered to lie on the table.
IRISH INSURRECTION BILL.]
Mr. Goulburn
said, that under no circumstances could he consider it as other than a most painful duty to have to submit to the House the continued application to Ireland of the provisions of the Insurrection act. For although he had more than once thought it his duty to support bills of this description when proposed by others, he could nevertheless assure the House that there was not a man in it, who was more sensible than himself of the objections to which they were liable. Most gratifying indeed would it have been to the noble lord at the head of the Irish government, if he, had felt himself justified, consistently with a due regard to the safety of the lives and property of the quiet and loyal inhabitants of Ireland, in dispensing with a measure which,
1523
1524
1525
1526
1527
1528
1529
Sir Robert Wilson
said, he considered the present to be a measure which would retard, instead of advancing, the tranquillity of Ireland. Besides, if the House passed this bill without receiving from ministers a guarantee of an investigation into the state of Ireland, then no such investigation would at all take place. When it was found that the causes of any recent conflagration still existed, it became a duty to take such measures as would prevent the operation of those causes in future. He begged leave to disclaim all imputation on the character of the noble marquis now at the head of the Irish government. This was the more
1530
vis medicatrix
1531
1532
1533
1534
l
l
l
l
l
l
1535
Mr. Lucius Concannon
urged the immediate necessity of adopting measures calculated to heal the wounds of his native country; and warmly expressed the indignation which he felt at seeing ministers allow month after month to elapse, and calamity after calamity to occur, without any endeavour to arrest the progress of the evil.
Colonel Davies
said, that although he fully concurred in the indignation expressed against the ministers for their want of exertion to remove the causes of the misery of Ireland, yet as he could not consent, on account of any fault of theirs, to leave the loyal inhabitants of that country exposed to the dagger of the midnight assassin, he should, however reluctantly, vote for the bill. While he made this sacrifice of personal feeling, he might be allowed to ask how the ministers justified themselves for not having, during the session, proposed any measure for the relief of Ireland, except that insufficient measure for the leasing of tithes? One cause of Ireland s misfortunes was, that redundancy of population, which appeared to increase with an accumulated force. That redundancy of population did, in his opinion, produce the moral degradation of Ireland; and, operating on the principle of reaction, that moral degradation had the effect of keeping up the excessive population. The Irish gentlemen were not guiltless in this case, by their practice of multiplying freeholds for election purposes. He should be sorry to narrow the elective franchise; but if leases for life no longer gave a vote in Ireland, the gentry would have a direct interest in diminishing the population on their estates, and of removing the great evil. A heavy responsibility rested on the government, for its conduct towards a country, which, from its natural advantages, might have been a paradise, but which, by mismanagement, had been made a terrestrial hell.
Mr. Spring Rice
said, that when the act had first been passed, he had never discharged a inure painful duty than in giving it his support. If at the time when the Insurrection act had been first proposed this session, ministers had not given
1536
1537
1538
1539
1540
in rerum natura
prœmium et pœna
pœna
pœna
in prœmio
1541
l
l
1542
vice versa
Duty.
Criminal convictions.
Malt.
Spirits.
In 1815 there were 771
14
s
0
d
5
s
6
d
In 1816 there were 907
17
4
6
0
In 1817 there were 532
17
4
5
6
In 1818 there were 499
9
4
5
6
In 1819 there were 531
14
0
5
6
In 1820 there were 723
14
0
5
6
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, that in every instance of conviction under the Insurrection act, the same consideration had been given, as would have been bestowed upon
1543
Mr. J. Smith
said, that nothing but a system of coercion had been pursued in the government of Ireland for the last two centuries; and what had been the fruits of that system?—insurrection and rebellion. He would put it to the House whether, during all that period, any fair attempt had been made to redress the real grievances of Ireland? The cause of the greatest evils in that country was, that the occupiers of land were made responsible for rents which could not be met by any industry or fair ingenuity. It was
1544
Sir J. Newport
was not prepared to take upon himself the responsibility of opposing the present measure, under the circumstances upon which it was demanded; but he thought that its continuance ought to be limited to the 1st of May next. He trusted, however, that no farther prolongation of the law would be found requisite; for heavy would be the evil of teaching Ireland to believe that, in spite of all the promises held out to her at the Union, she was still to remain the victim of penal statutes. Forty three years had now elapsed since one of the greatest lawyers and statesmen of his country, the lord chief baron Burgh, speaking of the situation, as to penal laws, of Ireland, had said, "penalty, punishment, and Ireland, are synonymous, and they are written on the margin of her statute-book in letters of blood." If the Irish were alienated from the laws under which they lived, to what cause but to a defective government could that alienation be ascribed? He did say that ministers had not done their duty towards Ireland. He had the highest respect for the noble person at the head of the Irish go-
1545
Mr. Plunkett
said, he considered the present measure as a lamentable evil, which could only be justified by the extreme necessity of the case. As a permanent measure he should not merely deprecate it, but consider it as amounting to an extinction of the constitution of Ireland; and in that light he knew it was viewed by the noble marquis at the head of the government of that country. If he thought for a moment that the passing of the present measure was to supersede the necessity of measures of amelioration, he would be the last man to consent even to its temporary enactment. That there was no indisposition in the legislature to apply itself to such objects, would be evident to all who looked at the past and present condition of Ireland. If any country in the world had made greater progress in civilization during the last half century than another, that country was Ireland. Let hon. members recollect the time when Ireland had truly been the victim of penal laws. Let them remember those statutes which, as chief baron Burgh forcibly expressed it, "had visited the Catholic in his cradle, and accompanied him to his grave." Those laws were now no more. Was that nothing done for the country? Thirty-eight years ago Ireland stood destitute alike of commercial advantage and constitutional privilege. Were the rights, the laws, the free trade, which had been given to her, nothing? And had there been any indisposition on the part of government to the granting of those immunities? Upon the question of emancipation, different opinions were entertained. For
1546
1547
Mr. Grattan
wished the bill to be limited to the 1st of May. He trusted the House would feel it its duty to make a serious inquiry into the state of Ireland.
The House divided: For the original motion, 135; For sir R. Wilson's amendment, 17.
List of the Minority
Barrett, S. M.
Nugent, lord
Bennet, hon. H. G.
Palmer, C. F.
Concannon, L.
Ricardo, D.
Cradock, S.
Robarts, Col.
Fitzgerald, lord W.
Stewart, W.
Hume, J.
Whitbread, S. C.
Hutchinson, hon. C. H.
Williams, J.
Maberly, John
TELLERS.
Monk, J. B.
Wilson, sir R.
Moore, P.
Smith, J.
The House went into the committee, in which a division took place on sir J. Newport's motion, for limiting the duration of the bill to the 1st of May, instead of the 1st of August: For sir J. Newport s motion,37. Against it, 94.
List of the Minority
Brown, D.
Glenorchy, vis.
Barrett, S. M.
Grattan, J.
Bankes, H.
Hume, J.
Bernal, R.
Hutchinson, hon. C. H.
Brougham, H.
Hamilton, lord A.
Concannon L.
Hill, lord A.
Cradock, S.
Kingsborough, lord
Calvert, C.
Langston, J.
Calcraft, J.
Lamb, hon. G.
Fitzgerald, lord W.
Monck, J. P.
Grant, J. P.
Martin, J.
1548
Maberly, J.
Robarts, Col.
Marjoribanks, S.
Rice, T. S.
Newport, hon. sir J.
Robinson, sir G.
Nugent, lord
Stewart, W.
Palmer, C. F.
Wilson, sir R.
Parnell, sir H.
Williams J.
Prittie, hon. F.
Wood, alderman
Powlett, hon. W.
TELLER.
Ricardo, D.
Davies, col.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Tuesday, July 9.
BREACH OF PRIVILEGE—COMPLAINT
Mr. W. Courtenay
rose, to bring under the notice of the House two recent publications, to which he considered it necessary to call their very serious attention. The House would recollect that some little time ago, an hon. member (Mr. Abercomby) called for a parliamentary inquiry into the conduct of the lord advocate of Scotland in relation to the public press of that country. In the course of the debate on that occasion, the hon. member was under the necessity of taking upon himself the disagreeable part of an accuser. Disagreeable as that office must have been to the feelings of the hon. member, it would not be doubted that he was then discharging one of the most important functions which a member of the House of Commons could exercise. Any thing, therefore, which interfered with the free exercise of such a function must be considered as a breach of the privileges of that House. In the course or the observations which the hon. and learned gentleman had made on the evening alluded to, he was called upon to make some remarks on the conduct of certain persons connected with public employments in Scotland. Those remarks appeared to have elicited the particular comments of which he (Mr. C.) was now speaking from the parties concerned; and to the publications in which they were contained, it was his wish to call the attention of the House. He held in his hand a pamphlet, entitled "A Letter to the hon. James Abercromby, by John Hope." Mr. Hope appeared to be one of the individuals on whose proceedings the hon. member had thought it requisite to make some reflections. Now, throughout the letter, that sort of spirit was visible, which, when applied to words spoken by an hon. member in the conscientious discharge of his duty within these walls, did appear a most open and daring viola-
1549
think yourselves safe
1550
1551
The Marquis of Londonderry
observed, that in some instances the House had at once voted the paper complained of to be a breach of privilege, but in other cases it had postponed coming to a decision till a future day.
The Speaker
was aware that both courses had frequently been taken; but he believed the course taken when it was a constructive breach of privilege, differed from that which had been pursued where the breach was positive and distinct. The question now was whether there had been a comment, and what were the terms in which that comment was couched. If there had been a comment at all, there was an end to the question about breach of privilege.
Mr. Wynn
agreed that the contents of the paper, which had not been read, had no relation to the question then before the House; but as the passages which had been read might be mitigated or aggravated by the other parts of the documents, it was desirable that the House should be put in possession of the whole. In the case of Mr. Reeves the whole of a long pamphlet had been read at the table. This, however, was inconvenient, as the attention of the House could not be so fixed on the article while reading, as to make them fully acquainted with it, and therefore he thought the better course was, to postpone the further consideration of the subject till to-morrow.
Mr. Tierney
was decidedly of opinion that the extracts in question were a gross breach of privilege. If, however, any hon. member thought that reading the whole pamphlet might have the effect of mitigating the rigour of the House, he ought to have it read.
Mr. Wynn
said, that in the case of Mr. Hobhouse, the consideration of the subject had been adjourned for a day. That course he thought it would be desirable to pursue now.
The Speaker
was aware that a great variety of precedents were to be found,
1552
The Marquis of Londondcrry
thought the House would come to a decision of the subject with more advantage after having considered the papers during an interval. But he thought it might in the meanwhile, be proper for the House to desire the hon. member to attend in his place forthwith, and to require of him a pledge that no personal consequences would ensue upon this matter.
Mr. Tierney
agreed with the noble lord, that the House ought to order the attendance of its member in his place, and that no time should be lost in doing so. He of course knew nothing of what was passing, but he owned he spoke with great anxiety of mind, from the feelings of friendship which he entertained for one of the parties. He implored the House therefore, unless they entertained some reasonable doubt as to the breach of privilege, not to hesitate in coming to a decision on that point; as they would thereby lead the way to that other step, which was so indispensably necessary, in order to prevent the occurrence of serious consequences.
Mr. Wynn
said, he should move for the attendance of the hon. member forthwith; but, in the mean time, he thought the whole of the documents ought to be read.
Lord Binning
contended that the whole
1553
Mr. Brougham
could not avoid viewing these papers, in the first instance, as a breach of privilege. Incidental to the main question, another circumstance claimed their attention, the chance of immediate personal altercation. But the question before them was, whether or not a breach of their privileges had been committed? The circumstances to which he had alluded would only operate as a reason for proceeding with all possible dispatch. There was a material difference between this case and that of Mr. Hobhouse. The circumstances attending the latter case might have been indecorous, and might have been justly resented by that House; but it did not amount to that direct and immediate obstruction which an attack upon individual members of that House, particularly an attack upon a single member for discharging his parliamentary duty, was calculated to accomplish. All cases of libels upon that House Might be construed to amount to an obstruction; but there was a striking and manifest distinction between those general cases and cases like that under consideration, which was nothing more nor less than a direct personal attack upon a member of parliament for discharging his duty. The House would see the paramount necessity of proceeding with effect and without delay. The first step was to declare that the conduct of the individual amounted to a breach of privilege. The next duty was, to take immediate steps to bring the party before the House. The House was in the habit of calling upon members in cases of personal difference, and enforcing pledges that no farther steps should be taken by them; but in those cases the offence was committed in the presence of the House; the House was competent to form a judgment upon it, and to act upon that judgment. An hon. member had on one occasion overheard certain words that had passed between two members in the lobby; he informed the House of the circumstance, and both gentlemen were called before the House. But in these cases neither party had cause to complain of the decision—both were present, and justice was done between them. Now, he begged the House to see the situation in which his hon. and learned friend was placed. The motion really might be con-
1554
Mr. Wynn
fully concurred in all that had fallen from the learned gentleman. Among the most sacred and important duties which the House owed not only to itself, but to the country, was that of preventing, by every means in its power, the practice of making members responsible for words spoken within its walls. That course, in a case like the present, was the best, which met with the most
1555
nem. con.
Mr. Wynn
said, they must now adjourn the farther consideration of the subject, or make an order for the printers to attend, in order to get at the authors.
The Speaker
thought it would be better to order the printers to attend, and then adjourns the further consideration of the subject till to-morrow.
Lord Binning
said, that one of the printers lived in Edinburgh.
Mr. Tierney
said, that seven or eight days must elapse before the printer could attend, and supposing the session to terminate before the author was brought up, Mr. Abercromby would be bound by the order of the House, while the other party would be at liberty to act as they pleased. Could any one doubt that Mr. John Hope was the author of the letter. If there was no doubt on the subject, perhaps the noble lord opposite could vouch for the fact, and in that case it would not be improper to order at once Mr. John Hope to attend the House.
Lord Binning
said, he had certainly not the smallest doubt that the letter in question was written by Mr. Hope. He was perfectly convinced that Mr. Hope would avow the letter at their bar, and he hoped the House would act on this statement.
nem. con.
1556
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Wednesday, July 10.
CORN IMPORTATION BILL.]
On the order of the day for the third reading of this bill,
The Earl of Lauderdale
said, he wished their lordships to pause before they passed a measure of so much importance. He took a view of the operation of the existing act, and contended that instead of providing a
minimum
maximum
The Earl of Harrowby
conceived, that be was giving more effect to the existing act, by remedying the defects which it contained, and vindicated ministers from the charge of having abandoned the principles which they had formerly professed. It was better to legislate now, than to wait till prices should rise, and the public mind grow full of anxiety and alarm. He contended, that the bill would prove advantageous to the British farmer, by preventing unlimited importation whenever corn should rise above the protection price. He was not one of those who wished that the price of corn should reach 80
s
Lord Erskine
said, it was cruel to tarn upon the agriculturists, and tell them that they had not suffered from the change in the currency, and that they would be as well protected with 70
s
s
Earl Grosvenor
said, that when he found the bill petitioned against by the whole agricultural body, he could not consider
1557
Lord Redesdale
maintained, that every bill founded on the principle of averages was founded on a wrong principle, as the average prices returned were not the true prices. But even if those prices were correct, he should object to the time at which the present bill was brought in. He should prefer throwing the ports open to the importation of foreign corn, with such a duty as would enable the British farmer to meet it in the market.
The Earl of Carnarvon
contended, that a great protecting duty was necessary, in consequence of the alteration in prices produced by the change in the currency. He thought the present bill preferable to the act already in existence, though both were founded on erroneous data.
The. House divided: Contents, 32; Not-contents, 16. The bill was then passed.
PROTESTS AGAINST THE CORN IMPORTATION BILL.]
The following Protests were entered on the Journals:
"Dissentient:—Because this bill repeals the regulations as enacted by the 55th of George 3rd, chapter 26, whereby, after long and minute examination into the state of the b agriculture of the United Kingdom, it was by Parliament provided, as necessary to afford to agriculture a degree of protection equal to what the law gives to other branches of industry, that wheat from abroad should not be exposed to sale till the price in our markets amounted to 80
s
s
s
s
s
s
"Under this bill, therefore, the farmer will not only be deprived of the monopoly he enjoyed in the home market, till wheat attained the price of 80
s
s
s
s
s
1558
s
s
"That these regulations are ruinous, to the agricultural interest cannot be doubted. The petitions on the table of this House, in the strongest terms deprecating the proposed alteration in the law, sufficiently display the opinion of those whose habits give them practical know ledge on the subject; whilst the committee themselves, from whom the proposal emanated, by disclaiming all intention of rendering worse the present condition of the British cultivation, and proposing, as the bill enacts, that the 55th of the late king should remain in force till wheat rises to 80
s
"It is to me, therefore, a subject of deep regret, when the distress of the British cultivator is so feelingly described in the numerous petitions on our table, that this House should enact a regulation which, though it is only to take place at a future period, cannot but produce immediate discontent: for to me it appears that every sense of political discretion, and every feeling that actuates a generous mind, must unite in pointing out, that the moment in which the legislature is unwillingly compelled to avow its incapacity to devise any means of present relief for the distressed farmer, is the time of all others in which it ought to avoid announcing a future injury to his despairing mind. LAUDERDALE."
"DISSENTIENT:—Because the act of the 55th of the late king, chapter 26, which is partially repealed by this bill, was brought into parliament by his majesty's ministers to remove the admitted impolicy of unlimited importations of foreign grain; and 80
s
"Because, from an obvious defect in that act, whenever wheat in out markets rose to 80
s
s
1559
"Because, this defect in the act of the 55th of the late king soon became the subject of universal complaint, three millions and a half quarters of foreign grain having come free into our ports, and at very low prices, before their being shut in February, 1819, to the great depression of our markets ever since.
"Because the prices of grain from this and other causes having ceased to be remunerative, many petitions were presented to his majesty's ministers, and to both House of Parliament, praying for relief in this respect; and thereupon a committee was appointed to consider the justice of their complaints.
"Because such committee, as appears by its report in a former session of parliament, having pronounced that agriculturists of every description were consuming their capitals without any present or expected returns which could be remunerative, the House of Commons directed its inquiries to be renewed in the present session, for the express and only purpose of originating some further relief from the ruinous depression of our markets.
"Because the House of Commons, therefore, in the consideration of this subject, had, no other duty cast upon it by the whole course of its own proceedings but to attend impartially to the universal complaints throughout the country, which unanimously attributed the distresses to the undue and impolitic opening of the ports under the existing law, without a reasonable and fixed protecting duty, not liable to be defeated by fraudulent averages, nor disturbed by perpetual fluctuations, when the ports were open or shut at the adopted standard.
"Because, it was therefore with equal surprise and regret that I read this bill when it was brought before us, which ought to have been instantly rejected, since it passes by altogether the complaints of the petitioners, which its authors have professed all along to act upon and to relieve; and although the superabundance of supplies over the demands on our markets had been declared by his majesty's ministers to be the grievances, yet this bill unaccountably adds to them,
1560
s
s
s
s
s
"Because, to insist never the less that this injurious change in the existing law is a great advantage to those whom it professes to relieve, though against their own universal voice, as expressed without a single exception by all the petitions, upon our table, is to maintain an opinion, which, however honestly and ably supported, may be considered by the sufferers to be as unfounded as it appears to me to be absurd.
"Because, from the great preponderance in the representation of other classes over the landed interest in the House of Commons, the petitioners who have laid their calamitous condition before us naturally looked up to this House for constitutional support. The Statute book is filled with almost innumerable acts for the protection of our manufactures and commerce by duties and prohibitions, whilst the security of landed property has been wholly neglected. Indeed, when I contemplate this sudden invasion of the 55th of the late king, at the very moment when its protecting provisions ought manifestly to have been extended, it seems to me as if a course of experiments was on foot by philosophical theorists to ascertain under what accumulated pressure of unequal taxation, and unequal competition with untaxed countries, the impoverished cultivators of our soil can possibly continue to exist. ERSKINE."
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Wednesday, July 10.
POOR LAWS.]
Mr. Nolan
addressed the House to the effect following:
*
*
1561
1562
1563
*
*
l
l
l
l
1564
annual amount of the poor-rates yet known. Since then they have gradually declined as follows:
1818–19,
£.7,531,650
an. decrease,
£.358,498
1819–20,
7,329,594
an. decrease,
202,056
1820–21,
6,958,445
an. decrease,
371,149
Total decrease in last three years,
931,703
But the average increase of the poor-rates calculating upon each three years from March 1812, to March 1821, is
March 1812 to March 1815,
£.6,129,844
March 1815 to March 1818,
6,844,290
Increase from 1815 to 1818
714,446
1818 from 1821,
7,273,229
Increase from 1818 to 1821
428,939
The entire of these reports, by the committees on this subject, are worthy of the general attention. It is to be hoped that they will be continued annually, and upon enlarged principles of inquiry.
† See the return of the poor-rates and population in these parishes. Northiam, near half the population paupers, rates at 1
l
s
d
s
d
s
d
s
1565
1566
1567
*
*
1568
1569
1570
1571
1572
1573
s
1574
1575
1576
1577
1578
1579
1580
1581
l
1582
1583
1584
1585
*
*
——Fuit sapientia quondam
Publica privatis secernere, sacra profanis,
Concubitu prohibere vago, dare jura maritis,
Oppida moliri, leges incidere lingo:
Sic honos et nomen divinis vatibus atque
Carminibus venit.
HORACE.
1586
1587
1588
1589
1590
1591
1592
*
*
1593
1594
*
*
1595
1596
The Marquis of Londonderry
thought it would be most advisable to allow the bill to be brought in and read a first time, without entering into that kind of desultory discussion, the tendency of which would be, not to advance, but retard the object in view. He congratuluted his hon. and learned friend on the great pains be had taken upon this subject, and expressed his satisfaction at finding that his object was to bring back the system to what it was originally intended to be, instead of misleading the public mind, by any attempt to remove that which had grown up and strengthened with the institutions of the country.
Leave was given to bring in the bill.
ALTERED STATE OF THE CURRENCY.]
Mr. Western
said, that several honourable friends were absent who wished to take part in the discussion of his resolutions. Perhaps, therefore, he might be allowed to move the first seventeen now, without debate, and to bring forward the last on a future day. He was resolved that the subject should be again considered before the close of the session.
Mr. Ricardo
said, he could not agree to any of the resolutions in their present form; several of them contained mistakes in fact, and all of them were pervaded by an erroneous principle.
Mr. Huskisson
strongly objected to the postponement of the discussion.
Mr. Western
said, he was quite ready to proceed, if it was the desire of the House [go on, go on!]. It might be thought that he was pertinacious on this subject, but if those, who were of that opinion felt, as deeply as he did, the importance of the question, the unparalleled situation of the country, the unexampled ruin that had already spread around, the apprehension that that ruin was but the precursor of more extensive evils, and the conviction, that all was attributable to the cause to which he had already called the attention of the House, he was persuaded, that they would not blame him for his perseverance. It was his most decided opinion, that if the bill of 1819, was allowed to continue n force, its operation would involve this and the sister island in the most unprecedented condition of peril. He utterly denied that there was any
1597
1598
1599
1600
1. "That the Select Committee appointed last session to inquire into the petitions complaining of the distressed state of the agriculture of the United Kingdom, reported, That it was with deep regret they had to commence their report by stating, that in their judgment the complaints of the petitioners were founded in fact, and that at the price of corn, at that time, the returns to the occupiers of arable farms, after allowing for the interest of their investments, were by no means adequate to the charges and out-goings; and that a considerable portion thereof must have, therefore, been paid our of their capitals:—That the price of grain having experienced a still farther depression, viz., from 55
s
d
s
1601
2. "That it appears by the papers relating to the state of Ireland, laid before this House by his majesty's command, that serious disturbances had broken out in that country, of which the demand and collection of rents had been, on the part of the insurgents, the alleged causes; and subsequent information has been received, that the labourers in agriculture, from a partial failure in the crop of potatoes, together with a total want of employment, and consequent means to purchase other food, are in the most calamitous and deplorable situation; and that many have died from the want of nourishment, whilst the price of provisions still continues so low, as not to afford to the occupiers of land the means of defraying the various charges to which they are subject.
3. "That in the same report of the Select Committee of last session, it is stated, 'That the measures taken for the restoration of the currency have contributed to lower the price of grain and other commodities generally, and consequently to cause a severe pressure upon the industry of the country, and not only to have occasioned a proportion of the fall of prices here, but to have produced a similar, though not equal effect in other countries; and, in a degree, to have deranged the markets of every part of the civilized world.' That in proportion as all commodities, whether the produce of the soil, manufactures, or commerce, have experienced a depression of their money value; so must the proprietors have suffered a direct injury; and whatever may be the degree, it was impossible that the commercial and manufacturing classes of the community can long continue to prosper, whilst the cultivators of the soil are rapidly sinking into ruin and decay, and the labourers sulfating in consequence of the want of their usual employment.
4."That soon after the passing of the act of 1791, by which the Bank of England was restricted from paying its notes in specie, the ancient metallic, standard of value having been thus departed from, the currency of the country, composed of Bank-notes, became depreciated, which depreciation was evinced, and may be estimated by the amount of Bank paper money above 3
l
s
d
l
s
1602
l
s
d
l
s
l
s
d
s
d
s
d
s
s
s
d
s
d
5. "That the average price of wheat between the years 1797 and 1819 having been, therefore, in that currency about 80
s
s
d
s
s
1603
6. "That, from the year 1797 to 1816, the country was, with short intervals, engaged in a war of unprecedented expense; the taxes were quadrupled, as well as county and parochial assessments, and a heavy public debt created.—That this period was at the same time distinguished by extraordinary, efforts of national industry, applied to its agriculture, manufactures and commerce, by a facility and extension of credit in all those branches, giving more immediate activity to capital, and a consequent extent and complication of money engagements beyond all former precedent:—That the national debt, which on the 5th Jan., 1793, was 227,989,148
l
l
l
l
l
s
d
l
l
7. "That this taxation has acquired an additional weight by the act of 1819, and the measures preparatory thereto, the degree of which can in part be ascertained by a comparison of the price of gold, but more justly by the money price of commodities, by which the real value of all payments must be determined: that the equivalent in gold to 60,571,025
l
l
l
8. "That the average price of wheat of the former period having been 81
s
d
s
d
l
l
9. "That it appears from various evidence, given in successive committees appointed to consider the petitions of, the agriculturists, that the wages of labour of
1604
s
s
s
s
l
l
10 "That it appears by a comparison of the official and declared value of exports of British commodities, that in the year 1814, the declared value of the exports was 47,859,388
l
l
l
l
l
l
11 "That the farther reduction of wheat from 55
s
d
s
12. "That such effects could not by possibility have been in the contemplation of the legislature, still less of the people of England, at the time of the passing the act of 1819:—That its destructive consequences are now visible—that individuals held to their contract, either have been or must be ruined; an unexampled revolution of property follow, and the burthens of taxation become absolutely intolerable.
1605
13. "That by the parliamentary paper, No. 145, of the present session, columns 1 and 2, it appears, that from the 5th Jan. 1798, to the 5th Jan. 1816, the sum of 159,630,826
l
l
l
14. "That the average price of gold having been during that period 90
s
d
s
d
s
d
l
15. "That the average price of wheat having been during the above period 81
s
d
s
d
l
l
16. "That the annual charge of 23,860,020
l
l
l
l
17. "That all public creditors prior to 1798, and others subsequent, have suffered in proportion to the depreciation that followed their respective loans; that they are therefore entitled, in strict justice, to be
1606
18. "That under all these circumstances, it it evidently and indispensably, necessary, to take into immediate consideration the destructive effects that have arisen out of the alterations made in the currency, by the acts of 1797 and 1819, as well respecting the enormous public burthens created and so augmented by the act of 1815, as the revolution of property in the vast and complicated intercourse of individuals throughout this country occasioned thereby; in order that, by a final arrangement of the currency, as equitable to all parties as circumstances will admit, or by a reduction of taxation equal to the advance occasioned by the act of l819, together with the establishment of some principle for the adjustment of private contracts, justice may, as far as possible, be administered to all, and the country saved from a revolution of property, and also from a pressure to taxation beyond the ability of the people to sustain."
The first Resolution having been put,
Mr. Ricardo
commenced by saying that if he should not succeed in refuting the arguments of the hon. gentleman, it would be owing, not to the force of those arguments, but to his inability to reply to them. The hon. member had said, that the alteration which had taken place in prices was to be solely imputed to the alteration in the state of the currency brought about by the act of 1819; but the hon. gentleman seemed to forget, that the country had been subjected to such alterations in prices, when no such cause existed as the
1607
1608
l
s
d
l
s
d
l
s
d
1609
l
s
s
1610
Lord Milton
contended, that the distress and embarrassment under which the country laboured were not to be imputed to the simple measure of 1819, but were to be traced to the fatal measure of 1797, and the effects which followed, to the fluctuations of the currency, and the efforts which had been made with a view of returning to cash payments. He agreed that the agricultural body came with an ill grace to that House, not in fact to be relieved from distress, but with a demand to raise the price of bread upon the people. He thanked God that the House had not the power to do so if they would. He would regret any invasion on the public creditor: he hoped the House would keep faith with him; but whether the taxes would keep faith with him was another question. The House would not sanction an invasion of the debt; but he greatly feared that the taxes would not be able to meet the demand of the creditor. There were two ways to relieve the farmer; the one, to increase his receipts; the other, to diminish his outgoings: the first was impossible, the other might be effected. And how could it be effected but by a reduction of taxation. He thought that ten millions of taxes might have been remitted this session. Had so much been remitted, it would have afforded great relief to the agricultural interest. It would not afford the same relief next year; because there were scarcely any farmers who were not now paying their rent out of their capital. The noble lord referred, in proof of the extent of the agricultural distress, to the petition from Leicestershire, which had been signed by all classes, from the lord-lieutenant to the lowest occupier of land. The consequence must be, that in 1823
1611
Mr. Attwood
commenced by remarking
1612
1613
1614
l
l
1615
1616
1617
1618
1619
1620
1621
1622
l
s
d
now
l
s
d
1623
l
s
d
1624
l
s
l
s
l
honestly
1625
1626
s
d
d
1627
l
l
l
l
s
1628
l
l
s
l
1629
l
l
d
d
d
l
1630
1631
s
s
1632
s
s
d
s
d
s
1633
Mr. Secretary Peel
asked, what reason there was for the House to revoke the decision it had come to not a month ago, without one new fact alleged; and begged gentlemen to consider the effect on all commercial intercourse of a declaration, that all transactions since 1797 were of doubtful equity, and should be revised. He contended, that the distress in Ireland was in no way attributable to the state of the currency, but to the failure of the potatoe crop, which was the chief reliance of a population, out of proportion to the means of employment.
Mr. Alderman Heygate
thought the restoration of the old standard was, to a considerable extent, the cause of the agricultural distress, but not the only cause. There was, in addition, the cessation of the war demand, five more than usually abundant, harvests, and an enormous importation within those five years of foreign corn. Parliament neither could nor would obviate the two first causes, by endeavouring to counteract the bounty of Providence, or by plunging the country into new and ruinous wars. They had that session endeavoured to regulate the import of foreign corn. The violent reduction of the circulation, occasioned by the premature act of 1819, had affected this country, and in a still greater degree Ireland. He was not, however, for again abandoning the gold standard, but rather for augmenting moderately and cautiously the diminished circulation. If this were effected with prudence and good sense he did not doubt the return, not of high, but of fair and remunerating prices.
Sir F. Burdett
supported the motion in an elaborate speech, of which, from the lateness of the hour, no report has been preserved, and concluded with stating, that the only resolution for which he felt himself responsible was the last, seeing that it pledged the House to inquiry.
The resolutions were negatived; and at four in the morning the House adjourned.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, July 12.
BREACH OF PRIVILEGE—COMPLAINT AGAINST MR. HOPE AND MR. MENZIES.
1634
Mr. Courtenay
said, he understood that the hon. and learned member for Calne (Mr. Abercromby) would that evening attend in his place, in obedience to the, order of the House. He understood also that the papers which the House had declared to be breaches of privilege, had led to consequences likely to be of a personal nature, unless the House interfered. The privileges of that House belonged to the House collectively, and not to any individual member; and he trusted the House would intimate to the learned member; that whatever might be his views or his feelings on the subject, he must not take any step interfering with the proceedings of the House. There were many precedents of cases wherein the House had solemnly enjoined individual members not to make any breach of privilege a personal matter. He should first move, "that the resolutions of Tuesday last be first read." [They were accordingly read by the clerk.] He would next move, "That the said Letters having been declared to be in breach of the privileges of this House, this House enjoins Mr. Abercromby not to prosecute any quarrel, against any person, which may arise out of such breach of privilege, by sending, or accepting any challenge."
nem. con.,
Lord Althorp
requested the indulgence of the House, while he stated the circumstances which had prevented the earlier attendance of his learned friend. On Tuesday last, before the papers question had been submitted to the House, his learned friend had set off for Northamptonshire, to communicate with him (lord A.) on the subject. In consequence of that communication they had both set off for the North, with a purpose in view which it was unnecessary to state to the House. On their arrival at Ferrybridge, they found that the messengers from that House had previously passed through the town, and were then several miles in advance; and then they became acquainted with what had taken place in the House on the subject. They therefore found it was impossible to accomplish their object,
1635
MARRIAGE ACT AMENDMENT BILL.
The Solicitor General presented a petition from Arthur Chichester, esq. Against certain clauses in this bill, by which, if passed into a law, he would be deprived of property to a large amount, to which he was entitled, by the law of the land, under the will of his grandfather. On the order of the day, for taking into consideration the Lord's Amendments to the said bill,
Dr. Phillimore
said, that he rose for the purpose of calling upon the House to concur in the amendments introduced into the bill by the House of Lords, and in so doing he could net deny himself the satisfaction of congratulating the House on the success with which their efforts had at length been crowned; and the opportunity which, after so many ineffectual struggles, was now, as it were, placed within their reach, of carrying into effect a salutary reformation which was imperiously called for by the best interests of society—a reformation which had for its object to restore to the marriage bond its true and indissoluble character; to give stability and security to property; to quiet and allay the apprehensions of hundreds of innocent individuals who had unwittingly incurred the penalties of a tremendous law; and to diffuse peace and happiness, and comfort throughout domestic life. Having this great object in view, he had to entreat the House not to reject the only means by which it could be accomplished. The amendments, however objectionable some of them might be, came singularly recommended to their notice. They were the result of protracted discussions in the other House—discussions every way proportionate to the importance of the subject; and they had been adopted after the most deliberate consideration that in our days had been applied to any bill which had been sent from this House to the other branch of the legislature. Within the last five years three bills had been sent to the House of Lords on this subject, varying in form from each other, but agreeing in substance. All these were rejected; but on the present occasion the
1636
impedimentum dirimens
impedimenta impeditiva,
1637
"Look! in this place ran Cassius' dagger through:
See what a rent the envious Casca made:
Through this the well-beloved Brutus stabbed."
1638
1639
Dr. Lushington
trusted that the House would pause when it reflected that this measure repealed all that had been done since the year 1754, in a manner perfectly novel and impracticable. The present was the only occasion when the House was afforded an opportunity of reconsidering a subject that affected property and interests to an immense amount. It was singular that there were only twenty lines of the original bill left, While ten pages of new and undigested matter was added by their lordships. Some parts were so confusedly worded, that it was wholly unintelligible. It was not less remarkable, that, if the principle of the bill were good, it had not been extended to Ireland. The learned doctor then proceeded to point out the injustice which would be inflicted on various individuals under many of its clauses. It would affect most injuriously a great deal of property, the inheritance of which depended on contingent remainders. Many individuals vested their money in the purchase of reversions, and contingent reversions, depending on parties not marrying, whose interests might be materially injured by this bill. He then commented on that part of the bill which provided that perjury committed for the purpose of procuring a license should be punished with transportation. It held out a strong temptation, when family disputes occurred, for one of the parties, where perjury had been committed, to inform against the other, and to untie the marriage knot, by having recourse to transportation. But it was not only the party, but the person granting the licence, that was in danger of a misdemeanour, if he neglected any one of a number of forms, which no one could be sure of having complied with. He happened to be the surrogate under the bishop of London, and he declared, that, if this bill passed, all his friends should die bachelors, before he would grant them a license. He had heard a noble lady had had a great hand in framing this bill; and it certainly appeared to him to savour more of a feminine than a masculine mind. It was curious too, that, under whatever circumstances of fraud a marriage by banns was celebrated, there was no transportation, and the marriage was valid even if the banns were published under names
1640
Mr. Plunkett
said, he perhaps did not understand every sentence in the but he believed in his conscience that it would do great good, by removing a system whose principal features were manifest injustice and gross cruelty; and he also thought that any inconveniences to which it might give birth might very easily be cured. The hon. and learned gentleman said, "Adhere to the ancient law of the land, and resist this innovation." He would say, "Let us return to the ancient law of the land, on which the existing Marriage act is an innovation." The Marriage act passed in 1754 was an innovation on the ancient and indubitable law of this country. That act was introduced by lord Hardwicke, to prevent the children of distinguished families, in their minority, from forming unsuitable alliances. It was clear that the evil which it was intended to meet could not be very extensive, and, in his opinion, it might have been cured by judicious moral restraint. For his own part, he knew no better mode of preventing such a mischief than by good example, and the application of mildness and temper. He did not mean to say, that legislative authority might not be beneficially resorted to on such an occasion; but it ought to be used for the purpose of forming such guards and securities as would prevent the offensive act from being done, instead of sending forth a bill, like that of 1754, which was so loosely framed, that an improper marriage might easily be effected, and which visited with punishment both the innocent and the guilty. That act left it in the power of those persons whom it was the object of
1641
1642
ex post facto
1643
Mr. Hudson Gurney
entirely approved of the retrospective part of the bill, but reprobated the clauses added by the lords, as necessarily leading to perjuries without number, and which he hoped and trusted another bill, if this must be passed, would be brought in to remedy. At the same time, he thought the best measure would be, the simple repeal of the Marriage act, leaving the law as it formerly stood, and analogous to that in Scotland. Where there were, after all, as few imprudent marriages as there were here.
Mr. Wetherell
objected to the retrospective clause, as an unconstitutional innovation on the rights of property. With respect to the acts alluded to rendering the marriages of priests valid, they could not be cited in support of the present measure, because at the Reformation the whole code of popery laws fell to the ground, and the restrictions imposing celibacy on popish priests of course fell to the ground with them. He objected to the bill on constitutional grounds; for if a man's right to property could be taken away by an
ex post facto
ex post facto
1644
Dr. Phillimore
denied that the bill had been prepared with a view to any particular case, and maintained that its retrospective operation was not so decided as that of the measure of 1817.
The Attorney General
resisted the amendments. The act, as it now stood, differed totally, except as to two clauses, from the bill passed by the House of Commons. The alterations introduced were pregnant with mischief. The existing law might press hard in particular instances; but let the House look at the measure to be substituted for it. The mode in which the prospective clause provided for the protection of minors in future, was really worthy of the attention of members. Suppose the kind of case against which the act provided. Some man took advantage of a girl of fortune's inexperience, and by fraud or perjury, inveigled her into an improvident marriage. Under such circumstances, the whole personal property of the woman came into the possession of the husband. Now, how did this new law propose to punish such an offender? It transported the husband for life, and so deprived the wife of her protector; it confiscated the whole of his property to the Crown, and so robbed her of those means which had
1645
Sir J. Mackintosh
said, it had been asserted that the votes of members had been canvassed on this bill. If that were the case he was in ignorance of it. No man had presumed to canvass him upon the subject. He knew of no parties to the measure in any way; but when he saw the great injustice of the present law—when he perceived its immoral tendency—when he perceived the conduct of individuals who sought to take advantage of that injustice—when he saw one branch of a family endeavouring to destroy the honour, the dignity, the wealth of another, for the sake of personal gain, he could
1646
1647
The Marquis of Londonderry
said, he supported the present bill, because he thought it was calculated to repair injuries which had been done by the former act. It was said to be introduced to meet a particular case. If he were to support it on that ground, he should consider himself disgraced; but it ought to be no objection to the bill, if there was a case of such manifest oppression from the existing law, as forced an attention to the law, and the necessity of its amendment upon the consideration of the House. He would contend, that the hardships inflicted by the existing marriage act were greater than those inflicted by the law of attainder, inasmuch as the latter were capable of mitigation, and the former were not. Under the marriage act, the offence was latent, and might escape observation for more than one generation. As soon, however, as it was discovered, the consequences were irremediable; the party, to whom the property had descended, forfeited it; there was a defect in his blood, which immediately transferred his fortune to his collateral relatives. In the case of attainder, however, the treason was open and notorious; the blood was at once known to be tainted; the property devolved to the Crown, which in its leniency generally restored it to the family of the offending party, after the withholding of it for a few years had satisfied the purposes of public justice. Indeed, the principle of forfeiture, as acknowledged in the marriage act of 1754, was a most outrageous dereliction of all true principle, because it inflicted a heavy punishment, not upon those who had committed, but upon those who were perfectly free from any offence. If they felt, that the existing law of marriage was more cruel in its operation than the law of treason, they were bound, in justice, to repair by a retrospective clause the evils of which they had already made themselves the authors. He knew that, in passing a retrospective law which was to affect property, he was calling on the
1648
Mr. Canning
stated, that he voted for this bill on the ground of expediency. He did not altogether approve of its enactments, but he saw, that if it were not passed now, no amendment would, in ail probability be made in the act of 1754, which every body allowed to be cruel and defective. If it were passed in its present shape, it would, he was confident, be found so incompetent to the purpose for which it was framed, that it would be necessary to bring in a bill in the next session to amend and explain it. In the hope, therefore, of obtaining a better legislative measure on the subject of marriage than was to be found either in the existing law, or in that which it was now proposed to substitute for it, he should vote in favour of the present motion, with no thanks to the lords for the amendments, but with thanks to Providence, for having got back their bill at all,
The House divided on the question, That the Amendments be read a second time: Ayes, 122. Noes, 20. The said Amendments were read and agreed to.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Monday, July 15.
MARITIME RIGHTS—DETENTION OF
The Marquis of Londonderry
said, he would take that opportunity of replying to the questions which a learned gentleman had proposed to him on a former evening, on the subject of the detention of the British vessel the Lord Collingwood by the Spanish authorities at Porto Rico. He had since
1649
Sir J. Mackintosh
observed, that the answer of the noble marquis must prove extremely satisfactory to the country. It was particularly desirable that the commercial interest should be informed that they would be protected in the exercise of their lawful rights.
CAUSE OF THE GREEKS.
Sir J. Mackintosh
said, he held in his hand a petition which he considered to possess peculiar claims upon the attention of the House. The petition proceeded from certain inhabitants of Lees, in the parish of Ashton-under-Lyne, and referred to the sufferings of the Christian Greeks, and the oppressions of the Turkish government. The sentiments contained in the petition were those of all the inhabitants of Great Britain, who at all thought upon the subject. He was sure that the feelings of the people of this country would have been manifested at a more early period, and in a more general manner, if it had not been for the difficulties which opposed themselves to any measure calculated to give a practical effect to those feelings. A simultaneous effort of all the powers of Europe, and an immediate one, could alone be effectual to the cause of these unhappy sufferers. The only security that England or any other
1650
Mr. Hume
wished to ask whether it was true, that the Greeks, in their endeavours to escape from the persecution of their oppressors, by taking refuge in the Ionian islands, had been forcibly expelled from thence by the British government in that station? He would also call the attention of the noble marquis to the fact, that a Turkish frigate was now fitting out at Deptford, with all the stores, ammunition, and arms of a warlike description that could bring her crew and company within the operation of the Foreign Enlistment bill. He had seen a sailor that morning, who told him that he had entered himself on board this Turkish frigate. Now surely it was the duty of ministers, to exert the same activity in prohibiting the subjects of this kingdom from entering themselves aboard a Turkish frigate, which they had manifested in regard to those who had been desirous of enlisting in the service of Naples or of Spain.
Mr. Wilmot
was not aware of any measures which had been taken by the government of the Ionian islands that, could have had the effect of preventing the reception of Greeks in the situation alluded to. No official information of any such measures had been received by ministers. He was unable to satisfy the inquiry of the hon. gentleman in regard to the Turkish frigate, in consequence of the absence of an hon. baronet, by whom it would be more satisfactorily answered.
Mr. Hutchinson
said, that for their exertions to prevent a war between Russia and Turkey, he had felt disposed to give to ministers every credit. But if those exertions had been put forth only for the purpose of allowing the Turks to commit what havoc their barbarous ferocity might prompt them to, during the recess of the British parliament—if this had been done, in order to enable them with the more security and confidence to pursue The work of destroying the Greeks—if had been the object of his majesty's ministers in England and in. Constantinople, he proclaimed their conduct to be of the most abject, the most degraded, and the
1651
Mr. Wilberforce,
having been appealed to by the hon. gentleman, begged to assure him, that for the cause of the unhappy reeks, it was impossible that any one could feel more warmly than himself Indeed he should hope that there could be but one feeling among generous and enlightened and Christian minds on their behalf. It was, in truth, a disgrace to all the powers of Europe, that long ere now they had not made a simultaneous effort, and driven back a nation of barbarians, the ancient and inveterate enemies of Christianity and freedom, into Asia He was at all times far indeed from advocating war, unless peace could only be acquired at the price of disgrace and infamy. At the same time, he must declare, that he knew of no case in which the power of a mighty country
1652
The Marquis of Londonderry
thought that the present was not a very fit occasion for the discussion of so wide a question as that into which gentlemen had been pleased to enter. It was really marvellous to see how the friends of peace could sometimes advocate the cause, and most unnecessarily, of war. His lima friend, at all times conscientiously supporting the doctrines of benevolence and peace, was now disclosing to the House a problem, which was to relegate and to throw back upon Asia a Turkish population of some 5,000,000 of souls. Now, whatever might be said about Turkish inhumanity, it did appear to him, that neither the crusade, which his hon. friend had proclaimed against the Turks, nor the sentence of transportation pronounced against them, were very likely to have the effect of expelling them from Europe. Gentlemen on the other side did his majesty's ministers great injustice, when they supposed that their exertions had been confined to mediating terms of peace between Russia and the Porte. The danger of Greece had not been lost sight of, and every thing which it was in the power of our government to effect, had been done. He could assure those gentlemen who appeared to possess a peculiar system for the better management of foreign affairs, that neither the government nor the country were so wild as to be prepared to, take up arms with a view to the more, effective and impartial administration of justice in the dominions of Turkey. But no effort had been neglected which it might have been hoped would either have prevented, or at least have softened, the horrors of a war, marked by atrocities that were equally disgraceful to. Greece and to the Porte. He could not suffer the hon. gentlemen to deceive either themselves or the House, however, by proceeding on a supposition that all the horrors and atrocities were on one; side of this contest, and that there was nothing in it for humanity to deplore, but the cruelty and barbarism of the Turks, and the sufferings and ill-fated amiability of the Greeks. The truth was, that, in this attempt to recover their liberties, as it had been called, the Greeks had done much which was to be regretted. The traits of ferocity and violence which had
1653
Sir R. Wilson
was of opinion, that if ministers would repeal their Foreign Enlistment bill, and give the spirit of honourable enterprize fair play, men would not be wanting to embark in such a cause. He would pledge himself that foreign aid would enable the Greeks to wrest their ancient territories from the Turks, and to take once more their station among the free nations of the world. He trusted that the noble lord would give directions to our government in the Ionian islands, at least to be impartial; for the fact was, that the hostile way in which our authority had been used against the Greeks, had rendered the name of England so odious among them, that not one Greek had yet ventured to solicit upon these shores assistance for his suffering countrymen.
Lord A. Hamilton
said, that we were at least bound to preserve a strict neutrality between the Greeks and the Turks, but the conduct which our government had pursued had been altogether partial and oppressive.
The Marquis of Londonderry
said, that the instructions of ministers to the government of the Ionian islands had been, that the strictest neutrality should be preserved in all transactions between the Greeks and the Turks.
Ordered to lie on the table.
IRISH INSURRECTION BILL.
On the order of the day, for the third reading of this bill,
Mr. Hutchinson
said, he understood ministers to declare, that they could do nothing for Ireland, but the passing of the Constables bill, the Tithe-leasing hill, and the measure now under consideration. If so, he had no hesitation in saying, that they had not done enough. The object of ministers ought to be, to make the people of Ireland wealthy and contented, and such was the purpose of Mr. Pitt at the time of the Union. What had been the fact? Martial law had since been declared, the Habeas Corpus act had been suspended, and the Insurrection act revived. In short, not one of the many promises made at the Union had been fulfilled. The country was now as dissatisfied as ever. Ministers had instituted no inquiry into the state of Ireland since the Union. Where was the equality of law that was spoken of? In what part of
1654
Mr. Monck
objected to the bill, because he saw nothing in it of a remedial nature. In his opinion redundant population in Ireland was the great source of the existing evils, while the state of society was half civilized, half savage. The, Irish gentlemen ought to do their utmost to introduce among the peasantry, a different mode of living, and to abandon the consumption of potatoes for grain. Ireland was competent to her own maintenance, and ought not to call upon England for any assistance.
Colonel Trench
agreed, that the gentry ought to exert themselves to raise the peasantry of Ireland from their degraded condition. If a measure like the present was not resorted to, the troops would be frequently called out, and much bloodshed would be the inevitable consequence. The absentee system he looked upon as a very great evil. The people were, in fact, deserted by those who ought to be their protectors. He denied that the gentlemen were unfit to hold the situation of magistrates. If improper persons got into the commission of the peace, they ought to be dismissed; but the conduct of such persons ought not to be attributed to the gentry at large. The Irish people, if judicious means were taken, were not incapable of civilization and improvement. A debt of gratitude was due to this country for the munificent subscriptions which had been entered into for the relief of Ireland, and he felt truly grateful to the Hibernian society, by whose efforts
1655
Mr. Wilberforce
gave his support to the bill, because he thought the situation of Ireland demanded it. The want of social order which prevailed in that country was truly lamentable, and he should be most happy if some comprehensive measure could be introduced to remove the evil.
Mr. R. Martin
said, that the bill would not inflict tiny injury on the people of Ireland. It has asserted that by its operation trial by jury would be abrogated; but, in his opinion, that would be for the benefit of the accused. It an individual charged with the offences cognizable under this act were to be tried in a disturbed county, it must be either by a jury of those who had suffered from violence, or of men who were the prisoners' partisans. In either case, there would not be a fair trial. In the first instance, the prisoner was not likely to receive justice at the hands of an irritated jury; and in the second, the Crown, stood no chance of a verdict. Under these circumstances, a man would rather be tried by a learned serjeant, than by a jury of the vicinage in which the offence had been committed.
Mr. W. Smith
supported the measure, because it struck him, as being, in a great degree, a measure of mercy. He would always be ready to grant great powers to the Irish government, if he did not recollect, with feelings of sorrow and indignation, the abominable manner in which the extraordinary powers formerly granted to that government had been abused. He never could forget the dreadful practices for which the Indemnity bill was passed after the commotions of 1798. It was an indelible disgrace for the government to ask for such a measure, and for the parliament to grant it. He believed that the noble marquis at the head of that government was opposed to every thing that had the slightest tendency to an abuse of
1656
The Marquis of Londonderry
said, that the present bill was one of those measures that were calculated to keep the extraordinary powers of government within some degree of rule and regulation. Why, then, on the discussion of such a measure, did the hon. member refer to a time when no such bill as the present was in existence? It was not liberal or fair to make such observations. In the absence of strong and efficient measures, the loyalists of Ireland, at the time of the rebellion, had no other way of defending themselves, but by taking the law into their own hands. At that melancholy period, many individuals thought they were doing good when they outstripped the bounds of law. He looked with pain and horror at some of their acts, but he denied that they arose from the abuse of any extraordinary powers which had been granted to the government. At a subsequent period, assisted by the attorney-general, he had brought in the Indemnity bill. And, when he brought down a pardon from the Crown for all those who had committed violence and spoliation on the persons and property of his majesty's loyal subjects, it would have been monstrous injustice if he had not also brought down a bill be protect the men who had adhered to the government of the country. Let not the hon. gentleman think that the bill was
1657
Mr. S. Rice
said, it was desirable that the unfortunate circumstances attending the former rebellion in Ireland should be kept out of the consideration of the House; as the introduction of them could have no effect but to produce angry charges, and as angry recriminations. A rebellion in any country must necessarily lead to acts which were not justifiable; but when that rebellion was over, it appeared to him to be advisable to close the book.
General Hart
contended that the distillery laws formed the greatest evil which Ireland endured.
Mr. Bennet
said, that to shut the eyes to the past was not the best way to insure a wise legislation for the future. In his opinion, it was, above all things, desirable that parliament should keep steadily in mind the operation of laws of equal severity to the present in former times. Those laws ought to be contemplated, not as examples to be imitated, but as beacons to be avoided. The conduct which that House had pursued with respect to Ireland, during the present session, was, in his opinion, highly reprehensible. With the exception of a grant of money, not a single grievance had been redressed. He urged the hon. general to bring the subject of the Distillery laws under the consideration of the House next session.
Goulburn
said, that this measure had been called a severe one, and so it undoubtedly was; but still it was mild in comparison with those which, case of actual rebellion, must necessarily be resorted to. He would ask any hon. member whether, if, at the commencement of the session, the Insurrection act had not passed, it could for a moment be doubted, that open insurrection and rebellion would have broken out? At that time, the parties against whom this act was directed, had actually encountered the king's troops; and it required no spirit of prophecy to foresee, that, if this strong preventive measure had tot been adopted, all the
1658
Lord A. Hamilton
said, that when he saw that not a tithe of the members of the House were present, and certainly not a tithe of the members for Ireland; he could hardly believe believe that the proposed measure was so indispensable as it was asserted to be. The chief secretary had referred the House to experience. Experirence! of what? The only experience on the subject which he (lord A. H.) recollected, was the experience of one measure of violence succeeded by another of violence succeeded by another of still greater violence. The turbulence of Ireland had been often and often ascribed to the misgovernment of that country. Nay, a right hon. gentleman (Mr. C. Grant), in a speech which would not easily be forgotten, had detailed disturbance after disturbance, and insurrection after insurrection growing out of that misgovernment. Now, he would ask, whether that ought not to be a subject of serious consideration, before they proceeded to the enactment of a measure so severe as that at present proposed?
Mr. Butterworth
thought the act, however severe, was a measure of mercy towards the peasantry of Ireland.
The bill was read a third time, and passed.
CONSULS IN THE BRAZILS.
On the order of the day, for going into a committee of supply,
Mr. Hume
said, that in the course of the last session, he had brought forward certain statements connected with the British consulate in the Brazils, and on the 22nd of April, in the present year, he had produced a petition signed by 74 merchants in that colony out of 79, complaining of the exaction of extravagant and illegal fees. The noble lord opposite had expressed doubts as to the correctness of the statements contained in that petition; but he (Mr. H.) had dis-
1659
ad valorem
l.
l.,
l.
s.
d.
l.
l.
s.
d.
l.
s.
d.
The Marquis of Londonderry
said, that on a former occasion he had stated, that these fees were about to be revised, and that they were then under consideration. He was willing to go into an inquiry on the subject; but he could not consent to postpone the public business until this complicated question was disposed of He had a right to complain a little of the exaggeration of the hon. member, though
1660
Mr. Baring
said, that if merchants in Brazil were to be saddled with such impositions, it was impossible for them to compete with the trade of foreign nations.
After some farther conversation, the motion, that the Speaker do now the chair, was put and agreed to.
NATIONAL MONUMENT IN SCOTLAND
Lord Binning moved, "That the petition of the contributors to the National Monument in Scotland, for aid towards building a Church to be connected there with, be referred to the Committee of Supply,"
Mr. Hume
would put it to the House if this was the time to encourage by gift of 10,000
l.
l.
Sir R. Wilson
thought it most indecent to talk in the present state of Ireland, of giving 10,000
l.
Mr. Hudson Gurney
said, it was with great regret he opposed the motion. So far from thinking under ordinary circumstances, that the erection of monuments of national magnificence was a waste of the opulence of a state, he considered them objects of the highest political importance. But, at the present moment, when we had had discussion, night after night, on the situation of the starving population of Ireland—when we had had complaint upon complaint of the general embarrassment of all classes in England and Scotiandit—it did seem impossible to come to a vote of giving 10,000
l.
sine die,
l.
1661
l.
Mr. Monck
said, that this magnificent, temple placed as it was on the top of a hill, might be good as an object to the inhabitants of Edinburgh, but was by no means so as a place of worship. He did not dispute the propriety of gentlemen erecting such a monument of their gratitude out of their own pockets; but he must object to wringing the money out of the purses of a people already overburthened by taxation.
Mr. Bennet
said, that when he gave his consent to the grant of 100,000
l.
Mr. C. Grant
was of opinion, that to grant 10,000
l.
Lord Binning
said, he should be the last man in the world to make the motion, if it would have the effect of depriving Ireland of any part of the assistance to which she had so strong a claim. But it was only intended to give a particular direction to money already voted by the House. The population of Edinburgh had considerably increased of late, and the increase of churches had not been in proportion. He would, however, withdraw his motion.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Tuesday, July 16.
SMALL NOTES BILL.
The Earl of
1662
on the order of the day for the third reading of this bill, rose to give the measure his support. If the passing of this act tended to throw an increased quantity of money into circulation, in so far its effects, would be beneficial. As, however, the notes of the country bankers were to be payable in gold, the bill could have this effect only in a slight degree. He did not think, therefore, that it would have any material effect in counteracting Mr. Peel's bill. It was the only measure which had been brought forward for the relief of agriculture. He should be told that that distress was caused by super-abundance of produce but he could prove that there was no superabundance. The noble lord then proceeded to quote from tables of prices current, the returns of cattle sold in Smithfield, the wheat in Mark-lane, and other documents, to show, that the state of the currency had alone influenced the rise, and fall of produce. When the circulation diminished, the prices were low; when it increased, they were high; and agricultural prosperity had fluctuated with the currency. The noble lord next quoted the prices of the contracts of provisions for the supply of Greenwich hospital, from 1744 to the present time, to show that transitions from war to peace had never before had any extraordinary effect, and that there was no such thing as high war prices and low peace prices. He then adverted to the increase in the price of wheat, which was principally governed by the quantity of circulating medium in the country. This was clear from a reference to the prices of 1814, and down to 1819, since which they had been declining, owing entirely, as he contended, to the financial operations of the country, particularly to those of the Bank during that period. Early in 1816, the government, owing to the then alarming depression of agriculture, and the failure of several of the country banks, increased the circulating medium by a large issue of Exchequer-bills, which at once relieved agriculture. Unfortunately, however, in 1819, came Mr. Peel's bill, which, by the immediate contraction of the circulating medium, affected and depressed the agricultural interests. If, by returning to the old standard, they had produced the evil, why not retrace their steps? Let them make one more change—let them divide the loss and the gain, and substitute a standard better suited to the capacity of the country as it now ex-
1663
The Earl of Liverpool
observed, that the present bill was not at all contemplated in the view Are particular remedy for agricultural distress. With respect to those distresses, he never did consider that they were to be attributed to the change in our currency, effected by the return to cash payments. It was not one cause that was at work, but a variety of causes combined, all growing out of the greatest change that had ever occurred in the history of nations, within the memory of man. Who that contemplated the character of the late war could for a moment think of comparing the events of that war, and the state of things growing out of it, with the events and effects of any former war? He had never complained of over-production, nor did he undervalue the blessings of an abundant harvest. His argument was, that the artificial causes arising out of the state of Europe, had forced a great portion of the poor lands in this country into cultivation, the high demand at that period having insured to the cultivator a remunerating price. It was impossible that the profits of those who had so extensively cultivated the poorer soils, should not have experienced a great depression with the cessation of the war de-
1664
s.
Lord Calthorpe
contended, that there was in the machinery of the act of 1819, some unexplained obstacle, that counteracted that self-restoring energy which was the characteristic of this country under all its vicissitudes.
The bill was read a third time and passed.
1665
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Wednesday, July 17. 1822.
GREEK HOSTAGES AT CONSTANTINOPLE.
Earl Grosvenor
said, that the House had been occupied during the present session in inquiring into the distresses of agriculture in this country, into those of nearly the whole population of Ireland, and into the state of that most disgraceful traffic, the Slave-trade, which, to its immortal honour, parliament had abolished, and which England was endeavouring to prevail upon other nations to abolish also. He trusted, therefore, that their lordships would not think it unworthy of their dignity to consider the state of unfortunate Christian slaves, on whom cruelties had been committed, which had excited the greatest horror throughout the country. He should not enter into the causes of the war between Turkey and Greece, and should not examine whether it had arisen from the voluntary impulse of the latter, or from the intrigues and treachery of Russia. All that it was necessary to know was, that such an horrible warfare existed; and all that it was important to ascertain was, whether by adopting a different system his majesty's ministers might not put an end to it. However this might be, no sooner did it appear that Russia was not going to war, than that moment had been chosen by the Turks to massacre or lead into captivity the whole population of Scio, and to murder the hostages from that island at Constantinople. It was said that a pledge had been obtained from the Divan by the British ambassador, that these anticipated cruelties should not be committed, and this assertion had not been contradicted. That pledge, however, if it had really been given, had been set at nought, and all the apprehended atrocities had taken place. He did not mean to say, that that Should be a cause of war; but it would justify this country and all others in withdrawing from any connexion with such detestable barbarians, and drawing a
cordon sanitaire
1666
The Earl of Liverpool
could scarcely believe that there was a precedent for such a motion. The question was, an act of cruelty committed by the government of Turkey—on whom?—on its own, subjects. What right had this country to interfere with the conduct of another government towards its own subjects? How far might not such a principle be carried? Let it be supposed that an insurrection in this country had rendered the employment of a military force necessary to put it down, and that it had been done under circumstances which appeared highly cruel to foreign nations. What would their lordships say, if the ministers of France or of Spain interfered in a case between the government of England and its own subjects? There were cases in
1667
Lord Rolland
conceived that the noble earl must have misunderstood the words of the motion, when he had taken it for one of interference in the concerns of ether nations, and had said that it had no precedent. It was nothing more than what the noble earl had done himself last year previous to discussing the affairs of Naples, when he had moved for the cor-
1668
The Earl of Liverpool
had not understood that any question had been put to him, whether the British ambassador at Constantinople had guaranteed the safety of the hostages from Scio. Now that he understood such a question to have been put, he had no difficulty in saying, that no such guarantee ever could be, or was given.
The motion was then negatived.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Wednesday, July 17.
BREACH OF PRIVILEGE—COMPLAINT
On the motion of Mr. Courtenay, the order of the day for the attendance of John Hope, esq. was read. Whereupon he was called in; and the Speaker communicated to him the proceedings of the House of the 9th instant, in the matter of the complaint of a printed letter, signed John Hope, and addressed to Mr. Abercromby. The said printed letter; being shown to Mr. Hope, he confessed himself to be the author thereof. Upon being informed by the Speaker, that if he had any explanation to offer to the House this was the time for doing so,
Mr. Hope
said:—Sir, I beg to return my grateful acknowledgments to this
1669
1670
1671
1672
1673
Sir R. Wilson
said, that he had, never been more shocked than at hearing the cheers in which hon. members opposite had indulged in approbation of what had been said at the bar. They were assembled there as judges, and by such expression of their feeling, gentlemen rendered themselves parties in the case at issue. It was impossible to expect that impartial justice should be done when such conduct was observed.
Mr. Courtenay
then moved, "That Mr. Hope, having confessed himself to
1674
Sir. F. Burdett
said, he could not conceal from himself that there existed a general feeling of the great danger likely to arise from their frequent assumption of a power of this sort, and he thought it his duty to urge the constitutional objections which he entertained against its exercise upon occasions like the present. He was not in the House when Mr. Hope was at the bar, nor was he actuated by any personal feeling upon this subject; be the upon which he (Sir F. B.) acted was the same. The House would bear in mind the circumstances of the case. The letter in question arose out of a report in the public papers, of what was said to have passed in that House on a former evening. That report might have been an unintentional, or even a malignant misrepresentation of what really had been said; but were they, nevertheless; to prevent the party whose character and honour suffered in consequence of such a publication, from doing himself the justice of contradicting it? This was an assumption of power on he part of the House which, were it claimed by the Crown itself, would not be for a moment tolerated. The parties in this case felt their characters traduced by a report which they found in the public papers; they complained of that report and asserted that its statements were untrue. But how this could be called a breach of the privileges of that House, he was at a loss to determine. It was absurd to talk of the daily reports in the public papers as breaches of privilege. If this doctrine was to be maintained and acted upon, neither the public press, nor private individuals would be safe. There was a report published, stating that Mr. such-a-one said so and so of such an individual Was not the party alluded tot liberty to contradict those statements in such a manner as he conceived most effective he being of course the best judge of his own conduct? This, he contended, any individual had a right to do without any charge of breach of privilege. If, indeed, a person out of doors called a member to account for what he had said in his place, such member would himself be guilty of a breach of privilege if he did not immediately bring the case under the consideration of the House. But here
1675
ex post, facto
d.
1676
1677
Mr. Stuart Wortley
said, that if the letter in question was a breach of privilege, it was their own fault. The original breach of privilege was in publishing a report of the hon. member's speech, but having allowed that report to go forth, it was hard to say, that no man had a right to contradict a statement which he conceived incorrect, and which tended to injure his character materially. If the facts with which the hon. member had been furnished were not true, and if in the report of the proceedings gentlemen saw that that had been circulated which wounded their feelings and injured their characters, would it not be monstrous to say, that knowing those statements to be unfounded, they must not take any steps to contradict them publicly? If the manner in which that report was contradicted, was a breach of privilege, it was the duty of the House to prevent the publication of accusatory statements, where no defence could be entered into. He should certainly vote against any motion having the punishment of Mr. Hope for its object.
The motion was agreed to.
Mr Courtenay
said, that if he knew himself at all, he came to the consideration of this question with a perfectly unprejudiced mind. Since the introduction of this question, he had continually been considering how he should follow it up; and he felt that that must mainly depend upon the course which the gentleman would take when called to the bar. In looking to the conduct of Mr. Hope, he was certainly disposed to give to the language and manner of that gentleman all the consideration which they deserved. At the same time, that a breach of privilege had been committed, the House had already unanimously decided. Whether he was right or not in having brought the matter forward for the consideration of the House, the House must judge, upon a review of all the circumstances. His great object had been, to prevent a breach of the peace, arising from what he now firmly believed to have been a mutual misapprehension of what had passed in that House. He hoped it would be understood that the privilege which parliament undoubtedly possessed, of freedom
1678
Sir R. Wilson
did not think the motion went quite far enough. This was a breach of privilege which the House was bound to notice in a most pointed manner. It ought to take such steps as would protect its members. Many of the most eloquent members of that I louse might have no wish to become gladiators, or to enter the list in defence of every opinion which they felt it their duty to advance in that House. The House ought at least to have an assurance from Mr. Hope, that no farther steps would be taken to produce that result which the hon. mover had been so anxious to prevent.
Mr. Brougham
agreed, that if, as had been stated by Mr. Hope at their bar, this was a mere technical and nominal breach of privilege, any the scantiest apology would be sufficient. But he felt unfeigned regret at being obliged to inquire, whether more had not been committed here than some hon. members seemed to be aware of. They had heard Mr. Hope's case. He had felt himself aggrieved by certain accusations; he felt his, character at stake, both privately and professionally; and, under those feelings he sat down to write the letter in question. He would be the last man to weigh too scrupulously the words tied by a gentleman defending himself from an unjust charge. Besides, he was, on other grounds, reluctant to visit Mr. Hope severely on this occasion. But, as regarded that House, he should be guilty of a squeamish delicacy if he did not state that that gentleman had beeen guilty of great misconduct. Besides, they must see, that even if they disposed of the ques-
1679
1680
Lord Binning
said, he felt it a duty which he owed to the House and also to a beloved friend and relative, to make a few. observations upon the present occasion. It had been said, that if they suffered Mr. Hope to depart without farther question here would be at once an end to the privileges of parliament, the freedom of de-ante. He differed from that learned member, and thought, on the contrary, that on all questions of privilege they were bound to deal with the accused parties as leniently as possible. He contended, in apposition to the learned member, who said he looked in vain for an explanation in Mr. Hope's speech, that explanation had been fully given. He appealed to the House whether they had ever heard a more firm or respectful address than that delivered at the bar by Mr. Hope? It had seen said that Mr. Hope did not explain. Now he did explain, and that very distinctly. He declared that, in writing the letter, he had not the remotest intention of violating the privileges of that House. Charges had been circulated against Mr. Hope, through the public papers, in every part of the kingdom, under which it was intolerable for him to live; they attacked his reputation as a gentleman, and marred his prospects as an advocate. Had the inquiry into the charges against Mr. Hope, been likely to come on this session, the letter would never have been heard of. It was not until it was found that that inquiry was
1681
1682
Mr. Abercromby
hoped the House would give him credit for a disposition not to pronounce any opinion in that House on the present question. His object in rising was, to set right a few facts. He could not but express his concern that any act of his should have engaged the attention of that House, and caused the interruption of ordinary and important business. The subject before the House was coupled with circumstances painful to him; if his feelings were only consulted, the present case certainly would not be brought before the House. Much had been said with respect to the statement of Mr. Hope having acted as counsel on the trial of Mr. Stuart. He had read the letter of that gentleman: he knew the impression it had made upon the public and upon members of that House. Having the honour of a seat in that House, he thought that there only was he accountable for any act of his, and that there only was he bound to give an. explanation of his conduct. Upon the subject he had preserved au absolute silence. He had not authorised any
1683
1684
The Marquis of Londonderry
hoped, that neither the zeal of his noble friend, nor the warmth of the learned member for Winchelsea, would interfere with a temperate conclusion by which the anomaly of privilege might be reconciled. He would not attempt the vain task of discussing this subject with the hon. member for Westminster; but he was well convinced that the letter of Mr. Hope was a breach of privilege. It was true, that the publication of the debates of the House was in itself a breach of privilege; but he considered it one that was essential to the public interest. It ought unquestionably to be tolerated, if it could exist without leading to evils which would leave the House no alternative, but to shut its doors and deny the public all knowledge of its proceedings. The breach of privilege now before the House was in the second degree; for if the publication of debates were allowed, it must sometimes produce inconveniences. Recollecting that Mr. Hope was counsel only in the private case of Mr. Alexander, he put it to the House whether he could repel the attack upon him, without at least glancing at political motives. It remained, then, to be considered what proceeding the case required, not forgetting that Mr. Hope, feeling his character at stake, had balanced between a breach of privilege and his own vindication. If the learned gentleman was called to the bar, and the resolution read to him, though the word admonition was not used, it was at least implied, and the indirect censure might have the same effect as a motion of greater severity.
Mr. Tierney
said, that the great object having been attained all, that remained now was, to see that the farther pro-
1685
1686
Mr. Wynn
said, he considered this a most material breach of privilege, because it interfered with that freedom of speech without which the House could not discharge its most important and sacred duties. It distinctly affected the freedom of speech, not only by comment, but by at-
1687
arena
1688
Mr. Canning
said, that he could not vote for the reprimand of Mr. Hope. It was to be decided whether that gentleman had been guilty of an intentional violation of their privileges, or whether, having a great duty to perform towards himself, that of repelling an injurious and unfounded accusation, he did not suffer a technical impediment to stand in the way of his vindication? The subject had been considered as if it were merely a question between the House and the offender. Undoubtedly, if a person out of doors questioned the freedom of speech in that House, great mischief might follow, and the House would be called upon to vindicate its privileges: but they overlooked a material circumstance, and that was, the existence in the present case of a third party—the reporting press, the creature of their toleration. With respect to the publication of the debates so long tolerated, it would not be practicable to put it down; and if it were practicable, it would not be desirable. Before the House decided upon the case of Mr. Hope, an ardent young man, he trusted that every gentleman would look upon the case of that individual as his own. Living far from this metropolis—moving in a narrow society, where he could scarcely meet with any but those to whom he was individually known—with any but political friends to mourn over his fall—or political enemies to triumph in his degradation—what could be the feelings of such a man were he to pass over an injury such as he had received, without making some effort to vindicate his assailed character? For the learned gentleman (Mr. Abercromby) he felt the highest possible respect for his public and private character, both in that House and out of it. There was one point to which he (Mr.
1689
1690
Lord A. Hamilton
said, that the sympathy of the hon. members seemed entirely turned to Mr. Hope, and both his learned friend and the privileges of the House were forgotten. The right hon. gentleman called upon every gentleman to plate himself in the situation of Mr. Hope He (lord A. H.) might also beg them to put themselves in the situation of the learned member who had been attacked. The object in view was, to protect members in the discharge of their duty. But this the resolution now proposed did not at all tend to do. He would ask any man to read Mr. Hope's letter, and say, whether the expressions used there were
bonâ fide
Sir J. Mackintosh
did not rise to oppose any measure of lenity, but merely to answer the friendly appeal to himself of the noble lord opposite. He admitted that he was ignorant of the practice of the Scottish bar already alluded to; but, at the same time he concurred with his learned friend (Mr. Abercromby)as to the use which he had wade of that part of the case.
1691
Mr. Menzies
said, he felt most anxious to assure the House of the profound respect which he entertained, and always had entertained, for their privileges. But he would shortly state the circumstances which had called forth the writing now before them. A report of a speech made in that House had reached him. In that report he found a severe attack upon his conduct. He found that gross injustice was done to his motives by a false statement of his professional proceedings. If this false statement had originated with the newspapers, he considered it indispensable for him to correct it. If, on the other hand, it had really been made in that House, he felt sure that it had been made in. consequence of false information. He had therefore applied by letter to the hon. gentleman for an explanation of the fact, whether the statement as set forth in the newspapers was correct. To this application he had received an answer, that the hon. gentleman was not responsible for any, reports in the newspapers, but that what he had said was fully supported by the statement in his (Mr. M.'s) own letter. Now, as that statement did not support the reports in the newspapers, he understood this to be evidence that the reports were false. If he had understood it otherwise, he would not have applied the term false to the statement of the hon. gentleman. He had written the paragraph now complained of, under the impression that what Mr. Abercomby had said coincided not with statements in the newspapers considering the statements in the newspapers. Considering the statements in the newspapers false and calumnious, he could not retract word of what he had applied to them; but he solemnly declared that he had not had the slightest idea that what he was doing was a violation of the privileges of that House.
1692
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Thursday, July 18.
RETAIL OF BEER BILL.]
Mr. Brougham
, in rising to move the second reading of this bill, begged to premise that he meant to cast no reflections on either of those two large and respectable bodies who conceived themselves to be principally interested in opposing it. The hon. and learned gentleman having proceeded to show that within a very few years the population of this country had increased from ten to fifteen millions, while the consumption of beer had considerably decreased, observed that several causes might be assigned for this fact. He was not one of those who suspected the brewers of having adulterated their beer by all those drugs which they were, he believed, with great exaggerations, accused of using; but one of those causes, he certainly, in common with the poor man, did believe to exist, and did absolutely find. It was not that he tasted the deleterious
coculus Indicus
quassia,
nux vomica
s
s
s
s
s
l
s
s
s
s
1693
1694
Mr. F. Buxton
expressed his concurrence in all the early and general observations of the hon. member regarding the effect of taxation upon the poor. He contended that this bill would ruin not less than 50,000 persons, and interfere with thirty millions of property; but if it were clear of all other objections, the lateness at which it was brought forward ought to sure ha rejection. He begged the House to separate the case and conduct of the brewers from that of the publicans; for the latter at least were not monopolists; and had not, as had been said, overcharged the trade with capital. As to the London brewers, he was prepared to show that they had not sold any such beer, in quality, composition or strength, as warranted the remarks of the hon. gentleman. After stating the class of persons of whom publicans were generally composed; namely, servants who had made savings out of their wages—he went on to argue from his own knowledge, that the most important part of the business of a victualler was not the beer he sold in his house, but that which he sent out to customers in the neighbourhood. If chandlers and barbers, and other small shopkeepers, were allowed to sell beer, the consequence would be, that a most respectable, industrious, and numerous de-
1695
Mr. Huskisson
thought it injudicious at this period of the session, to legislate upon private property, when the parties interested could not be duly heard. He therefore recommended that the bill should be withdrawn for the present. He contend-
1696
Mr. Alderman Wood
contended, that the bill would be injurious to a large class of persons without a corresponding good to the public. The great quantity of beer which a publican was enabled to draw, made the beverage he supplied superior to that which would be afforded by a chandler, who would keep perhaps single barrel, which would, like the small beer now sold in the same way, be sour summer and vapid in winter. In many parts of London good beer was now to be had at 4
d
d
1697
Mr. Brougham
said, that on the failure of a principal clause in the Licensing bill, he had thought it his duty to introduce the present measure; and finding so much interest and prejudice working against it, he had thought it necessary to persevere to the present stage. He should now consent to postpone the measure to the next session. He implored the chancellor of the exchequer to turn his attention to some arrangement with respect to the beer duty, so as to afford a middle kind of beer between that which paid the 10
s
s
s
l
l
l
1698
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that ministers were not inimical to the principle on which the measure proceeded. On the contrary, the subject had been under the consideration of the Treasury and means, he believed, had been devised to enable the public to brew a middle sort of beer, of a proper strength and body, and at a proportionate duty.
The bill was withdrawn.
CANADA GOVERNMENT AND TRADE
On the order of the day for recommitting this bill,
Mr. Wilmot
in moving that the Speaker do leave the chair, said, that the matter of the bill before them might be brought under three heads: the first part went to alter the constitution of the provinces of Canada, which had been established by the act of 1791; the second, to apply to Canada the principles of an extension of free trade, which had been sanctioned by the bills of his right hon. friend; the third and last, to settle the appropriation of duties between the two provinces of Upper and Lower Canada. The last of these in order he should consider first; because it was the anomalous position of the provinces in reference to these duties, that had led to the necessity of remedial measures. When the French province of Canada was conquered by the British arms, the criminal law of England was introduced into the conquered country, and the civil law of France was suffered to remain, modified by a proclamation issued in 1763, and by various ordinances subsequently made. The alterations introduced into the French law by these ordinances, led to anomalies in the law, which were remedied by the Canada act of 1774, which restored the French civil law to the province. From 1774 to 1791, the government of the province had been carried on by a governor and a numerous executive council, who had not the power of local taxation, the taxes being imposed by the parliament of Great Britain. Previously to 1791, after the American war, the upper part of the provinces which had been comprehended under the general name of Canada, but which was not inhabited, was colonized by American loyalists. In 1791, the Quebec act was passed, the debates on which took place amidst circumstances which were interesting to every Englishman who studied the history of his country, as the produced the difference between two great men,
1699
1700
1701
Sir J. Mackintosh
said, that in rising to observe upon the very able and perspicuous speech of the honourable gentleman, he hoped it would not be imputed to disrespect for that honourable gentleman if in the course of his observations he alluded less frequently to his speech than might perhaps be expected. The reason why he should not advert to many of the observations of the hon. gentleman was, because they related to parts of the bill, in which he completely concurred. The hon. gentleman had justly observed, that the two great measures connected with these provinces which were introduced in the last reign, one at the commencement of the American war, and the other at the period of the great confederacy against the French revolution, were attended with circumstances of great national interest and importance. The present bill was introduced under very different circumstances. Little good seemed to be expected, and little evil to be apprehended from it, if any judgment might be formed from the thin attendance of the House, which was called upon to consider its merits. The House was now called upon, on the 18th of July, to enter for the first time into the discussion of a bill, the object of which was no less than to change the constitution of two great colonies, to abolish their separate legislations, and unite them into one. He would put it to his majesty's government, whether the present state of the House did not fortify the objections which he was about to make, and which were of a very limited nature, to a part of the present bill? All he contended for, was six months' delay with regard to that part of the bill which related to the incorporation of the two legislatures: to the other parts of the bill be had no objection. The hon. gentleman had divided his measure into three parts. Of the first of these, which applied the principle of a free trade to the inland trade of the two provinces, he highly approved; he concurred equally in the second part of the bill, which distributed between the provinces of Upper and Lower Canada the revenues derived from the port of Quebec; he objected only to the third branch of the measure; or rather to the immediate adoption of that third branch, which related to the Union of the two provinces. He should move, that it
1702
1703
1704
1705
Mr. Ellice
felt all the difficulty which an attempt to answer the arguments of his hon. and learned friend (sir J. Mackintosh) imposed upon him, and the more so as he was obliged to acknowledge his entire acquiescence in the general principles he had laid down. He considered, however, the present case a little beyond the scope of their application, or at least as affording, from the peculiar circumstances in which the Canadas were situated, a sufficient justification for the apparent deviation from them, which the present proceeding involved. According to his hon. and learned friend, this measure was to be considered as an unnecessary interference with the rights of the legislatures of the two provinces, in matters which were either permanently settled or left to their regulation by the Quebec act, and he could not see in the state merit of the hon. gentleman (Mr. Wilmot) any case of expediency even, much less of necessity, made out, which could justify passing this bill in the present cession. His learned friend also complained, that there were no documents laid before the House, no expressions of the opinion or feelings of the people for whose interests it was proposed to legislate, and however much disposed he might be, individually, to place confidence in the assertions of the hon. gentleman, they could form no rational ground, for the House to proceed
1706
1707
1708
1709
1710
l
l
1711
1712
Mr. Calcraft
said, the measure might be necessary and right, but it was of too im-
1713
Mr. Bright
accused the advocates of the bill of sophistry, and stood upon the great Canadian statute, which allowed the assemblies of the colonies to make laws, subject to the revision of, the British House of Commons. The law by which a constitution was given to Canada was intended as a permanent measure. It was under that character recommended from the throne, and so acknowledged by every branch of the legislature. They were now about to take away what the legislature had deliberately conferred. Would not that very measure, compared with the silence observed, excite the greatest discontent, if there existed, as he believed there did exist, a sense of spirit amongst the Canadians? It was purely an Upper Canada bill, having for its object to destroy the influence of the Lower Provinces, And give a decided superiority to the Protestant over the Catholic population. If they took away the legislature from Canada, what security would every other British colony have? Where was the security of Jamaica or of any other of our West India dependencies? He protested against any such violation of the rights of British, subjects. These rights were inalienable, and he could not acknowledge those grounds of expediency on which it was sought to violate them.
Mr. Goulburn
observed, that the objections urged against the bill, were founded on a misconception of its object. It did not contemplate any such change as its opponents assumed. The great object of the bill was, to provide for an incorporating union between the two provinces. The question then resolved itself into three parts. First, Whether the parliament possessed the power to interfere; secondly, whether there existed that expediency which justified that interference; and, lastly, whether the present advanced period of the session was a sufficient argument to delay an interference, which; on every other ground, was most beneficial? At to the first point, it was undisputed that parliament possessed the power. The constitution of Canada rested on an act of parliament, which act had destroyed the pre-existing constitution of that colony. The next point was, whether or not there existed that state expediency which demanded such an interference? It was admitted that the consideration of
1714
Mr. Denman
limited his objections to the measure, to the simple ground of the advanced period of the session, and the thin attendance of members.
The Marquis of Londonderry
contended, that the lateness of the session ought not to prevent them from adopting a measure which would confer upon the Canadas a great advantage. If government had not been strongly impressed with a conviction that the change contemplated by this measure was anxiously wished for in both the Canadas, it would never have been submitted to the consideration of parliament. He therefore: trusted that gentlemen would allow the bill to go into a committee.
The House divided: Ayes, 48; Noes, 14. The bill was then committed.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Friday, July 19.
IRISH INSURRECTION BILL.
The Earl of Liverpool
rose to move the second reading of this bill. He said, there was no disposition, in the government of Ireland to exercise unduly the power which it was unfortunately necessary to give, nor to retain it a moment longer than the safety of the country required. But the dispatches from the lord-lieutenant showed, that though tranquillity and security to property had been ensured by the act, there was reason to apprehend the most injurious effect would take place were it to be suspended.
The Marquis of Lansdown
, though he admitted the measure to be necessary, considered himself bound to enter his protest against continuing to act on the principle of this bill; which was the off spring of a system of palliation evils,
1715
Lord Ellenborough
, though he disapproved of the principle of the bill, felt himself bound to agree to it, as it afforded a protection which the people of Ireland were by habit brought to expect. In giving his consent to this bill, he held the government to be distinctly bound to introduce measures of conciliation.
The Earl of Limerick
said, that if the bill did not pass, there would be no security for the lives and property of the loyal inhabitants of Ireland.
Lord Redesdale
supported the bill, on the ground of immediate necessity. The cause of the evil of which all complained, was, that the law had never been properly administered in Ireland. The consequence was, that the character of the people of Ireland was affected by that mal-administration.
The Earl of Darnley
gave his consent to the bill under the same qualification as other noble lords. He expressed a general confidence in the noble marquis at the head of the government of Ireland. With regard to Ireland, no real good could be expected from palliatives. It was necessary to go to the root of the evil.
The Earl of Donoughmore
gave his reluctant assent to this measure, as one of imperative necessity. That Ireland had been long and cruelly mis-governed was a notorious fact; but the question here was, what could be done in the midst of a lawless and powerful confederacy against all order. Such a state of things must be put down, and he was compelled to admit, that there was no other way of meeting the existing evil than by resorting to such a measure as the present.
The Earl of Rosslyn
feared, that the present measure partook more the character of a permanent than a temporary regulation. He objected to the bill, as giving an excessive power to the magistrates, without providing any redress for the people in case of its abuse.
1716
The Earl of Roden
supported the bill, as the measure, most likely to restore the tranquility of Ireland, and attributed the evils under which she laboured to the number of absentees.
Lord Holland
said, that if he could confide to any man such frightful and unconstitutional powers as were granted by this bill, he would confide them to the noble marquis at the head of the Irish government. The powers, however, that were granted by the insurrection act, he would never again grant to any individual. He had once in his life supported such a bill; but, without any affectation, he would say, that the vote which he had given in support of it, lay like a lump of lead upon his mind, and was the only act of his political life, of which, upon a retrospect he sincerely repented. One of his objections to the bill was, the enormous extent of its powers. Allowing that they were necessary, still he would ask, why was not the bill conferring them accompanied by some measure of a conciliatory nature? One noble lord had attributed much of the evil in Ireland to the want of respect paid to the laws by the population of that country. He would, however, ask, were the laws themselves respectable? So long as they were of a nature like, that upon their table, they would never excite respect in the breast either of the people or the magistracy. As an English gentleman, he would say, that if such a bill were passed in England, he would immediately throw up his commission as a magistrate; because he was convinced that no one could execute it without becoming a worse man, and a worse subject to a free government. The bill placed arbitrary power in the hands of those who were likely to abuse it, sometimes from fear, and at other times from a wish to take revenge. Indeed, he would rather confer such authority as it gave upon the military officers of the Crown, than upon those whom it employed in Ireland in a civil capacity. The bill was calculated to aggravate all the evils under which Ireland at present laboured. He therefore could not consent to the passing of such a measure.
The bill was read a second time.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, July 19.
STEAM BOATS—FOREIGNERS AT GRAVESEND.
Lord Binning
presented
1717
Mr. Hudson Gurney
said, that as the present discussion seemed to involve all grievances which did and did not arise from steam boats. He should address the right hon. gentleman opposite on one connected with his department; namely, the compelling all foreigners to exchange their papers, and take up their passports at Gravesend, to their great personal inconvenience, as they are obliged to go there the day before the vessel sails, and either wait its arrival or return to London, where, it should appear, the alien office would much more naturally have been the place for them to apply;—But, within a very few days, a foreigner of high rank had applied to, but was answered, he must go to Gravesend, and might then come back, and embark in London if he pleased. Mr. G. said, he did not mean to make of this a very serious evil, but it was a species of vexation of which the English would very loudly complain, if subjected to it in any foreign country.
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, that he had that very morning given directions to remedy the inconvenience complained of. He was aware that steam boats from London to France had been running for some time, but he wished to wait until he saw whether they were likely to become permanently established. Finding that they were likely to continue, he had that morning given directions at the Custom House, that passports should be there delivered to foreigners, in order to prevent the necessity of their going to Gravesend.
Mr. Gurney
expressed himself satisfied.
ALIENS REGULATION BILL.
On the order of the day for the third reading of this bill,
Mr. Bernal
expressed his strong disapprobation of the principle and details of the measure. It was no longer called for by any foreign war, but the ground on which it rested was, that it was necessary for the sake of preserving our friendly relations with continental states. He contended, that though it was only to continue for two years, it contained in itself
1718
Mr. Wetherell
argued, that the principle of the Alien bill was as old as the constitution of the country. It was a power inherent in the Crown from the earliest periods. Every state in its first rudiments must have the right to admit, exclude, or send away those who were not its subjects. Magna Charta, in terms, applied to merchant strangers only; and they could not come, but under the safe conduct and protection of the king; by which in fact was meant the king's license. There were between 15 and 20 statutes, from the time of, Magna Charta to the reign of Henry 6th, in which provision was made for the admission into our ports of merchant strangers only. How, then, could gentlemen contend, that a right, specifically granted for the purposes of trade, could be extended generally to persons having nothing to do with trade? Magna Charta gave the right of safe conduct to those who came here to trade; but it went no farther. This was the interpretation given to the passage by sir Matthew Hale, and other eminent men. There was a curious document now in existence, from which it appeared, that in the reign of Edward 3rd, a safe conduct was given to a merchant of Bourdeaux "to come here to prosecute his affairs;" which showed that the power to allow or to prevent the entry of foreigners into this country had been anciently exercised by the Crown. If a merchant were coming here, not to prosecute treason, but to prosecute his trade, it would, he admitted, be wrong to prevent him; but the question was, whether the state had or had not the right to exercise this power over aliens? Was languages, which evidently
1719
1720
ne exeat regno
ne exeat regno.
ex arbitrio;
1721
1722
Mr. Denman
said, that he was not sanguine enough to believe that there was any chance of defeating this measure in the present session, he still hoped that it might be repealed in the next. With respect to the object and tendency of this bill, the feelings of his learned friend were involuntarily engaged on the side of those who opposed it; and he could not help thinking that this avowal had done him more credit, both as an English lawyer and a gentleman, than any of that arguments, however acute or ingenious, which he had urged in its support. Certainly, if this were merely a bill for modifying and regulating an ancient prerogative of the Crown, his learned friend would be entitled to consider it as a boon to foreigners, instead of an act of oppression. He had always considered the line of argument taken by his learned friend as involving a question of mere antiquarian research; but even upon this feeble and insufficient ground, he was prepared to meet the supporters of the bill. His learned friend admitted, that he could
1723
ne exeat regno,
ne exeat regno,
ne exeat regno
revertatur in regnum.
ne exeat regno.
1724
Sir R. Wilson
opposed the bill as a disgrace to the national character and as a measure not resorted to in France. Instances of the abuse of the act might be stated in numbers. Witness the case or general neral Gourgaud, sent out of the country upon the deposition of a worthless individual to whom he owed money. Witness the treatment, not only of Napoleon living, but of Napoléon dead. He would read a paper, signed by count Montholon, in which the count declared, that the executors had, at St. Helena, ordered a tablet to be placed, by Mr. Darling, on the emperor's coffin, with an inscription, as follows: "Napoléon Né à Ajaccio, le 15 Aôut, 1769; Mort à Ste Hélénèle 5 Mai, 1821." This tablet, sir Hudson Lowe, would not allow to be placed on the coffin, and would not even permit the initial of that name, which had filled, and will fill the universe, to be inscribed upon it. The bill would no doubt be passed this session; but the hon. member for
1725
Colonel Stanhope
felt convinced that no person would object to it, who had not done something wrong in his own country. He would beg leave to ask the gallant gentleman, by what law he had been sent out of France?
Sir R. Wilson
replied, by that power which had violated the convention of Paris.
The House divided: Ayes, 75. Noes, 32.
List of the Minority.
Abercromby, hon. J.
Mackintosh, sir J.
Baillie, Col. J.
Marjoribanks, S.
Barham, J.
Monck, J. B.
Barrett, S. M.
Moore, P.
Bennet, hon. H. G.
Palmer, Fyshe
Bernal, R.
Prendergast, M.
Burdett, sir F.
Rice, S.
Craddock, S.
Robinson, sir G.
Crompton, S.
Scarlett, J.
Davies, col.
Smith, W.
Denman, T.
Smith, J.
Forbes, C.
Smith, R.
Gurney, H.
Whitbread, S.
Hobhouse, J. C.
Wood, alderman
Hume, J.
TELLERS
Lockhart. J. J.
Calcraft, J.
Lushington, Dr.
Wilson, sir R.
Maberly, J.
Mr. Hobhouse
then moved, that the bill be entitled. "A bill to repeal so much of the great charter of England, and of other statutes, as relates to the free ingress and free residence of foreign merchants in these islands, and to assimilate, in that respect, the executive authority of Great Britain to the despotic governments of the continent."—The House divided: Ayes, 20. Noes, 69.
The bill was then passed.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Tuesday, July 23.
PIRACY IN THE WEST INDIES.
Mr. Canning
presented a petition from certain merchants, shipowners, and underwriters of Liverpool, complaining of the numerous piracies in the West Indian seas. The. right hon. member, having detailed the contents of the petition, begged to add some facts with which he had been furnished regarding outrages committed upon British shipping. On the 13th Dec. 1821, when within five miles of Cape San Antonio, a British ship bound for Liverpool, had been stopped by a crew of armed men,
1726
Sir G. Cockburn
said, that when these transactions came to the knowledge of government, it sent out instructions to the admiral on the station to seize all vessels which could not prove their nationality, and which had committed depredations on our trade: a statement was sent in answer to government, that no actual proof could be made of depredations committed by any particular vessel: government sent out fresh orders to the admiral requiring him to seize all vessels against which reasonable cause of suspicion existed. With respect to the depredation committed off Cape St. Antonio, the moment the government heard of that transaction it excited their attention. It appeared that the pirates lay at the point of St. Antonio in watch for vessels; that they anxiously looked out in order to distinguish merchant men from ships of war; and that sometimes they made their attack in schooners and sometimes in small boats. So long as our men of war were near the coast, these pirates did not come out, but as soon as they were driven off by winds or currents, the pirates came out in their schooners and boarded vessels that hap-
1727
The Marquis of Londonderry
said, that if the cases of aggression complained of were mere cases of undisguised piracy, there would be no difficulty in dealing with them; but the peculiarity was, that the piracy was perpetrated by vessels having commissions. At the commencement of the contest between Spain and her colonies, these commissions had been issued, not only by the provinces which carried on war against Spain on the sea coast, but by powers which had no ports, particularly by Artigas, whose commissions were sold to cover piracies. In consequence of this, the government had issued orders to seize all vessels sailing under commissions from governments in whose ports they were not fitted out. As to the local governments in South America, they had shown every disposition to keep their cruisers within bounds; and, considering the difficulties of the case, had made great efforts to do justice. But when the vessels sailing under the commissions he had described were seized, it was necessary to prove that they had committed acts of hostility. These orders were at last enlarged, and our ships were authorized to seize vessels of the description mentioned on suspicion. He now came to the particular acts of piracy complained of, which had taken place near Cape St. Antonio, and which were first
1728
Mr. Bright
said, the acts of the pirates at Cape St. Antonio were such direct acts of piracy that he saw no such difficulty in dealing with them as had been described. He could not but admire the superior success of the American navy in dealing with these pirates. This was owing to no superior skill or activity in American officers, but to a better system. The active exertions of our officers in so important a matter should be encouraged; and when, in attempting to execute their duty, they fell into mistakes, they should be indemnified from the legal consequences.
Mr. Marryat
said, the present was a question between the human race and its enemies. There was not now that difficulty respecting commissions that once existed, as those of Artigas had been called in by the authority that issued them, The diplomatic communications with Spain would produce little effect, as this country had just as much influence with the local government of Cuba as Spain had. Cuba, though not nominally independant of the Spanish government, had really paid no attention to the laws of Spain
1729
Sir J. Mackintosh
said, he could not listen without strong feelings of indignation at the narrative of rapine and cruelty which had been practised on British subjects, and the insult that had been offered to the British flag. If they overlooked such an insult, even to the smallest vessel that carried the British flag, they would be unworthy of the name they bore. But as they were deeply interested, they were bound to speak with consideration and temper on matters of such importance, to show that they contemplated them seriously, and were seriously determined to maintain the rights and interest of the empire.
CANADA GOVERNMEMT AND TRADE BILL.
Mr. Ellice
presented a petition, signed by all the respectable merchants of London connected with Canada, in favour of this bill. He confessed he felt some surprise and regret at hearing the present measure, the object of which was, to give an independent constitution to the provinces of Canada, assimilated, on a former evening, to that odious measure by which the British parliament sought to deprive the province of Massachusetts of a free legislature. He was satisfied that the bill would be received with gratitude by the great mass of the population of Canada.
Mr. Bright
protested, on the behalf of our absent colonists, against the wickedness of introducing so iniquitous and abominable a measure at this late period of the session.
Mr. Marryat
said, he had received strong representations from many persons connected with Canada, that the present bill was likely to produce the most injurious effects. Under these circumstances he should certainly oppose the passing of it, unless withdrawn until next session.
1730
Sir F. Burdett
, without entering into the abstract question, how far it was right to legislate for the interests of our colonies without previous communication with them, begged leave to protest against the exaggerated expressions of the hon. member for Bristol, which imputed to his majesty's government an act of gross injury and violent tyranny against the provinces of Canada. Feeling that great credit was due to his majesty's ministers for the very liberal views they entertained on this subject, and believing, that if the same enlightened system of colonial policy had been much better for this country, he felt it his duty to protest against the harsh and violent expressions of the hon. member for Bristol, which had no foundation whatever in reason or justice.
Sir J. Mackintosh
said, he had never applied any expressions of censure to the bill itself; for he admitted that the conditions of the union appeared to be fair and reasonable. He had certainly deprecated the attempt to pass a bill, depriving a free colony of their constitution without hearing their opinions and arguments for or against the measure. He confessed he had heard the sentiments of the hon. baronet on this subject with the utmost surprise. He had never carried his opinions, as to popular rights, so far as the hon. baronet. He venerated every part of the constitution, and he preferred and loved the popular part of it; but he had never carried his popular principles so high as the hon. baronet. This was the first time he had heard it argued, that an incorporating union of two great colonies was not a most essential alteration of their political constitution. The annexation of Holland to France might, on such principles, have admitted of an easy defence; and it might have been said to the former power, "We do not take away the rights of Dutchmen, but we only communicate to you the rights of Frenchmen." He objected to such an interference with the rights of a free people, on grounds wholly distinct from the merits of the constitution which might be imposed upon them. He no more wished to see liberty imposed on a people than despotism; for even liberty imposed on a people did not deserve the name, and was little better than despotism. The people of Canada had no less than two years' notice previous to the measure of 1791; whereas parliament was now called upon to make a total
1731
The Marquis of Londonderry
said, that as his majesty's government, instead of finding the support they expected, had been strenuously opposed, not on the principle of the bill, but on the period of the session at which it was introduced, it was obvious that the measure could not be passed, except under circumstances which were calculated to alienate the feelings of the people of Canada from the proposed arrangements. He lamented that the learned gentleman had opposed the measure in a tone of earnestness, which rendered it almost impossible to carry it through in the present session. Under all the circumstances, therefore, he felt it inconsistent with his public duty to press the measure, however much its postponement was calculated to injure the best interests of the people of Canada. He protested, however, against the principle, that parliament had no right to legislate for the best interests of the most distant dependencies, without previous communication with those dependencies. He could not conceive any principle more disastrous, since it was calculated to tie up the hands of the legislature from performing its most sacred duties.
Sir F. Burdett
regretted the postponement of the measure, and trusted that no opposition would be offered to it next session. The operation of the bill would have been highly beneficial to both the provinces concerned; and he could not help thinking that the gentlemen who had opposed it, had been a little over scrupulous in the cause of technical objections and abstract principles.
Ordered to lie on the table.
RECOGNITION OF THE COLUMBIAN GOVERNMENT.
Mr. Lennard
said, that as it was desirable that parliament, in its Consideration of this question, should be aided by the knowledge of what was passing immediately with respect to it, he should move for the production of all correspondence between his majesty's government and the agents of Columbia. He did this in order that the House might be informed as to what demands of recognition might have been made by Columbia, and as to the manner in which those demands had been treated by England. He could not see that the success of such a motion could interfere in the negotia-
1732
de facto
1733
The Marquis of Londonderry
was somewhat surprised at the latitude to which some of the observations of the hon. mover had proceeded. It was not the custom to lay before the House proceedings which had not arrived at any result; and parliament would be placing itself in a, rather embarrassing situation, if it interfered with arrangements in the stage of those in question, and took upon itself a responsibility which regularly belonged to government. His majesty's ministers had never refused to entertain any agents of what was called the Columbian government, although such person had not been received officially; and the representations of such agents had been discussed by government, and made the subject of communication with Spain. He (the noble marquis) did not mean to assert that
1734
de facto
de facto,
Sir J. Mackintosh
thought it very fair to make a motion like the present, in order to give the House an opportunity of expressing its feeling upon the particular subject; and such motions had been attended with highly beneficial results. The questions for consideration were simply these:—Would it be convenient for England to recognize the independence of Spanish South America? and would such a recognition by England be any violation of the rights of Spain? Surely, neither of these questions could be connected with any secrets of state. There was a wide distinction between recognizing independence in colonies which had been our own, and admitting it in states over which
1735
1736
Sir R. Wilson
wished to ask whether the question of South American independence was clearly a British question, or fettered in any way by the treaties at Aix-la-Chapelle?
The Marquis of Londonderry
said, the whole was purely a British question, uninfluenced by foreign powers, and resting only upon the law of nations, and the character of generosity and prudence which he trusted this country would ever maintain.
After a short conversation, the House divided: Ayes, 18. Noes, 53.
HOUSE OF COMMONS,
Wednesday, July 24.
POOR-RATES IN IRELAND.
Mr.
1737
presented a petition from Middlesex and Surrey, recommending the establishment of poor-rates in Ireland.
Mr. Hudson Gurney
said, he wished the petition had been from two Irish, instead of from individuals of two English counties, as he was perfectly convinced that the great calamities which at present afflicted Ireland were entirely occasioned by their having no poor-laws. He was far from stating that all the provisions of the English poor-laws were to be recommended, or that their administration was not susceptible of great amelioration; but until there was, in some shape or other, a localized provision for the sustenance of the poor, under the pressure of adverse circumstances, the state of Ireland could never be other than it was—a perpetual recurrence of misery and insurrection.
Mr. Dawson
said, that if the poor-laws were introduced into Ireland, the result would be, that the poor would have to support the poor.
Mr. S. Rice
thought the introduction of the poor-laws into Ireland would be productive of additional evil to that country. He called upon the hon. member to consider that the poor-laws in England had no other effect than that of depriving the poor of that independence of character which had formerly distinguished them.
Mr. Hume
deprecated the idea of introducing the poor-laws into Ireland. Let the hon. member look at Scotland. There existed no poor-laws in that country, and yet in no part of it was any severity of distress experienced. He hoped that the ruinous system of poor-laws now existing in this country would, in the course of a short time, be much altered, if not entirely abolished.
Ordered to lie on the table.
ANTIENT HISTORIANS.
The House having resolved itself into a committee on this subject,
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
expatiated on the advantages of having an uniform and regular edition of our Antient Historians published by authority and at the public expence. This was the more necessary, because individuals were in the habit of printing imperfect copies, which were very carelessly collated, if collated at all. He hoped that even at the present time, when the public money required to be expended with so much
1738
l.
Sir J. Mackintosh
felt great satisfaction in seconding the motion, and considered the work proposed to be one of the very highest utility. Generally speaking, the government of England was a little in arrear as to its patronage of literature; but it was highly creditable to the state of society in this country, that we saw works got up by individual enterprise which in other countries would have required the assistance of the legislature. With respect to the work in question, however, there were a variety of causes—the great capital required—the great devotion of time—the limited extent of probable sale—and certain laws which pressed heavily upon the publication of expensive works—which were likely to prevent its being performed by individual speculation. For the conductor of the work there was an individual (Mr. Petrie, of the Tower) eminently qualified; and if he were not employed immediately, the desire of employing him might come too late. The work would be a history of the progress of the constitution; and, as such, it would be extremely valuable; and, whatever might be the anxiety not to spend the public money unnecessarily, there could, he thought, be no objection to the principle of the address.
Mr. Hume
did not object to the measure, but he hoped that the business would not turn out as the institution of the Irish Record Office had done. More
1739
l
Mr. Goulburn
said, that the matter was under consideration. It should be remembered, however, that if the proceeds had been small, the work was of a most laborious and intricate description.
Mr. Hudson Gurney
trusted, that what had fallen from the hon. member for Aberdeen respecting the Irish commission of records (of which Mr. G. said he knew nothing), would not be construed to the prejudice of the proceedings of the commission of records in England. In fact, apparent slowness of proceeding was of the first importance. No man not employed in it, could appreciate the degree of patient labour which was required, first in becoming acquainted with, and then in examining and arranging the materials, before works of this nature could, with any hope either of correctness or completeness, be committed to the press. It was well known the public were indebted to lord Colchester, the late Speaker of that House, for the establishment of the Record Commission; for which he considered that noble lord entitled to the gratitude of his country; our records being, he believed, the most ancient and least imperfect of those of any nation in Europe, but, in their then state, for the most part inaccessible, perishable if not perishing, scattered, and uncalendared. The object of the commission was therefore to preserve and render them accessible as documents, by printing and indexing them; and the only error at first committed was the hurrying the sub-commissioners somewhat too much—probably in order to have something to shew for the money expended—by which some of the earlier volumes were rendered less perfect than they otherwise might have been.—As to the object more immediately before the House, almost every nation in Europe had published, or was now publishing, an authorized edition of their earlier national historians; and he considered it a circumstance of great good fortune that the work was to be commenced here at a period when we had the benefit of a gentleman ready to undertake it, gifted with the extraordinary qualifications for the execution of such task, which were combined in the present
1740
Mr. Bennet
said, he never gave a vote in his life with more satisfaction than the present, but he should wish to see it a work of general utility, and one which, devoid of unnecessary splendour, might find easy circulation.
Mr. Wynn
said, he did not wish for any unnecessary splendour, but still the work should be published in a manner worthy of their character.
Mr. Bright
hoped the ancient works would be published at full length.
The resolution was agreed to.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Thursday, July 25.
FINANCE RESOLUTIONS.
Mr. Hume,
in bringing forward his resolutions, assured the house, that if he had not been strongly impressed with the absolute necessity of calling their immediate attention
1741
1742
l
l
l
1743
*
*
1744
l.;
l
1745
l
l
l
l
l
l
1746
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
1747
l
l
l
l
s.;
s
l
l
s
d
l
s
d
l
l
1748
l.;
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l.;
1749
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
s
l
l
l
l
l
l
s
d
l
l
l
l
s
l
l
s
d
1750
l
l
l
l
l
l
l,
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
d
1751
l
s
l
l
s
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
1752
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
1753
s
d
l
1754
1755
1756
1757
They began now, too late he feared, to
RESOLUTIONS relative to the National Debt, and the Operations of the Sinking Fund.
1. "That the National Debt of Great Britain, unredeemed on the 5th Jan. 1793, was 239,350,148
l.;
l
1
l
2
l
3
1 Parliamentary Paper, No. 35, of 1819; page 3—page 9.
2 Vide Vol. 12, Finance Reports, folio edition, page 1.
Interest
7,831,837
6
2
Terminable Annuities (various) £704,740, terminable in 1860
1,373,751
2
6
Charges of Management
120,277
15
7
Making a Total of
£.9,325,866
4
3
Interest on Unfunded Exchequer Bills, Appendix 7, of No. 35
297,445
16
1
9,623,312
0
4
Deduct Redeemed and expired Annuities, as per col. 5, of Parliamentary Paper, No. 35, of 1819, page 3
419,338
0
0
Net Charge for the year 1793
£.9,203,974
0
4
The Funded and Unfunded Debt of Ireland, at that time, was £,2,252,677, at an Annual charge of £130,920 for interest, as appears by Parliamentary Paper, No. 35, of 1819, but that amount is not included in this Resolution.
2. "That from the 1st Feb. 1793 to the 5th Jan. 1817, including 600,000
l
l
l
*
l
l.;
l.;
*
Vide
64,750,000
In 1811 raised for Ireland, but not charged
4,500,000
£69,250,000
1 Sum funded as per col. 1, of Parliamentary Paper 145, of 1822
584,874,557
Excess of Exchequer Bills
33,289,300
Total Sum raised
£618,163,857
2
Vide
Amount of Exchequer Bills, on 5th Jan. 1817
44,650,300
Amount of Exchequer Bills, on 5th Jan. 1793
11,361,000
Excess of Exchequer Bills, issued and Outstanding on the 5thJan. 1817
£.35,289,300
1758
perceive, that in so doing, they had bartered permanent prosperity for temporary advantage, and had, in fact, been voting away their own estates.
He had to apologize to the House, for trespassing so long, upon their attention, but the ruinous consequences which had been produced by the erroneous system of finance so long carried on, had impressed his mind so strongly with the absolute necessity of an immediate change, that he could not, consistent with his sense of duty to the public, refrain from stating what he had done.
He was fearful he had not made himself perfectly intelligible on all the branches of this intricate subject, but, he could assure the House, he had not spared any labour, to do so.— The hon. gentleman concluded with moving the following
1759
less than 618,163,857
l
3. "That there was paid into the Treasury, on account of the 584,874,557
l
l
l.;
l
l
l
l
s
d
l
l
2
l
1
Vide
Cash paid to the Treasury
487,646,178
From which deduct debentures, 1813
£.786,698
—Loan of E. I. C. 1812
2,500,000
Amount for Public.
434,359,480
Add Amount
Bills funded (vide col. 1)
86,183,176
Austrian Loan of 1795 not paid into the Exchequer
4,600,000
Retained by the Bank, 1797, part of Loans of £.1,620,000
4 648,732
579,791,383
Amount retained for Discount, &c.
5,083,169
£.584,874,557
*
Vide
*
Vide
4. "That for the sum of 579,791,388
l
l
l.;
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
s
l
l
l
l
s
1
Vide col. 3 of 145; viz
£.708,750,353
of 3 per cents.
49,982,119
of 4 per cents.
120,557,471
of 4 per cents.
Various Capitals
£.879,289,943
Total
2 Interest, as per col. 5
29,289,668
Annuities for 25 years, as per col. 6
230,000
Annuities terminable in 1860, Do.
654,695
Total Annual charge, as per col. 7
£.30,174.363
3. Various Capitals £.879,289,943 at a charge in perpetuity of
29,289,668
Annuities terminable in 1860, £.654.695, equal to
617,377
Annuities for 25 years, equal to charge in perpetuity
133,400
Total of charge in perpetuity
£.30,040,445
equal to £.1.001,348,166 of 3 per cent capital, calculated at the Annuity Value.
Equal to £.5 3 7½ per cent interest.
5. "That, if the conversion of the 4 and 5 per cent Capitals is made at the average relative prices they bore to 3 percents, at the time they were funded, the total amount in 3 per cent Capital will be 975,784,592
l
l.;
The 49;982,119
l
l
l
1760
1761
the relative current value of the 3 per cents being 67
l
£.61,172,133
The 120,557,471
l
l
l
l
180,836,206
The amount of 3 per cents funded
708,750,353
The 884,695
l
l
*
25,025,900
Total 3 per cent Capital
£.975,734,592
Making a difference of
.£.25,563,574
l
*
*
Vide
6. "That, during the 24 years from the 1st Feb. 1793 to the 5th Jan. 1817, in which the 579,791,388
l
l
1
l
2
l
3
l
4
l
5
1
Vide
2
Vide
3 Cash paid to Commissioners
188,522,340
Expense of Office
62,698
Total Cash
£.188,585,038
£
£
£
£
4 If 579,791,388
30,040,445
188,585,038
9,171,063
5 If 579,791,388
1,001,348,166
188,535,038
325,102,116
7. "That, with the 188,585,038
l
l
1
l
2
l
l
s
l
l
l
l
s
Vide
Vide
3 Equal to £.4 11 2¾ per cent Interest
8. "That the amount of annual charge created in perpetuity, by raising the 188,585,038
l
l
l
l
1
l
2
l
s
l
l
s
l
l
s
l
1 Charge in perpetuity incurred
9,771,063
Charge in perpetuity redeemed
9,163,233
Less redeemed thin created
£.602,830
2 Money £.100: 3 per cent Stock £.10.13::Money. £.188,565,038: 3 per cent Stock £.20,094,333
9. "That, independent of the operations of the Commissioners of the Sinking Fund, the following Reductions of the National Debt and Annual Charge have taken place between the 5th Jan. 1793, and the 5th Jan. 1817; viz. that 25,290,994
l
1
1
Vide
Up to that date the Stock for land tax redeemed stood in the names of the Commissioners, but from that time it has been cancelled annually; viz.
1st Feb. 1815
£.24,960,313
10
7
at Interest 1.758,809
8
1
1762
1763
l
s
d.;
l
2
l.;
l
3
l
l
s.;
l
4
l
l
s
d
5
l.;
l.;
6
l
l
l
7
1st Feb. 1816, 3 per cents.
194,743
8
8
Do.
5,842
6
0
1st Feb. 1817, 3 per cents.
135,937
4
11
Do.
4,078
2
0
Totals
£.25,290,994
4
2
Do.
£.758,729
16
1
5 per cents, of 1797, paid off
2,363,420
0
0
Do.
£.118,171
0
0
2
Vide Parliamentary Papers, No. 162, of 1822
3 3 per cents Capitals, cancelled for Annuities, by 48 Geo. 3 o. 142
3,449,955
0
0
Do.
103,498
13
0
Vide
4 Unclaimed Dividends on 5th Jan, 1817, Finance Accounts
539,244
0
0
Do.
17235
0
0
6 Annuities expired and unclaimed, up to 5th Jan. 1817
Do.
523,493
19
5
Charges of Management, at £562 10 per million on Capitals cancelled as below
Do.
17,237
0
0
6 Total Capitals cancelled
£.31,643,613
4
2
*
9
0
Deduct Amount of Annuities, created by 43 Geo 3, up to 5th Jan. 1817
225,254
0
0
7 Total Diminution of Annual Charge on 5th Jan. 1817
£.1,313,111
9
0
Unclaimed Exchequer Annuities, page 225 of Finance Accounts, 5th Jan. 1817
28,838
7
0
Expired on 5th April, 1803, and to 5th Jan. 1808, page 229
494,655
12
5
Total
£.523,493
19
5
10. "That the total Revenue of Great Britain in the 24 years between the 5th Jan. 1793, and the 5th Jan. 1817, from taxes alone, including the small branches of Hereditary Revenue, and incidental resources, amounted to the sum of 1,114,318,563
l
1
Vide
Vide
Vide
Vide
11. "That the total Expenditure of Great Britain, for the same period, viz. from the 5th Jan. 1793 to the 5th Jan. 1817, for interest on the debt as it stood on the 5th Jan. 1793 (but excluding all charge for Loans since 1793), and for expenses of Civil Government, for the Navy, Ordnance, Army (ordinary and extraordinary), Miscellaneous Services and Charges of Management, and including 58,164,716
l
1
l
l
2
1.
Vide
For 1797, 8, and 9, as in 10th Resolution.
Vide
2
Vide
In this Sum is included;
Paid to the Bank for discount on Loans
3,335,512
Paid to the Bank for receiving Loans—
Vide
397,006
£.3,732,598
Principal of Debentures paid off by 53 Geo. 3, c. 41 and 53, in 1815 and 1816.
786,698
£.4,519,296
1764
1765
l
l
12. "That, as the Revenue of Great Britain, was 1,114,318,563
l
l
l
1
1 Expenditure
1,235,982,479
–11th Resolution.
Revenue
1,114,318,563
–10th Resolution.
Excess of Expenditure
£.121,663,916
13. "That, in addition to the Expenditure of 1,235,982,479
l
l
1
l
l
l
l
2
l
1
Vide
Expenditure
£.1,235,982,479
Remitted to Ireland for Loans and Allowances
68,930,595
= 1,304,913,074
Revenue of Great Britain
1,114,318,563
Received from Ireland
52,245,471
= 1,166,564,034
Excess of Expenditure
£.138,349,040
2 Remitted from England to Ireland.—
Vide
68,930,595
Remitted from Ireland to England.
52,245,471
£.16,685,124
14. "That as the reduction of 1,313,111
l
l
1
l
l
2
l
l
3
l
1 Annual Charge, 5th Jan. 1793
9,203,974
—
Vide
Reduction as per 9th Resolution, up to 51h Jan. 1317
1,313,111
Charge as it would have been in 1817, if no Loans had been raised
£.7,890,863
2 Capital, Funded and Unfunded, 1793.
239,350,148
Capitals cancelled up to 1817
31,643,613
—
Vide 9th Resolution
Capital as it would bare been
£.207,706,535
3
Vide
£28,812,307—
Vide
Capitals various
772,764,937
at an Annual charge of
26,650,959
4
5
Terminable Annuities of various denominations
1,657,904
6
10
Life do. 48 Geo. 3, c. 142
225,254
13
0
Charges of Management of the Bank
278,189
2
3
Unfunded Debt
44,650,300
charge
1,815,926
17
8
Total Capital
£.817,415,237
at an Annual charge of
£.30,628,234
4
2
15. "That it appears by the preceding Resolutions, that, in consequence of not raising the Supplies within the year, by taxes, to the amount of 138,349,040
l
1766
1767
l
l
1
l,
1 Capital of Debt as it stood on 5th Jan. 1817, Funded and Unfunded
817,415,237
at charge of
30,628,254
4
9
Capital of Debt as it would have been, as per 14th Resolution
207,706,535
at charge of
7,890,363
0
0
£.609,708,702
charge
2£.22,737,371
4
3
Increase of Charge by Loans, since 1793, to pay the actual excess of Expenditure of 138 millions.
16. "That, by the union of the Exchequer of Ireland with that of Great Britain, on the 5th Jan. 1817, a farther Annual Charge of 1,323,775
l
s
d
l
1
l
2
l
3
l
1 Charge on the Debt of Great Britain
30,628,234
as per 14th Resolution.
Charge on the Debt of Great Ireland
1,323,775
Total Charge of United Kingdom on 5th Jan. 1817
£.31,952,009
Sterling.
Proportion of Charge on Unfunded
2,031,157
Proportion of Charge on Funded
£.29,870,852
2
Vide
Funded Debt, unredeemed, Ireland, in British Currency, on 5th Jan. 1817
23,435,254
5
3
at an Annual charge of
1,058,545
Unfunded
5,304,615
0
0
at a charge of
265,230
Funded and Unfunded
£.28,739,869
5
3
at an Annual charge of
£.1,323,775
*
The Total Capital of Irish Debt is stated at
34,017,870
15
5
Redeemed
8,812,662
12
7
Unredeemed Capital in Irish Currency
£.25,235,208
2
10
Equivalent in British Currency
23,293,992
0
0
3 Capital of Great Britain, on 5th Jan. 1817, Funded and Unfunded
817,415,237.
–14th Resolution
Capital of Ireland, Funded and Unfunded
28,739,869
-
Total of the United Kingdom
£.846,135,106
*
17. "That, from the 5th Jan. 1817 to the 5th Jan. 1822, there was raised, by taxes, in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, the sum of 296,454,538
l.;
1
l
2
l
3
l
s
1 Total Gross Income of the United Kingdom (Drawbacks excepted).
3 Expenditure of the United Kingdom.
1817
£.57,650,589
?.58,544,049
1818
59,657,941
57,872,428
1819
58,680,252
57,392,544
1820
59,759,680
57,476,755
1821
60,686,076
57,639,893
Income
£.296,454,538
Expenditure £.288,925,669
Expenditure
288,925,669
7,528,869
Excess of Income in 5 years.
2
Vide
1768
1769
18. "That, notwithstanding the Excess of Income of 7,528,869
l
l
1
l
2
l
3
l.;
l
l
l
l
l
4
l
l
l
l
l
l
s
l
l
l
1
Vide
By Loans in money
19,999,920
By Exchequer Bills
34,262,000
By Commissioners of Sinking Fund
36,500,000
£.90,761,920
Deficit retained by the Bank
£.184,976
For Transfer
14,109
199,085
Nett Amount of Cash
£.90,562,835
2
Vide
Vide
1818, for transfer of 27 Millions, 3 per cents to
3½ per cents
£.2,999,920
Cash £.2,971,819
19
4
1819 Capital
12,000,000
11,862,340
7
6
1820
5,000,000
4,980,783
15
1
£.19,999,920
Received
£.19,814,944
1
11
Short credit
184,976
0
0
Nett
£.19,999
19. "That, during the period of 5 years, from 5th Jan. 1822, in which 3,773,354
l
l
l.;
1
l
s
d
2
l.;
l
3
l.;
4
l
l
s
l
l
l
s
d
1
Vide
Paid to the Commissioners of Sinking Fund
82,021,555
Expense of Office
32,203
Total of money paid to them
£.82,053,758
2 In 1817
4,853
17
11
1818
6,399
12
10
1819
7,240
4
8
1820
7,108
6
9¾
1821
6,601
0
0
£.32,203.
2
2¾
—
Vide
62,698.
0
0
From 1793 to 1816
Expense of
£.94,901.
2
2¾
in 29 years
3
Vide
4
Vide
1770
1771
20. "That, in borrowing the sum of 82,053,758
l
l
1
l
2
l
3
l
l
4
l
l
s
l
l
s
l
l
s
l
Money.
3 per cents.
Money.
3 per cents.
1
If £.90,562,835
£.125,778,466
£.82,053,758
£.113,960,608
But £.82,053,758
has redeemed only
111,295,232
Occasioning a Loss of 3 per cents Capital and a Dividend of £.79,961.
£.2,665,376
Money.
Dividend.
Money.
Dividend.
2
If £.90,562,835
£.3,773,354
£.82,053,758
£.3,418,818
3
Vide
Dividend on borrowing
3,418,818
4
Dividend on redeeming
3,338,857
Difference in Dividend
£.79,961
21. "That the total sum funded in Great Britain in the 29 years from the 5th Jan. 1793 to the 5th Jan. 1822, amounted to 675,636,477;
1
l
2
l.;
3
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
s
l
l
l
s
l
s
d
1
Vide
2
Vide
3
Col. 5
£.33,063,022
perpetuity.
Col. 6
133,400
of perpetuity. for £.230,000 of 25 years
Col. 6
617,377 5
of Perpetuity. for £.654,695 terminable in 1860
£.33,813,799
Equal to 3 per cent Capital or £,1,127,126,633.
22. "That the total sum paid to the Commissioners of the Sinking Fund, during the said period of 29 years, from the 5th Jan. 1793 to the 5th Jan. 1822, amounted to 270,543,895
l
1
l
2
l
3
l
l
5
1
Vide
270,543,895
2
Vide
94,901
Total Sum paid to Commissioners S. F.
£.270,638,796
3
Money received.
3 per cents.
Money paid to Commis.
3 per cents.
If
£.670,334,222
£.1,127,126,633
£.270,638,796
3
£.455,049,262
4
£.670,354,222
Dividend, £.33,813,799
£.270,638,796
Dividend, £.13,651,477
23. "That, with the 270,638,796
l
l
1
l.;
2
Vide
*
Vide
*
53 Geo. 3, o.95
1813
153.576,500
1814
38,944,561
1772
1773
l
l
s
l
l
l
s
l
s
d
1815
51,271,467
1820
47,930,611
1821
21,729,166
Total
£.313,452,305
3 per cents.
1814
7,796,400
4 per cents.
1813
142,600
5 per cents.
Total
£.321,391,305
24. "That the amount of annual charge created in perpetuity, borrowing the 270,638,796
l
l
l
l
l
l
s
l
l
s
l
l
l
l
s
d
In borrowing.
Created 3 per cent Capital.
At an Annual charge of
1 £.270,638,796
£.455,049,262
£.13,651,477
But had redeemed only
416,903,000
12,507,090
Less redeemed than created
£.38,146,262
£.1,144,387
25. "That, independent of the operations of the Commissioners of the Sinking Fund, a reduction took place, between the 5th Jan. 1817 and 5th Jan. 1822, of 3,583,497
l
1
l
l
l
2
l.;
l
3
l
l
1 Cancelled, and expired in 5 years.
Capitals.
Annuities.
£.230,000 Annuities expired in 1819
£.230,000
0
0
For Land Tax, cancelled
£.528,094
16
8
15,842
16
9
3 per cent, per 48, Geo. 3, c. cancelled
2,916,560
0
0
100,143
3
7
Unclaimed Capital
138,842
0
0
4,445
4
0
Exchequer Annuities expired
15,789
1
1
Exchequer unclaimed for 3 years
30,710
9
6
Totals
£.3,583,496
16
8
£.396,930
14
11
Deduct increase of Charge, payable for Annuities, by 48 Geo. 3, c. 142
185,711
0
0
Actual reduction from the Debt, as it stood on 5th January, 1817
£.211,221
14
11
Capital.
Interest.
2Funded in 1817, in Great Britain, as per 14th Resolution
£.772,764,937
£.28,812,307
6
6
Funded in 1817, in Ireland, as per 16th Resolution
23,435,254
1,058,545
0
0
United Kingdom
£.796,200,191
£.29,870,852
6
6
Decreased as above
3,583,496
211,222
0
0
Funded Debt, as it would bare been on the 5th Jan. 1822.
£.792,616,695
£.29,659,630
0
0
3
Vide
Interest in perpetuity
£.27,875,841
19
1
Terminable Annuities
1,451,205
13
4
Annuities by 48 Geo. 3
410,964
19
6
Charges of Management
277,773
0
4
Total Charge of Funded Debt of the United Kingdom, as it really stood on 5th January, 1822
£.30,015,785
12
3
1774
1775
26. "That the Unfunded Debt of the United Kingdom, in Exchequer and Treasury Bills, on the 5th Jan. 1817, was 49,954,915
l
1
l
l.;
l
2
l
3
l
4
l
5
l
l
1
Vide
Unfunded Debt Great Brtiain, 5th January, 1817
£.44,650,300
Unfunded Debt Great Irish
5,304,615
Total
£.49,954,915
Unfunded Debt Great Britain and Ireland, on 5th Jan. 1822 (
vide
32,671,731
Apparent Decrease of Unfunded Debt, as per Finance Accounts
£.17,283,184
2
Vide
3
Vide
Deficiency of the Consolidated Fund on 5th Jan. 1822
?.8,842,830
Deficiency of the Consolidated fund on 5th Jan. 1817
609,872
Deficiency in the 5 years
£.8,232,458
4 Excess of Income, as per Resolution, No. 17
£.7,528,870
Deficiency of Consolidated Fund as above
8,232,458
5 Apparent decrease of Unfunded Debt, as note
1
£.17,283,184
Accounted for, as per note
4
15,761,328
Decrease of Unfunded Debt
£.1,521,856
Against Increase of £.356,153 of Annual charge of Funded, equal to 3 per cent Capital
11,871,766
27. "That on taking a retrospective view of the Operations of the Sinking Fund, from the 5th Jan. 1793 to the 5th Jan. 1817, it is conclusive, that no Reduction of the debt was effected thereby; because, as the expenditure in each year exceeded the income derived from taxes, the money applied by the Commissioners of the Sinking Fund must have been first borrowed; and, as has been shown by the 4th Resolution, that 100
l
l
s
l
s
l
l
s
d
l
s
d
s
d
28 "That as the expenditure for the service of Great Britain, during the 24 years from 5th Jan. 1793 to the 5th Jan. 1815, (including the charge on the debt as it stood on the 5th Jan. 1793) exceeded the income derived from taxes by the sum of only 138,349,040
l
1
l
l
2
3
4
1 Funded
584,214,557
—
Vide
Increase of Unfunded
33,289,300
—
Vide
£.618,163,857
—
Vide
3 For Interest, Annuities, and Charges
291,229,779
4 To Commissioners of Sinking Fund
188,585,038
Amount raised
479,814,817
2 To cover Excess of Expenditure
138,349,040
Total Sum raised
£.618,163,857
29 "That the system of borrowing, during the said 24 years, created a necessity for borrow-
1776
1777
l
l
30. "That the deduction in the preceding Resolution will be confirmed by ascertaining year by year, what sum would have sufficed to have met all the demands of the state in each year, on precisely the same scale of expense with which it has been supported, had not the system of the nominal Sinking Fund been maintained; by which mode of proof it will be seen that about. 360 millions would have sufficed to have been funded, instead of 584,874 557
l.;
31. "That as the 584,874,557
l
l
1
l
l
2
l
3
l
4
l
l
l
l
5
l
l
1
Vide
£.30,174,363
2
Vide
9,168,233
3£.21,006,130
4 Total Funded
£.584,874,557
Deduct
188,585,038
paid to Commissioners of Sinking Fund.—
Vide
£.396,289,519
Balance of Amount Funded.
Add
33,289,300
Bills Unfunded.—
Vide
£.429,578,819
applied as follows:
Viz.
£.291,229,779
for Interest and Charge on new Debt.
133,349,040
for excess of Expenditure.—
Vide
£.429,578,819
Total Increase, on Account of the excess of Expenditure of£.138,349,040 in the 24 years.
5 £.21,006,130
by
£.396,289;519
18,572,820
by
360,000,000
£.2,433,310
£.36,289,519
32. "That, taking the charge for the Funded Debt as it stood on the 5th Jim. 1817 at 29,870,852
l
1
l
2
l
l.;
l
l
l
l
1
Vide
2
Vide
33 "That, as the price of all commodities is uniformly governed by the demand, if 360 Millions only had been borrowed instead of 584 Millions, it is fair to conclude, that the rate of interest at which the lesser amount might have been obtained, would have been considerably lower; and taking it only at the rate of one half per cent lower, it would have made a difference if 1,800,000
l
l
l
l
l
l
1778
1779
34 "That, if the annual charge of the Funded Debt is taken at 24,737,542
l
1
l
2
l
3
l
4
l
l
From
1£.24,737,542
Deduct
£.1,260,000
As per note, 1st, Resolution 25
211,222
1,471,222
Leaving Charge for 1822
3
Instead of
4
35. "That, as the total amount of Debt unredeemed, Funded and Unfunded, on the 5th Jan. 1793, was only 239,350,148
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l.;
l
l
l
l
l
l
l.;
36. "That, whether the Financial System of the Country be regarded, in reference to the increased burthen of 1,144,387
l
l
l
37. "That, on taking a prospective view of the result of a Sinking Fund; if five Millions per annum are applied for 10 years, in the purchase of Stock, at the rate of 81
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
38. "That by the preceding Resolution, it is seen, that under the operation of a Sinking Fund of 5 Millions per annum, at Compound Interest, no relief whatever from taxation will be afforded to the Country for 10 years; and without any guarantee that the exaction of so great an
1780
1781
l
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
put it to the candour of the hon. member, whether it would not be better, at this late period of the session, to postpone his resolutions? Whether the principles on which those resolutions were founded were right or not, it was impossible, at the present period, that they could receive a fair or adequate discussion. He would neither admit nor deny the accuracy of the hon. gentleman's calculations; and it was the less necessary to enter into any detailed examination of the resolutions, as the hon. member had himself stated, that they were only preparatory to some future plan, which it was his intention to submit next session. The hon. member's resolutions might all be embraced in three general principles. He attempted to show; first, that immense sums of money had been charged on the public, in consequence of not raising the sums necessary to defray the annual expenses within the year; secondly, that the application of a sinking fund during war had created an unnecessary increase of debt, and of the annual charge; and, thirdly, that as the national debt had been increased, instead of diminished, by the operation of a sinking fund, the system of a sinking fund ought not to be continued. With regard to the first of these points, no man would dispute, that had it been possible to raise the whole supplies of each year within the year, there never would have been any debt. The propriety of raising as much as possible never had been questioned; and resolutions to that effect had been moved on the 27th of July, 1812. If, however, the whole surplus charge of each year had been added to the debt, there would have been, previous to the peace of Amiens, an increase of 40 millions; and, taking the subsequent period of the war, an increase of 210 millions. Every gentleman must be aware that it would not have been possible to raise the whole supplies of each year by war taxes; and if there had been from the commencement of the war as great a taxation as after the peace of Amiens, the probability was, that the burthen upon the country would have been greater. It was but justice to Mr. Addington to say, that vigorous measures
1782
l
l
1783
Mr. Grenfell
complimented his hon. friend upon the able manner in which he had brought forward the subject, but differed with him as to the propriety of taking away the sinking fund. With every respect for his opinion, he believed the present system for the reduction of debt was the best that could be adopted; but there was no part of his hon. friend's statement in which he more entirely agreed, than that which related to the injurious operation of the sinking fund in time of war.
The debate on the said Resolutions was then adjourned till this day three months.
SLAVERY AT THE CAPE OF GOOD HOPE.
Mr. Wilberforce
rose and said:
*
*
1784
1785
lex loci,
1786
1787
esprit de corps
1788
1789
1790
1791
1792
1793
1794
1795
Mr. Wilmot
said, that the hon. gentleman had assumed in his argument, that the colony at the Cape, and especially the newly settled part of it, might become a great mart for slaves. Now he thought that such an. apprehension was wholly unfounded; and he firmly believed, that the condition annexed to all new grants of land, that it should not be cultivated by slaves, had in no one instance been violated. The slave population of the districts in which the new settlements had been formed, at present amounted to 546 males and 464 females. The House, however, would recollect, that the districts in question were not to be considered as a new colony, but were part of an old and long-settled colony, throughout which the same laws and institutions prevailed: it would be found difficult, therefore,
1796
Mr. W. Smith
said, we had a clear right, and it was no less clearly our bounden duty, to prohibit the very existence of slavery, whether predial or do-
1797
lex loci?
proh pudor!
1798
Mr. Money
said, that the extension of slavery into the new settlements, dependent on the Cape of Good Hope, appeared to him to so wrong in principle, that he most cordially concurred in. the Address. He was decidedly of opinion, that neither the adoption nor the continuance of what was evil in principle, and cruel in operation, could be justified by any view to private or public advantage. In the present case, however, to permit slavery to exist was not only wrong in itself, but impolitic and dangerous. The hon. gentleman saw difficulty in preventing slavery in the new settlements, because it had been allowed by the Dutch laws at die Cape of Good Elope. It was true, that when we took possession of the Cape in 1806, the rights and privileges previously enjoyed by the Dutch had been secured to them; and among those privileges, was that of holding their fellow-creatures in slavery. But, surely it by no means followed, that after the cession of this Dutch colony in full sovereignty to his majesty, we were bound to follow the laws and customs of the Dutch. Those who maintained this proposition, might with equal propriety contend that the abominable practice of extorting evidence by torture, which formed a part of the Dutch criminal law, ought to have been continued; and yet it was one of the first acts of the British government to annihilate that monstrous proceeding. But even if it were admitted, that the articles of capitulation deprived us of the right to prohibit the old Dutch inhabitants from still treating their slaves as property, and selling them to each—other, it could not be expected that, in forming new establishments, we she should furnish them with new customers for their human merchandize. Surely we might make it an inviolable condition, with those whom we permitted to migrate thither, nay whom we assisted with the public money to
1799
1800
Dr. Phillimore
cordially approved of the motion. At the same time that he felt the difficulty and delicacy of interfering with the rights, or alleged rights, of the ancient Dutch colonists, he entirely agreed that, with respect to the districts newly settled, liberty ought to be the general law, the
lex loci,
Mr. F. Buxton
said, that if he concurred, with the hon. secretary, in thinking that there existed no more than a bare possibility that slavery might be introduced into our new settlements at the Cape, that bare possibility would be an unanswerable argument in favour of the motion. But could we flatter ourselves that there existed no more than a bare possibility? This much was certain; within our dominions there, the value of a slave was 160
l.;
1801
lex loci
The Address was agreed to.
COMMISSION OF INQUIRY.
Mr. Wilmot
rose to move that an humble address be presented to his majesty, "That he would be graciously pleased to issue a Commission under the great seal, to inquire into the state of the settlements of the Cape of Good Hope, the Mauritius, and Ceylon, and also into the administration of criminal justice in the Leeward Islands." The motion, he stated, divided itself into two distinct parts: first, as regarded the Cape of Good Hope, the Mauritius, and Ceylon; and, secondly, as regarded the Leeward Islands. With respect to tiles first, the commission which he proposed to send out was one of a very general nature; for the commissioners would be directed to
1802
1803
Mr. Wilberforce
said, he had no doubt, if the appointments were judiciously made, that great good would result frond the commission.
Lord Nugent
said I wish, Sir, to express the sincere pleasure I feel in supporting my hon. friend's motion. The inquiry which is the object of it, is one of the highest importance to humanity and justice. It is at this time peculiarly called for, by abuses which have long been ripening in the Leeward islands, and which have now risen to a character and amount of which the House has but a faint idea. I have to thank my hon. friend for the early intimation, which he gave me, of his present motion. It relieves me for the present from a duty to which, in some measure I stood pledged. The main object which I should have had in view in calling the attention of the House to this subject, has been more than answered by the motion of this night. On the details, therefore, of the measure which I should have submitted, I shall not now enter. In truth, Sir, every question of West Indian jurisprudence is surrounded by very many and very great difficulties. Among these, is the difficulty of separating truth from falsehood, in the evidence obtained from the islands themselves. A general impression of misgovernment may often lead to much rills statement, and great grievances may provoke to great exaggeration. One of the greatest obstacles, in looking to an administration of public justice, such as we all should wish to see perfected in a British colony, unhappily lies in the existence of slavery: it lies in the obvious anomaly of the attempt to introduce the machinery of a free government into a society composed of master and slave. Whilst, however, it shall be unhappily necessary, that to a certain degree this dreadful curse of slavery should yet find countenance in colonies dependent upon England, it is peculiarly our duty to remove those minor obstacles which present themselves to the genera operation of British justice. And here we are met by an obstacle, difficult indeed to deal with; I mean, the smallness
1804
1805
Mr. Hume
approved of the motion, as tending to economy in the administration of the affairs of the colonies, which had been heretofore profuse and lavish. He was also anxious to have a similar commission for Trinidad, and should move, as an addition to the address, "That his majesty will be graciously pleased to direct that a commission be sent to the island of Trinidad, to inquire into, and report upon, the nature of the Spanish laws, both criminal and civil, as there administered; the extent of the taxes and other burthens imposed, upon the inhabitants; the powers, exercised by the governor; his proclamations respecting grants of land; and other matters that affect the welfare and prosperity of the colony:"
Mr. Marryat
said:—Mr. Speaker; while I fully acquiesce in: the motion for issuing a commission, to enquire into the state of the settlements of the Cape of Good Hope, the Mauritius and Ceylon, from which I augur very great advantages, both to those colonies and the mother country, I am also extremely anxious that the same benefit should be extended to another of our colonies,
1806
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l.;
l
1807
l
s
d
l
l
s
d
1808
1809
l
1810
l
1811
l
l
s
1812
1813
1814
1815
1816
1817
1818
1819
1820
v
1821
v
1822
1823
l.;
1824
1825
l
1826
1827
1828
1829
1830
1831
1832
1833
*
*
1834
1835
1836
1837
1838
—Simul alba nautis
Stella refulsit,—
Defluit saxis agitatus humor;
Concidunt venti, fugiuntque nubes,
Et minax (quod sic voluere) ponto
Unda recumbit
1839
*
patres conscripti,
decuriones,
*
*
†Gibbon vol. 1, p. 69.
1840
*
*
1841
*
*
1842
*
*
‡ Ibid. vol. 1. p. 412.
‡Franklin's Correspondence, vol. 2, p.80.
1843
Mr. Goulburn
denied the correctness of Mr. Marryat's statements, and pledged himself that papers should be laid on the table, early in the ensuing session, which should fully disprove them. He entered his strong protest against the claim of what was termed the British constitution, and British law, for Trinidad. In a country like this in which we lived, where all the inhabitants were equal in the eye of the law, no system of government could be better adapted to promote the happiness of the community; but, unhappily, this was far from being the case in the West Indies. And in our Slave colonies, the effect of the British constitution, as it was called, wherever it prevailed, was to throw the whole power into the hands of the white oligarchy, to the exclusion of every other class from the enjoyment of the advantages of that constitution;—so that its boasted benefits were confined to a twentieth or thirtieth part of the whole population, who were thus enabled to tyrannize over the rest. In Trinidad there were about 3,600 whites of all ages, and both sexes; but in the same island there were about 14,000 free persons of colour, many of them persons of property; and nearly twice that number of slaves. Now, the Spanish laws secured certain privileges to the free people of colour, and to the slaves, which they did not enjoy in colonies governed by what was termed the British constitution and British laws;—so that, in giving the boon that was demanded to a fraction of the population,
1844
On the motion of Mr. Wynn, the debate was adjourned till to-morrow.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, July 26.
SUPERANNUATION ACT AMENDMENT BILL.
On bringing up the report on this bill,
Mr. Calcraft
said, that if the bill was made optional towards the present holders of office, and only compulsory in future, he would withdraw his opposition to it. His principal objection to the bill was, that it imposed a partial tax upon persons who had never contemplated it when they first entered upon their situations. Many of them had insured their lives, and they would in future be bound not only to pay the annual premium, but an additional 5 per cent. The House was dealing with a class of persons who had discharged no trivial duty to their country, and who had not been by any means overpaid. To the principle of superannuation prospectively, he had no objection. The salaries of the public officers had been reduced; yet even from this lessened amount a farther sum was now to be abstracted. It would be merely just, that those who quitted office should be allowed to recover back what they had contributed without receiving the slightest advantage. The case was one of great hardship and oppression. He had never met with a man who did not think the bill in principle most unfair. After referring to the correspondence of lord Sid-mouth and Mr. Hobhouse, against the bill, the hon. gentleman contended, that it broke faith with the public servants. The project was founded only on expediency, and it was to be enforced because the persons who were to suffer were weak and defenceless. The right hon. gentle-
1845
l.
Mr. Canning
considered the bill in principle as objectionable as any measure that had been ever brought forward: it was most unfair to subject any particular class to peculiar taxation. In the arrangements of the measure there was a clear breach of faith. He did not say that it was not in the power of the Crown to reduce the salaries of its official servants without the aid of parliament; but for this House to originate such a plan was in direct opposition to the address of the last session, and could be looked upon only as a species of parliamentary taxation. The bill was obviously a breach of faith towards all who, since 1810, had devoted themselves to the public service, on condition of receiving the benefits which the act of that year held out. He would put an individual case—that of a young man of the highest promise and of most respectable birth, but deprived of his father, who at a time when he was obtaining the honours of his college, and had every prospect of distinguished preferment in the church, was induced to accept a public situation under the Crown on the conditions of the statute of 1810. On those conditions he had relied; but he was now to be told that they were not to be fulfilled—that a large part of his emoluments was to be taken from him. This bill would be to him a grievous injury. It was impossible to know how many individuals had quitted the law, the army, or the church; under the faith of the act of 1810. This bill might also be considered an invasion of the rights and powers of the Crown. Besides, if a man were removed from office, he would lose all he had contributed to this fund: it would really be nothing short of pillaging him to turn him out of his place without returning the money he had annually paid. He saw no remedy for this objection, but by defining in the bill for what faults a man should or should not be dismissed, and under what circumstances he should or should not be allowed to withdraw the
1846
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that the bill in question was founded on an address which had been agreed to by both Houses. Its object was to bring the salaries of the different public offices as near as possible to the standard of 1792; but in doing this he was most anxious to avoid making any sudden reduction, or, indeed, any reduction which was likely to be felt by the parties. The arguments of his right hon. friend, if good for any thing, would go to prove, that when once a person obtained a situation in a public office, it was no longer in the power of the Crown or of parliament, to reduce or qualify that office in any way. Such a principle, if once introduced, would go to confound vested rights arising out of grants for life, with contingent and general expectations from the present occupation of a public office;
1847
The Marquis of Londonderry
assured the House, that he had never felt a more painful duty than that imposed upon him by this bill. The House had appointed a committee to inquire into all public offices, and that inquiry had continued its sittings for up wards of three months. The com-
1848
l.
l.
1849
l.
l.
l.
1850
Mr. Hume
agreed, that the speech of the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Canning) was one of the most extraordinary he had ever heard. That right hon. gentleman was undoubtedly capable of clothing any opinions he entertained in language which was calculated to produce a considerable effect; but he was much deceived if the speech he had made that night had carried conviction to the mind of any man who heard him. To contend that because an individual made a selection between the church and the public offices, his majesty's ministers were therefore precluded from making any change in the scale of salaries was a most monstrous and absurd principle. Since he had sat in that House he had never heard a more constitutional and consistent address than that which had just been delivered by the noble marquis. He concurred entirely with the noble lord as to the right of the Crown to regulate the salaries of public officers, and the necessity of doing away with the idea of any vested interest in their situations, which those officers might conceive they possessed. The noble lord had stated most fairly, that it was the duty of government to do away with the idea that persons in public offices had any claim to remuneration after any number of years'. He (Mr. H.) thought the present bill did not go far enough, and that it would not answer the expectations of the country; but if the argument of the right hon. gentleman proved any thing, it would prove that government had no right to make any reduction at all. The present bill was objectionable, since it raised a new fund, and involved some complex operations; and he would put it to the gentlemen opposite, whether it would not be better to give up the bill, and proceed at once to a reduction of salaries, at the rate of 15 per cent, which was proportionate to the alteration in the value of money.
COLONIAL COMMISSION OF INQUIRY.
The debate being resumed,
Mr. Wilmot
hoped, that the hon. gentleman would withdraw his amendment, for extending the commission to Trinidad.
1851
Mr. Hume
said, he had full confidence in the sincerity of the hon. gentleman, and would agree to withdraw his amendment.
The address was then agreed to.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Monday, July 29.
ALIENS REGULATION BILL.]
The Earl of Liverpool
, on moving the order of the day for the third reading of this bill, begged to state as shortly as possible, the reasons which induced ministers to propose a coninuance of this measure. He held it as a maxim, that a strong distinction should be drawn between those who owed a natural allegiance to the country, and those persons whose allegiance here was temporary, and who owed a natural and permanent allegiance elsewhere. He was aware that the great charter of our liberties provided for the protection of alien merchants trading to this country. But this was a protection granted, not for the benefit of such alien merchants, but for the benefit of this country. And why? Because this country derived great advantage from the trading of those alien merchants, and unless such special protection was granted to them, the king, by his prerogative, might send them out of the country. But if it was the right of an alien not to be sent out of the country against his will, what need of such a provision in the great charter? The exception in this case established, the principle upon which this bill was founded. It was a measure in perfect conformity with law and justice, and there was nothing in the Statute book against it. It might be said that this was a prerogative of the Crown, and that there were not many instances of its having been exercised. There was, however, an instance in the reign of queen Elizabeth. The case was that of a foreigner who had been accused of uttering defamatory language of the government. A doubt arose as whether the language had been used in this country or abroad; the matter was referred to the privy council, who decided, that if the language was used in this country, the party ought to be proceeded against according to law; but if the words were used abroad, then he should be sent out of this country. It
1852
The Earl of Darnley
opposed the bill, which he characterized as a most disgraceful and useless measure.
Lord Holland
could not retire from the House with satisfaction at the close of ant anxious session, if he did not do all in his power to resist a bill which, in all points of view, was objectionable: "monstrum nulla virtute redemptum." He had trusted that the new secretary of state for the home department, after he was once warm in his seat, would have felt himself and the country sufficiently secure to have allowed a law so odious to expire. The very terms of preceding alien bills showed that they were grounded solely upon peculiar circumstances, and the ministers who had brought them forward had rested
1853
1854
1855
1856
ne plus ultra
The question being then put, that the bill do pass, the House divided. Contents 22. Not-Contents 6. Majority 16.
1857
PROTESTS AGAINST THE ALIENS REGULATION BILL.]
The following protests were entered on the Journals:
"Dissentient: 1. Because the bill is cruel; for even when not perverted to any improper purposes, it may deter the victims of civil or religious persecution abroad, from seeking refuge under the lows of a free country.
2. "Because the bill is unjust. It exposes all resident Aliens (such even as may have settled here in consequence of no such law existing at the time) to actual punishment without trial; and it condemns even the most unsuspected among them to an evil, greater than most punishments, a dependance on the arbitrary will of one man.
3. "Because the Bill, is unnecessary, there being no unusual resort of strangers to this kingdom, and no apprehension, real or pretended, that individual foreigners either possess the means or harbour the design of disturbing our internal tranquility.
4. "Because the Bill is unconstitutional. It creates a power liable to abuse, and unknown to our laws; and arbitrary authority has always been thought to degrade those who are the objects of it, and to corrupt those who possess it, and thereby to lead to tyrannical maxims and practices incompatible with the safety of a free people.
5. "Because the Bill is impolitic. It discourages the employment of foreign capital, and the exercise of foreign ingenuity in our country, and obviously tends to embroil us, with other Courts of Europe, by rendering the residence of any obnoxious individuals among us, an act of the State, and no longer a consequence of the hospitable spirit of our municipal laws. VASSALL HOLLAND.
ROSSLYN.
THANET.
"Dissentient: Because, by this Bill, the Secretary of State is authorized to convey an Alien to any foreign port, and there to deliver such alien into the hands of his mortal enemies—to subject him to perpetual imprisonment, to corporal punishment, to torture, or to death.
GAGE.
VASSALL HOLLAND.
"Dissentient: Because I should have thought it exceedingly hard, had I done my duty, and opposed the invasion of revolutionary France to the utmost of my power (as I have always understood an
1858
GAGE.
"Dissentient: Because the Bill confers an arbitrary power, which may be employed to promote the views and secure the authority of foreign and tyrannical governments, and even if not so employed, may yet be considered by them as intended to serve such purposes. In either case the measure appears to us injurious to the character and interests of Great Britain, and hostile to the liberties and welfare of mankind.
ROSSLYN.
VASSALL HOLLAND.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Tuesday, July 30.
BRITISH COMMERCE—PIRATES IN THE WEST INDIES.]
Mr. Marryat
rose to present a petition from certain ship-owners of London, complaining that British shipping was not sufficiently protected in the South Sea. It appeared that the governments of Chili and Peru were at present at variance, and each had declared the coast of its enemy in a state of blockade. The vessels of Great Britain were thus placed between two fires; and the consequence was, that many of them had been captured by each of the hostile parties. The books at Lloyd's exhibited numerous proofs of the depredations committed upon British commerce. The Lord Collingwood vessel had been captured and condemned at Porto Rico. The causes assigned for this proceeding were, that the vessel was trading in the South Seas without a license from the government of Spain, and moreover that it was carrying on trade with the enemies of that government. Another great source of injury to British commerce was, the pirates who infested the West Indies. The hon. member read a description of the treatment which a British vessel had received from a piratical cruiser. After stripping the vessel of every thing valuable, and making the captain deliver all his money, the pirate cut and destroyed all the rigging and left her. The pirate, however, afterwards returned and demanded more money from the captain, who not being able to furnish them with it, was dreadfully wounded by their cutlasses, and afterwards hung up to a part of the rigging by rope tied round his
1859
Sir G. Cockburn
said, that in the instances in which America had restored vessels, they had just before been taken by the pirates. The schooner Despatch had been acting as a pirate before it was captured by the Spanish ship. Our admiral had no right to interfere. Most of the vessels which came under the description of pirates were prepared with regular commissions from recognized belligerent powers. It was said that the American vessels pursued that pirates into their strong holds. The reason of this was, that the keys lay on the American coast.
1860
The Marquis of Londonderry
said, that unless the petitioners suspected the government of supineness, and believed, the admiralty to be their enemies, he thought the best course they could adopt, would be to endeavour to open the eyes of the Admiralty upon the subject. He deprecated the discussions which arose upon such petitions, as tending to expose British shipping to greater risks than they at present ran. The hon. member who presented the petition desired that British cruisers should be converted into a kind of roving court of Admiralty, to adjudicate in all cases where vessels were retaken from pirates. It was said, that this
1861
1862
Mr. Bright
said, he could not acquit the Admiralty of supineness. It, was stated, that this was a question with independent powers. He denied the fact. There were two questions; the first with Chili and Peru, which he admitted to be independent states: the second, with the pirates on the island of Cuba. The noble lord and his colleague said, "If we find out pirates, we know how to deal with them." He would ask, what did a pirate mean? Did it mean a small vessel coming suddenly out of a place of concealment, her crew armed with swords, pistols, and knives, robbing defenceless vessels, plundering their cargoes, and hanging up their crews?
Sir G. Cockburn.
—If such a vessel had proceeded from Spain, under Spanish colours, she would not be a pirate. Spain
1863
Mr. Bright
said, he was then to understand, that if a vessel were provided with simulated papers, and hoisted any flag the crew thought fit to assume, she was not to be treated as a pirate, although she had committed dreadful outrages. If that were the case, there was an end of all security on the sea; for nothing could be more easy than to fit out a vessel under these false pretences, and to rob and plunder every ship that was inferior to her in force. When the crew of a vessel perpetrated acts which were unknown to civilized war, she must be considered
primâ facie
Mr. Groker
said, that the hon. gentle-
1864
1865
Dr. Lushington
said, it was not possible for the government, whatever might be its exertions, to protect our commerce from all inconvenience during the continuance of the present hostilities. There was now a war between Spain and her colonies, and while that war continued, our ships would be subject to the right of visitation and search, unless we denied that right to others which we vindicated for ourselves. While visitation and search might be carried on, our vessels must be subject to occasional vexation and inconvenience in the manner of executing it, and to liability to condemnation, if the laws of war were violated; for if a neutral vessel entered the port of a belligerent that was
de facto
de facto,
de jure,
1866
de facto
de jure
Ordered to lie on the table.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Tuesday, August 6.
THE SPEAKER'S SPEECH TO THE KING.]
His majesty arrived in the usual state at the House of Peers, and having taken his seat on the throne, the gentleman usher of the Black Rod was ordered to desire the attendance of the Commons.
The Speaker
of the House of Commons, accompanied by a considerable number of members, appeared at the bar, and delivered the following speech:
1867
1868
THE KING'S SPEECH AT THE CLOSE
After the royal assent had been given to the said Bills, his Majesty closed the session with the following Speech to both Houses:—
"My Lords and Gentlemen;
"I cannot release you from your attendance in Parliament, without assuring
1869
"I continue to receive from foreign powers the strongest assurances of their friendly disposition towards this country; and I have the satisfaction of believing, that the differences which had unfortunately arisen between the court of St. Petersburgh and the Ottoman Porte are in such a train of adjustment as to afford a fair prospect that the peace of Europe will not be disturbed.
"Gentlemen of the House of Commons;
"I thank you for the supplies which you have granted me for the service of the present year, and for the wisdom you have manifested in availing yourselves of the first opportunity to reduce the interest of a part of the national debt, without the least infringement of parliamentary faith.
"It is most gratifying to me that you should have been enabled, in consequence
ADDENDUM.
The following will be found a more correct Report of the Speech of the Marquis of Titchfield, on presenting a Petition from Lynn, praying the interference of the House for a Remission of the remainder of Mr. Hunt's Sentence, than the one given at page 1.
The Marquis of Titchfield
presented a petition from some inhabitants of the town of Lynn, praying the interference of the House, for the remission of the remainder of Mr. Hunt's sentence. He said, he would not trouble the House with reading the whole of the petition, but he wished to read enough of it to explain the object and motives of the petitioners in their own words. The noble marquis then read some parts of the petition, in which the severity of the sentence and the cruelty practised towards this victim of ministerial hatred were spoken of, and the case of sir Manasseh Lopez referred to as precedent in favour of Mr. Hunt. The noble marquis pro-
1870
of this, and of other measures, to relieve my people from some of their burthens.
"My Lords and Gentlemen;
"The distress which has for some months past pervaded a considerable portion of Ireland, arising principally from the failure of that crop on which the great body of the population depends for their subsistence, has deeply affected me.
"The measures which you have adopted for the relief of the sufferers meet with my warmest approbation; and, seconded as they have been by the spontaneous and generous efforts of my people, they have most materially contributed to alleviate the pressure of this severe calamity.
"I have the satisfaction knowing that these exertions have been justly appreciated in Ireland, and I entertain a sincere belief that the benevolence and sympathy so conspicuously manifested upon the present occasion will essentially promote the object which I have ever had at heart—that of cementing the connexion between every part of the empire, and of uniting in brotherly love and affection all classes and descriptions of my subjects."
ceeded to offer some observations on the subject of the petition, but in so low a tone of voice, that few of them were audible in the gallery. We understood him to say, that he was glad of this opportunity of observing, that he cordially agreed with the petitioners in the object they had in view, although he differed with them decidedly as to some of the reasons they had assigned in support of it. He certainly could not assent to any imputations against his majesty's ministers for their conduct in this matter, for he thought they had done no more than their duty in ordering the prosecution of Mr. Hunt. Still less could he participate in
1871
1872
APPENDIX.
FINANCE ACCOUNTS.
FOR THE YEAR ENDED 5TH JANUARY 1822.
CLASS.
PAGE.
I.
PUBLIC INCOME
iii
II.
CONSOLIDATED FUND
v
III.
ARREARS AND BALANCES
xv
IV.
TRADE AND NAVIGATION
xv
V.
PUBLIC EXPENDITURE
xxi
VI.
PUBLIC FUNDED DEBT
xxiii
VII.
UNFUNDED DEBT
xxxv
VIII.
DISPOSITION OF GRANTS
xxxv
I.—PUBLIC INCOME OF THE UNITED KINGDOM
FOR THE YEAR ENDED FIFTH JANUARY, 1822.
An Account of the ORDINARY REVENUES and EXTRAORDINARY RESOURCES, constituting the PUBLIC INCOME of the United Kingdom of GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND, for the Year ended 5th January, 1822.
HEADS OF REVENUE.
GROSS RECEIPT: Total sum to be accounted for.
Drawbacks, Discounts, Charges of Managements, & Paid out of the Gross Revenue.
NETT PRODUCE: applicable to National objects, and to Payments into the Exchequer.
Ordinary Revenues.
£
s
d
£
s
d
£
s
d
CUSTOMS, including the Annual Duties
15,205,265
1
9½
3,730,005
19
0¾
11,475,259
2
8¾
EXCISE, including the Annual Duties
32,228,649
4
2
3,287,020
3
0¼
28,941,629
1
1¾
STAMPS
7,310,474
7
5¼
456,487
15
2½
6,853,986
12
2¾
LAND AND ASSESSED TAXES, including the Assessed Taxes of Ireland
8,583,722
14
9¾
390,921
12
11¾
8,192,301
1
10
POST OFFICE
2,272,897
2
9¼
651,571
0
9
1,621,326
2
0¼
ONE SHILLING AND SIXPENCE Duty, and Duty on Pensions and Salaries
83,775
12
11¾
2,069
12
8
81,706
0
3¾
HACKNEY COACHES
26,661
16
10
4,099
10
11
22,562
5
11
HAWKERS AND PEDLARS
31,757
14
6
5,837
4
3
25,920
10
3
POUNDAGE FEES (Ireland)
4,269
13
11¾
4,269
13
11¾
PEELS FEES Do
853
18
5¾
853
18
5¾
CASUALTIES Do
3,815
15
9½
3,815
15
9½
TREASURY FEES and Hospital Fees (Do.)
985
4
4¾
985
4
4¾
SMALL BRANCHES OF THE KING'S HEREDITARY REVENUE
141,148
4
1½
5,071
0
0½
136,077
4
1
TOTAL of Ordinary Revenues
65,894,276
12
0¾
8,533,083
18
10¾
57,361,192
13
2
Other Resources.
PROPERTY TAX (Arrears)
47,978
12
4¾
10,141
14
7
37,836
17
9¾
LOTTERY, surplus Receipts after payment of Lottery Prizes
219,139
16
0
219,139
16
0
Unclaimed Dividends, &c. per Act 56 Geo. 3, cap. 97
83,910
13
3
83,910
13
3
From the Commissioners for the issue of Exchequer Bills, per Acts 57 Geo. 3, c. 34, & 124, for carrying on Public Works, and for the Employment of the Poor
75,500
0
0
75,500
0
0
On account of Advances made by the Treasury, for improving Post Roads, for building Gaols, for the Police, for Public Works and Employment of the Poor, and for the support of Commercial Credit in Ireland
126,201
10
6¾
126,201
10
6¾
Surplus Fees of Regulated Public Offices
63,000
14
4¾
63,000
14
4¾
Interest on Contracts for the Redemption of Land Tax
44
0
1½
44
0
1½
Other Monies paid to the Public
142,028
16
11
142,028
16
11
TOTAL (exclusive of Loans)
66,652,080
15
8½
8,543,225
13
5¾
58,108,855
2
2¾
Loans paid into the Exchequer
13,828,783
15
1
13,828,783
15
1
GRAND TOTAL
80,480,864
10
9½
8,543,225
13
5¾
71,937,638
17
3¾
II.—AN ACCOUNT OF THE INCOME OF AND CHARGE UPON THE CONSOLIDATED FUND.
INCOME.
CHARGE.
Actual Payment out of the Consolidated Fund, in the Year ended 5th January 1822.
Future Annual Charge upon the consolidated Fund, as it stood on 6th January, 1822.
£
s
d
£
s
d
£
s
d
CUSTOMS: Consolidated
£4,160,703
8
6¾
Total Charge for Debt Created prior to the Year 1812
25,951,320
4
11½
25,321,037
15
2½
CIVIL LIST:
Isle of Man
15,743
1
1
For the support of his Majesty's Household, per Act 1, Geo. 4
850,000
0
0
850,000
0
0
Quarantine Duty
15,270
9
4
COURTS OF JUSTICE:
Canal and Dock Duty
26,053
3
3
4,217,770
2
2¾
Judges of England and Wales, in augmentation of their Salaries
13,050
0
0
13,050
0
0
Deficiencies of Judges Salaries in England
13,337
4
2
Uncertain.
Additional Salaries to Welsh Judges
3,200
0
0
3,200
0
0
Sheriffs of England and Wales
4,000
0
0
4,000
0
0
Clerk of the Hanaper
3,000
0
0
Uncertain.
J. Baldwin, Esq. Receiver of the of the Seven Police Offices
12,951
16
6½
Uncertain.
J. Baldwin, Esq. Receiver of the of the eight Police Offices
16,249
19
5¼
Uncertain.
EXCISE: Consolidated reserving the Sums carried to Duties, pro Annis, 1812 and 1815, per Acts 52 & 55 Geo. 3
20,710,347
15
4
Thomas Venables Esq Do. Thames Police Office
3,655
18
10
Uncertain.
Foreign Spirits, Anno 1811
120, 928
0
0
MINT:
20,831,275
15
4
Master of the Mint in England
13,800
0
0
13,800
0
0
Master of the Mint in Scotland
938
5
4
Uncertain.
SALARIES AND ALLOWANCES:
STAMPS: Consolidated after reserving as directed per 55 Geo 3
5,737,227
16
10
Speaker of the House of Commons, to complete his salary of £.6,000 per annum
2,119
6
0
Uncertain.
Licenses for selling Lottery Tickets
4,130
19
9
Edward Roberts, esq. an annual sum formerly paid the anditor
650
0
0
650
0
0
5,741,358
16
7
George Popler, esq. inspector of Tontine certificates
600
0
0
Uncertain.
[This account continued over leaf.]
[This Account continued over leaf.]
£
s
d
£
s
d
£
s
d
INCIDENTS
7,149,311
16
2
Chief Cashier of the Bank, for fees
1,247
10
0
Uncertain.
For the encouragement of the growth of Hemp and Flax in Scotland
2,956
13
8
2,956
13
8
Annuity granted to Samuel Baker,
el. al
2,700
0
0
5,400
0
0
Surplus Annual Duties
2,896,733
3
11½
COMMISSIONERS OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS:
W. M. Praed, esq. Chairman to 31st Aug. 1821 (the day of his resignation)
970
7
3
Ditto Pensions, Offices, &c. 1817 to 1821
50,424
8
11¾
Sir C. W. Rouse Boughton, bt. to 26th Feb. 1821, (the day of his death)
173
6
8
Edw. R. Stuart, esq. appointed Commissioner, 1st May, 1821
390
11
5¾
Edw. R. Stuart, esq. appointed Chairman 31st Aug. 1821
529
12
9
1,500
0
0
Richard Dawkins, esq,
1,200
0
0
1,200
0
0
Land Tax, Annis 1799 to 1821
1,212,851
17
9¾
John Whishaw, esq
1,200
0
0
1,200
0
0
John Sargent, esq. to 6th Oct. 1821 (day of his resignation)
887
12
7
George Jenkinson, esq. appointed 19th Oct. 1821
268
19
3¾
1,200
0
0
Francis S. Larpent, esq appointed 19th Oct. 1821
268
19
3¾
1,200
0
0
John Thornton, esq. Appointed 19th Oct, 1821
268
19
3¾
1,200
0
0
Arrears of Income Duty
23
6
1¾
Salaries, &c. in the office of the said Commissioners
34,789
15
4
Uncertain.
COMMISSIONERS OF WEST INDIA ACCOUNTS:
John Halket, esq. Chairman, to 5th July 1821
750
0
0
Money reserved on account of Nominees appointed by the Lords of the Treasury, in Tontine, Anno 1789
23,341
19
7
John Wilson, esq
1,000
0
0
1,000
0
0
James Chapman, Esq.
1,000
0
0
1,000
0
0
Salaries, &c. in the office of the said Commissioners
6,196
13
11
Uncertain.
MISCELLANEOUS:
Arrears of Property Duty
34,234
15
9¾
Russian Dutch Loan, per Act 55 Geo. 3. c. 115
115,753
0
2
Uncertain
Comissioners for inquiring into Charities
10,000
0
0
Uncertain.
Contingencies in the office of the said Commissioners
8,000
0
0
Uncertain.
Deficiency of Profits to the South Sea Company, per 55 Geo. 3, c. 57
2,214
15
10
Uncertain.
Monies paid by divers persons
188,061
8
3½
Irish Life Annuities
37,896
18
6
Uncertain.
£
s
d
£
s
d
£
s
d
Expense of the Bridge building over the Menai Straits
25,000
0
0
Uncertain.
Expenses of the improvement of Port Patrick Harbour
5,000
0
0
Uncertain.
Total Income of Duties, &c. applicable to paying the Charges prior to the Year 1812, and the Incidental Charges, as they stood on 5th January 1822
42,345,387
10
10?
J. B. H. Curran, esq. Commander of H. M. S. Tyne, being bounty on seizure, &c. on Slaves, per 47 Geo. 3, c. 36
2,265
0
0
Uncertain.
W. Fisher, esq. Commander of H.M.S. Bann, per 47 Geo. 3, c. 36
7,550
0
0
Uncertain.
Francis Stanfell, esq. Commander of H.M.S. Phæton per 47 Geo. 3, c. 36
1,330
0
0
Uncertain.
Total Income of Duties for the Year 1812
994,321
18
1
E. H. Madge, esq. Commandant in the Mauritius per 47 Geo. 3, c. 36.
258
0
0
Uncertain.
General G. J. Hall, acting governor of Mauritius per 47 Geo. 3, c. 36
120
0
0
Uncertain.
Hart Davis, esq. collector of the customs, at Mauritius per 47 Geo. 3, c. 36
227
0
0
Uncertain.
Ralph Darling, esq. commandant Mauritius per 47 Geo. 3, c. 36
13
0
0
Uncertain.
Thomas R. Pye, Agent for the Island of Rodrigues, Mauritius per 47 Geo. 3, c. 36
953
0
0
Uncertain.
Thomas R. Pye, Agent for the Island of Rodrigues, Mauritius per 47 Geo. 3, c. 36
953
0
0
Uncertain.
Total Income of Duties for the Year 1815
459,833
10
4
Lord Howden, Commander in Chief at the Cape of Good Hope per 47 Geo. 3, c. 36
104
0
0
Uncertain.
William V. Munnings, esq. President of the Bahamas, per 47 Geo. 3, c. 36
56
0
0
Uncertain.
B. M. Kelly, Commander of H. M. S. Pheasant per 47 Geo. 3, c. 36
700
0
0
Uncertain.
Total Income of Duties for the Year 1819
35,515
0
0
Lieut, B. Le Sage, Agent at Madagascar per 47 Geo. 3, c. 36
702
0
0
Uncertain.
PENSIONS:
Earl of Chatham
4,000
0
0
4,000
0
0
Lord Rodney
2,000
0
0
2,000
0
0
Lady Dorchester
1,000
0
0
1,000
0
0
John Penn, esq
1,000
0
0
1,000
0
0
Richard Penn, esq
3,000
0
0
3,000
0
0
By Cash in part Redemption of £2.637,000, Exchequer Bills deposited in the Tellers Chests by the Auditor of the Exchequer, per 59 Geo. 3, c. 19, to render the Growing Produce available for the Public Service, and exchanged per Act 1, Geo. 4, c. 44
1,200,000
0
0
Duke of Clarence
12,000
0
0
12,000
0
0
York
12,000
0
0
12,000
0
0
Earl St. Vincent
2,000
0
0
2,000
0
0
Viscount Duncan
2,000
0
0
2,000
0
0
INCOME RECEIVED IN IRELAND:
Duke of Cumberland
12,000
0
0
2,000
0
0
Richmond
6,333
6
8
6,333
6
8
Lord Erskine
4,000
0
0
4,000
0
0
Custom Duties
1,437,652
18
10¼
Sir Archibald Macdonald
2,500
0
0
2,500
0
0
Sir James Mansfield
1,875
0
0
—
Sir William Grant
2,500
0
0
2,500
0
0
Sir Alan Chambre
2,000
0
0
2,000
0
0
Excise
1,632,648
8
3½
Sir Sydney Smith
1,000
0
0
1,000
0
0
[This account continued over leaf]
[This account continued over leaf]
£.
s
d
£.
s
d
£
s
d
Assessed Taxes
308,223
1
5
Lord Abercrombie
2,000
0
0
2,000
0
0
John William Compton, esq.
500
0
0
—
Alexander Croke, esq.
1,000
0
0
1,000
0
0
John Hinchliffe, esq.
1,000
0
0
1,000
0
0
Duke of Sussex
12,000
0
0
12,000
0
0
Quit Rents
71
0
11¼
Duke of Cambridge
12,000
0
0
12,000
0
0
Lord Hutchinson
2,000
0
0
2,000
0
0
Sir James Saumarez
1,200
0
0
1,200
0
0
Lord Boringdon,
et. al
3,000
0
0
3,000
0
0
Duke of Athol
3,646
10
4¼
Uncertain.
Stamp Duites.
375,716
8
5
Henry Moreton Dyer, esq.
1,000
0
0
1,000
0
0
John Sewell, esq
1,000
0
0
1,000
0
0
William Territt, esq.
1,000
0
0
1,000
0
0
Lady Nelson
2,000
0
0
2,000
0
0
Sir Richard Strahan
1,000
0
0
1,000
0
0
Honourable Sarah Collingwood
500
0
0
500
0
0
Mary Patience Do
500
0
0
500
0
0
Duke of Clarence
6,000
0
0
6,000
0
0
Stamp Duites from the Bank of Ireland composition in lieu of Stamps on their Notes, for one year to 25th March 1822
13,846
3
1
Duke of Cumberland
6,000
0
0
6,000
0
0
Duke of Sussex
6,000
0
0
6,000
0
0
Duke of Cambridge
6,000
0
0
6,000
0
0
Duke of Gloucester
14,000
0
0
14,000
0
0
Princess Sophia of Gloucester
7,000
0
0
7,000
0
0
Stamp Duties Law-Fund Duties
11,264
9
9¾
Earl Nelson
5,000
0
0
5,000
0
0
Lord Rodney
923
1
6
923
1
6
Viscount Lake
2,000
0
0
2,000
0
0
Viscount Wellington
2,000
0
0
2,000
0
0
Earl of Wellington
2,000
0
0
2,000
0
0
Hon. Jane Perceval
2,000
0
0
2,000
0
0
Princesses Augusta, Elizabeth, Mary and Sophia, £.9,000 per annum each
36,000
0
0
36,000
0
0
Sir Archibald Macdonald
36,800
0
0
36,800
0
0
Sir James Mansfield
600
0
0
—
Sir William Grant
800
0
0
800
0
0
Balances recovered from dismissed and deceased Collectors
818
11
8¼
Sir Alan Chambre
600
0
0
600
0
0
Duke of Wellington
5,525
0
0
5,525
0
0
Lord Boresford
2,000
0
0
2,000
0
0
Lord Combermere
2,000
0
0
2,000
0
0
Lord Exmouth
2,000
0
0
2,000
0
0
Lord Hill
2,000
0
0
2,000
0
0
Poundage Fee
4,269
13
11¾
Lord Lynedoch
2,000
0
0
2,000
0
0
£
s
d
£.
d
£.
s
d
Pells Fee
853
18
5¾
Duke o York for the Prince of Cobourg
50,000
0
0
50,000
0
0
Duke of York
14,000
0
0
14,000
0
0
Duke of Clarence
2,500
0
0
2,500
0
0
Princesses, as above £4,000 per annum each
16,000
0
0
16,000
0
0
Lord Colchester
4,000
0
0
4,000
0
0
Duke of Cambridge
6,000
0
0
6,000
0
0
Treasury Fees
948
16
7½
Duchess of Kent
6,000
0
0
6,000
0
0
Late Queen's servants
17,905
18
2
Uncertain.
Late King's servants
21,545
14
7½
Uncertain.
Queen Caroline
48,975
2
8½
—
Duke of Clarence
29,500
0
0
6,000
0
0
Hospital Fee
36
7
9¼
TOTAL of Incidental Charges, &c. upon the Consolidated Fund, as they stood on the 5th January 1822
1,651,724
0
5
1,230,238
1
10
Casual Revenue
3,815
15
9½
Total Charge for Debt, prior to 1812
25,951,320
4
11½
25,321,037
15
2½
Total of Incidental Charges, &c.
1,651,724
0
5
1,230,238
1
10
Total Charge for Debt in the Year 1812
2,216,397
10
6¾
2,181,120
9
1½
Total Charge for Debt in the Year 1813
4,152,940
19
9
4,152,940
19
9
Total Ordinary Revenue
3,855,704
4
4½
Total Charge for Debt in the Year 1814
3,271,119
10
9½
3,271,642
6
9½
Total Charge for Debt in the Year 1815
4,365,619
10
2
4,366,036
2
2¾
Total Charge for Debt in the Year 1816
72,390
19
4
73,255
1
9½
Total Charge for Debt in the Year 1818
1,603,777
17
0
1,603,717
17
0
Total Charge for Debt in the Year 1819
1,442,005
16
5
1,442,005
16
5
Total Charge for Debt in the Year 1820
1,786,644
14
9
1,443,049
10
8
Total Charge for Debt in the Year 1821
81,484
7
6
896,328
2
6
Imprest Moles repaid, and other Monies received
144,219
14
9
3,999,923
19
1½
46,595,425
11
7¾
45,981,432
3
3¾
Interest on Exchequer Bills issued to make good the Deficiency of Consolidated Fund
118,153
5
10
Uncertain
Total Charge payable in Great Britain
46,713,578
17
5¾
—
Total Income of the United Kingdom
49,034,981
18
5¼
Charge defrayed in Ireland
2,356,854
11
7
Deficiency of Income
35,451
10
7½
49,070,433
9
0¾
TOTAL Charge of the United Kingdom
49,070,433
9
0¾
III.
FOR THE YEAR ENDED FIFTH JANUARY 1822.
[
The Accounts of Arrears and Balances were not ordered to be printed
IV.
I.—TRADE OF GREAT BRITAIN.
An Account of the value of all IMPORTS into, and of all EXPORTS from GREAT BRITAIN, during each of the three Years ending the 5th January 1822 (calculated at the Official Rates of Valuation, and stated exclusive of the Trade with IRELAND; distinguishing the Amount of the Produce and Manufactures of the United Kingdom Exported, from the Value of Foreign and Colonial Merchandise Exported:—Also, stating the Amount of the Produce and Manufactures of the United Kingdom Exported from GREAT BRITAIN, according to the Real and Declared Value thereof.
OFFICIAL VALUE OF EXPORTS.
YEARS.
OFFICIAL VALUE OF IMPORTS.
Produce and Manufactures of the United Kingdom
Foreign and Colonial Merchandize.
Total Exports.
Declared Value of the Produce and Manufactures of the United Kingdom Exported.
£.
s
£.
s
£.
s
£.
s
£.
s
VALUE, inclusive of the Trade with Ireland,
1820
29,654,898
13
32,923,574
18
9,879,236
0
42,802,810
18
34,248,495
6
1821
31,484,108
11
37,818,035
13
10,525,025
18
48,343,061
11
35,568,669
9
1822
29,675,320
4
40,194,892
13
10,670,880
8
50,865,773
2
35,826,082
13
2.—TRADE OF IRELAND.
An Account of the Value of all IMPORTS into, and of all EXPORTS from IRELAND, during each of the Three Years ending the 5th January 1822 (calculated at the Official Rates of Valuation, and stated inclusive and exclusive of the Trade with GREAT BRITAIN); distinguishing the Amount of the Produce and Manufactures of the United Kingdom Exported, from the Value of Foreign and Colonial Merchandize Exported:—also, stating the Amount of the Produce and Manufactures of the United Kingdom Exported from IRELAND, according to the Value thereof, as computed at the Average Prices Current.
OFFICIAL VALUE OF EXPORTS.
YEARS.
OFFICIAL VALUE OF IMPORTS.
Produce and Manufactures of the United Kingdom
Foreign and Colonial Merchandize.
Total Exports.
Declared Value of the Produce and Manufactures of the United Kingdom Exported.
£.
s
£.
s
£.
s
£.
s
£.
s
VALUE inclusive of Trade with Great Britain
1820
6,395,972
17
5,708,582
15
61,882
12
5,770,465
7
9,747,206
1
1821
5,197,192
17
7,089,441
11
89,781
6
7,179,222
18
10,308,713
11
1822
6,548,515
9
7,703,857
11
77,795
4
7,781,652
16
9,803,057
19
VALUE exclusive of Trade with Great Britain
1820
1,093,247
8
558,261
10
25,948
11
584,210
2
956,069
12
1821
954,542
5
577,519
13
30,886
11
608,406
5
855,983
4
1822
1,068,708
0
630,852
3
27,599
5
664,451
9
833,548
9
NAVIGATION OF THE UNITED KINGDOM.
NEW VESSELS BUILT.—An Account of the Number of their TONNAGE, that were built and registered in the several Ports of the British Empire, in the Years ending the 5th January 1820, 1821, and 1822 respectively.
In the Years ending the 5th January.
——
1520.
1821.
1822.
Vessels.
Tonnage.
Vessels.
Tonnage.
Vessels.
Tonnage.
United Kingdom
777
89,091
619
66,691
585
58,076
Isles, Guernsey, Jersey, and Man
20
1,381
16
1,451
12
1,406
British Plantations
328
21,701
248
16,440
208
11,810
Total
1,125
112,173
883
84,582
805
71,292
VESSELS REGISTERED.—An Account of the Number of VESSELS, with the Amount of their TONNAGE, and the Number of MEN and BOYS usually employed in Navigating the same, that belonged to the several Ports of the British Empire, on the 30th September, in the Years 1819, 1820, and 1821 respectively.
On 30th Sept. 1819.
On 30th Sept. 1820.
On 30th Sept. 1821.
——
Vessels.
Tons.
Men.
Vessels.
Tons.
Men.
Vessels.
Tons.
Men.
United Kingdom
21,501
2,425,885
155,277
21,473
2,412,804
155,335
21,163
2,329,213
150,424
Isles, Guernsey, Jersey and Man
496
25,712
3,613
496
26,225
3,775
489
26,639
3,859
British Plantations
3,485
214,799
15,488
3,405
209,564
15,304
3,384
204,350
14,596
Total
25,482
2,666,396
174,378
25,374
2,648,593
174,414
25,036
2,560,202
169,179
VESSELS EMPLOYED IN THE FOREIGN TRADE.—An Account of the Number of VESSELS, with the Amount of their TONNAGE, and the Number of MEN and BOYS employed in Navigating the same (including their repeated Voyages) that entered INWARDS, and cleared OUTWARDS, at the several Ports of the United Kingdom, from and to all parts of the World (exclusive of the Intercourse between GREAT BRITAIN and IRELAND respectively), during each of the Three Years ending 5th January 1822.
Years ending 5th Jan.
INWARDS.
BRITISH AND IRISH.
FOREIGN.
TOTAL.
Vessels.
Tons.
Men.
Vessels.
Tons.
Men.
Vessels.
Tons.
Men.
1820
11,974
1,809,128
107,556
4,215
542,684
32,632
16,169
2,351,812
140,188
1821
11,285
1,668,060
100,325
3,472
447,611
27,633
14,757
1,115,671
127,958
1822
10,805
1,599,423
97,485
3,261
396,107
26,043
14,066
1,993,530
123,528
OUTWARDS.
1820
10,250
1,562,802
97,267
3,795
556,041
30,333
14,045
2,118,843
127,600
1821
10,102
1,549,508
95,849
2,969
433,328
24,545
13,071
1,982,836
120,394
1822
9,797
1,488,644
93,377
2,628
384,219
22,179
12,425
1,872,863
115,556
V.—PUBLIC EXPENDITURE—5th Jan. 1822.
HEADS OF EXPENDITURE.
SUMS.
TOTAL.
£.
d
d
£.
d
d
I. Fro interest, &c. on the Permanent Debt of the United Kingdom, unredeemed; including Annuities for Lives and terms of Years
47,130,171
18
10
II. The Interest of Exchequer Bills, and Irish Treasure Bills
2,219,602
5
0
III. The civil Lists of
England
£.850,000
0
0
Ireland
214,877
6
1¾
Courts of Justice in England
69,444
18
11¾
Mint
14,738
5
4
Allowances to the Royal Family, Pensions, &c.
439,229
14
0¼
IV. The other Charges on the Consolidated Fund.
Salaries and Allowances.
60,168
7
7
Bounties
14,278
0
0
Miscellaneous
203,864
14
6
Permanent Charges in Ireland
402,339
7
7
2,268,940
14
1¾
V. The Civil Government of Scotland
133,077
15
5
VI. The other Payments in anticipation of the Exchequer Receipts, viz. £.
s. d
Bounties for Fisheries, Manufactures, Corn, &c.
Customs
320,045
4
11½
Excise
72,951
10
3
392,996
15
2½
Pensions on the Hereditary
Excise
14,000
0
0
Post Office
13,700
0
0
27,700
0
0
Militia and Deserters Warrants, &c. Excise and Taxes
56,176
19
4
476,873
14
6½
VII. The Navy, viz.
Wages
2,304,000
0
0
General Services
2,789,220
3
0
5,093,220
3
0
The Victualling Department
850,659
12
4¼
5,943,879
15
4¼
The Ordnance
1,338,349
8
1¼
Deduct the Value of Stores supplied by the Board of Ordnance to Foreign Powers, the Expense of which is reimbursed to the Ordnance Department by the Paymaster General, under Warrants of the Treasury
426
3
11
1,337,923
4
2¼
The Ary, Viz.
Ordinary Services
£.7,854,114
14
2½
Extraordinary Services
1,079,090
17
10½
8,933,205
12
1
Deduct the Amount of Remittances and Advances to other Countries
426
3
11
8,932,779
8
2
X. Loans, Remittances, and Advances to other Countries Tripoli
426
3
11
XI. Issues from Appropriated Funds, for Local Purpose
48,038
11
1¼
XII. Miscellaneous Services, viz.
At Home
3,567,482
2
9¾
Abroad
302,560
10
9
3,870,042
13
6¾
72,361,756
4
2¾
Deduct Sinking Fund on Loan to the East India Company
163,739
2
6
72,198,017
1
8¾
*
An Account of the PUBLIC FUNDED DEBT Of the UNITED KINGDOM, payable in GREAT BRITAIN, as the same stood on the 5th of January, 1822.
CAPITALS, at £.3 per Cent per Annum.
Bank England Annuities 1726.
South Sea Old and New Annuities. 1751.
Consolidated Annuities.
Reduced Annuities.
CAPITALS at£.s 10s. per cent per Annum.
Consolidated £.4 Per cents.
CAPITALS at£.5 per cent. Consolidated Annuities.
£.
£.
s
d
£.
s
d
£.
s
d
£.
s
d
£.
s
d
£.
s
d
TOTAL DEBT of the United Kingdom, payable in Great Britain
14,686,800
21,037,684
13
11
391,855,816
8
10
202,611,529
19
1
22,573,821
14
0
74,945,413
4
8
141,830,057
9
7
TOTAL DEBT of United Kingdom, payable in Ireland.
19,274,600
5
3
1,241,630
15
5
11,363,370
19
7
TOTAL LOANS to the Emperor of Germany, payable in Great Britain
7,502,633
6
8
TOTAL LOANS to the Prince Regent of Portugal payable in Great Britain
895,522
7
9
14,636,800
21,037,684
13
11
399,358,449
15
6
203,507,052
6
10
41,848,421
19
3
76,187,044
0
1
153,193,488
9
2
In the Names of the Commissioners of the National Debt
8,506,100
0
0
21,816,603
15
10
67,711,367
13
6
12,301,418
0
0
187,646
0
9
22,013
1
5
14,686,800
12,531,584
13
11
377,541,845
19
8
135,795,684
13
4
29,547,003
19
3
75,999,397
19
4
153,171,415
7
9
Transferred to the Commissioners for Purchase of Life Annuities, per Act 48, Geo. 3, c. 142
3,965,209
0
0
2,235,020
0
0
51,634
0
0
114,652
0
0
14,686,800
12,531,584
13
11
373,576,636
19
8
133,560,664
13
4
29,547,003
19
3
75,947,763
19
4
153,056,763
7
9
(
Repealed ColumR
CAPITALS AT £-5 per cent Annuities. 1797 and 1802.
TOTAL CAPITALS.
ANNUAL INTEREST.
Annuities for Lives of for Terms of Years
Charges of Management.
Annual or other Sums by sundry Acts.
TOTAL of ANNUAL EXPENE.
£.
s
d
£.
s
d
£.
s
d
£.
s
d
£.
s
d
£.
s
d
£.
s
d
TOTAL DEBT of the United Kingdom, payable in Great Britain
1,015,668
12
4
871,952,738
4
7
29,905,738
16
6
1,417,924
8
1
275,512
3
10
12,972 842
19
9
44,572,018
8
2
TOTAL DEBT of the United Kingdom, payable in Ireland
31,879,602
0
3
1,292,444
15
9
43,724
6
2
553
16
11
405,503
3
10
1,742,226
2
8
TOTAL LOANS to the Emperor of Germany, payable in Great Britain
7,502,633
6
8
225,079
0
0
1,655
16
5
36,693
0
0
263,427
16
5
TOTAL LOANS to the Prince Regent of Portugal, payable in Great Britain
895,522
7
9
26,865
13
6
51
3
2
30,000
0
0
56,916
16
8
1,015,668
12
4
912,230,495
19
3
31,450,128
5
9
1,461,648
14
3
277,773
0
4
13,445,039
3
7
46,634,589
3
11
In the Names of the Commissioners of the National Debt
6,064
18
5
110,551,213
9
11
3,380,481
10
1
606
0
11
3,381,087
11
0
—
1,009,603
13
11
801,679,282
9
4
28,069,646
15
8
1,461,042
13
4
277,773
0
4
16,826,126
14
7
46,634,589
3
11
Trausferred to the Commissioners for Purchase of Life Annuities, per Act 48, Geo. 3, c. 142
6,366,515
0
0
193,804
16
7
9,837
0
0
203,641
16
7
141
2
6
1,009,603
13
11
795,312,767
9
4
27,875,841
19
1
1,451,205
13
4
277,773
0
4
17,029,768
11
2
46,634,730
6
5
Add Annuities payable at the Exchequer, Unclaimed for there Years, at 5th Jan. 1822
30,710
9
6
17,060,479
0
8
Deduct Life Annuities payable at the Bank of England
410,964
19
6
Amount applicable to the Reduction of the Debt of the United Kingdom
16,649,514
1
2
An Account of the Progress made in the Redemption of the PUBLIC FUNDED DEBT of the United Kingdom, payable in GREAT BRITAIN, at the 5th January, 1822.
FUNDS.
CAPITALS.
Long Annuities at the Bank of England.
Transferred to, or Redeemed by the Commissioners, from 1st August 1786 to 5th Jan. 1821.
TOTAL SUMS Paid
Average Price of Stocks.
£.
s
d
£.
s
d
£.
s
d
£.
s
d
Consolidated £.3 per Cent Annuities
520,168,619
7
10
133,934,232
0
0
87,775,401
5
1
65½
Reduced £.3 per Cent Annuities
407,631,452
0
1
260,101,838
0
0
168,682,931
6
2
64⅞
£3½ per Cent Annuities
22,573,821
14
0
4,835,900
0
0
4,024,620
12
6
83¼
Old South Sea Annuities
24,065,084
13
11
Old
7,056,600
0
0
4,852,934
14
6
68¾
New South Sea Annuities
New
5,236,500
0
0
3,643,451
6
9
69⅝
£.3 per Cent Annuities Anno 1751
1,919,600
0
0
1,160,000
0
0
818,166
15
0
70½
Consolidated £.4 per Cent Annuities
82,741,813
4
8
7,796,400
0
0
6,586,934
8
9
84½
Consolidated £.5 per Cent Annuities
141,972,057
9
7
145,500
0
0
130,113
7
6
89⅜
£.5 per Cent Annuities, Anno 1797 and 1802
1,015,668
12
4
—
—
—
—
£.3 per Cent Annuities. Anno 1726
1,000,000
0
0
—
—
—
—
£.3 per Cent Bank Annuities
14,686,890
0
0
—
—
—
—
Consolidated Long Annuities
1,359,435
18
8
—
—
—
£.5 per Cent Annuities formerly paid by Ireland
1,576,242
11
6
180,296
9
4
155,334
10
3
86⅛
420,447,266
9
4
276,669,88
6
6
Capitals transferred to the Commissioners, the Dividends on which have not been claimed for 10 years and upwards, and which are subject to the Claims of the Parties entitled thereto
676,795
17
8
1,219,351,159
13
11
1,359,435
18
8
421,124,062
7
0
Transferred to Commissioners, on Account of Land Tax Redeemed, at 5th January 1822
25,819,089
0
0
Note.—The Unredeemed Debt of £766,041,493 6 11 includes £.16,296,875, created by the Sinking Fund Loan of £.12,500,000, Anno 1821; and the Capital Redeemed, amounting to £.420,447,266 9 4 above stated, includes £.16,296,875 the Capital obtained for the said Loan, which Loan is in the course of payment.
1,193,532,070
13
11
Transferred to Commissioners, on Account of Land Tax Redeemed, at 5th January 1822 for Purchase of Life Annuities, per Act 48, Geo. 3
6,366,515
0
0
9,837
0
0
1,187,165,555
13
11
1,349,598
18
8
Redeemed by the Commissioners including Capitals, the Dividends on which have not been claimed for 10 Years and upwards
421,124,062
7
0
Unclaimed 10 Years 606
0
11
Unredeemed Debt of the United Kingdom, payable in Great Britain, at 5th January, 1822
766,041,493
6
11
1,348,992
17
9
SUMS annually applicable to the Redemption of the National Debt.
ANNUITIES fallen in since 22nd June, 1802, or that will fall in hereafter.
£
s
d
£
s
d
Annual Charge per act 26 Geo. 3
1,000,000
0
0
Annual Charge per act 42 Geo. 3
200,000
0
0
Exchequer Annuities, 2nd and 3rd Anne: Expired 5th April 1803
23,369
13
4
Annual Charge per Act 1 & 2 Geo. 4. c 122, being £.1 per Cent on Exchequer Bills, outstanding, at 5th January 1821
290,000
0
0
Exchequer Annuities, 2nd and 3rd Anne: Expired 5th Jan. 1805
7,030
6
8
Annuities for 99 and 96 Years, Expired Anno 1792
54,880
14
6
Annuities for 10 Years Anno 1787
25,000
0
0
Exchequer 4 Anne 2nd and 3rd Anne: Expired 5th April
23,254
11
6
Exchequer Annuities Unclaimed for Three Years, at 5th January 1822
30,710
9
6
Exchequer of which Nominees shall have died prior to 5th July 1802
21,481
6
1
Exchequer 5 Anne 2nd and 3rd Anne: Expired 5th April 1806
7,776
10
0
Annual Interest on £.407,489,170 0 0 Redeemed at of.3 per Cent including £16,296,875 created by Sinking Fund Loan of £.12,500,000, Anno 1821
12,224,675
2
0
Exchequer 6 Anne 2nd and 3rd Anne: Expired 5th April 1807
4,710
10
0
£16,296,875 on £.4,835,900 0 0 £3½ per Cent
169,256
10
0
£
311,856
0
0
Exchequer 6 Anne 2nd and 3rd Anne: Expired 5th July
10,181
0
0
£
7,275
0
0
£
9,014
16
5½
Bank Short Annuities Expired 5th Jan. 1808
418,333
0
11
£
6,6400,220
3
7½
Bank Long Annuities which will expire 5th Jan. 1860
1,359,435
18
8½
Ann. Interest on £.6,200,229 £.3 per Cents transferred for Purchase of Life Ann.
186,006
17
4¾
Ann. Interest on 51,634 4 per Cents transferred for Purchase of Life Ann.
2,065
7
4¼
By an Act 42nd Geo. 3, cap 71, such Annuities as fall in after the passing of that Act, are not to be placed to the Account of the Commissioners of the Reduction of the National Debt.
Ann. Interest of 114,652 5 per Cents transferred for Purchase of Life Ann.
5,732
12
0
Long Annuities transferred for 5 per Cents transferred for purchase of Life Ann.
9,837
0
0
Sinking Fund borne by Consolidated Fund, on Loans raised and Bills funded Anno 1815, 1818, and 1819
1,377,013
4
7
Annual Appropriation on £. 12,000,000, part of 14,200,000 Loan Anno 1807
626,255
10
5
Ann. Interest on £.178,510 6 4 £.3 per Cents uncl. for 10 years and upwards
5,355
6
2¼
Ann. Interest on 24,307 11 6 4 per Cents uncl. for 10 years and upwards
972
6
0½
Ann. Interest on 24,577 19 10 5 per Cents uncl. for 10 years and upwards
1,228
17
11¾
Long Annuities, unclaimed 5 per Cents uncl. for 10 years and upwards
606
0
11
Annual Interest on £.449,400 £.3 per Cents purchased with unclaimed Dividends
13,482
0
0
Chargeable on Sinking Fund:
23,212 925
4
10½
Life Annuities
£.410,964
19
6
Loans and Bills, funded from 1813 to 1821
9,722,775
1
6
Part of Charge for Treasury Bills raised for Ireland, Anno 1816
9,014
16
5½
10,142,154
17
5½
Deduct for Sinking Fund for said Loans and Bills
2,737,992
0
7¼
7,404,762
16
10¼
Actual Sinking Fund of Great Britain and Ireland funded therein Consolidated
15,808,162
8
0¼
An Account of the progress made in the Redemption of the IMPERIAL DEBT, at 5th January, 1822.
FUNDS.
CAPITALS.
Long Annuities at the Bank of England.
Transferred to, or Redeemed by the Commissioners from 1st August, 1786, to 5th January, 1821.
TOTAL SUMS Paid.
Average Price of Stock.
SUMS Annually applicable to the reduction of the NATIONAL DEBT.
ANNUITIES fallen in since 22nd June 1802, or that will fall in hereafter.
£
s
d
£
s
d
£
s
d
£
s
d
£
s
d
Imperial £.3 per Cent Annuities
7,502,633
6
8
£
36,693
0
0
Imperial Annuities for 25 Years, expired 1st Many 1819.
Redeemed by the Commissioners at 5th Jan. 1822
2,632,571
3
0
2,631,281
0
0
1,676,343
19
6
63¾
Annual Interest on £2,631,281 at 3 per Cent
78,938
8
7
230,000
0
0
Capitals transferred to them, the Dividends on which have not been claimed for 10 Years and upwards
1,290
3
0
Annual Interest on £.1,290 3 0 Unclaimed Capital, for 10 Years and upwards, at £3. per Cent
38
14
1
115,670
2
8
Debt unredeemed at 5th Jan. 1822
4,870,062
3
8
2,632,571
3
0
An Account of the Progress made in the Redemption of the DEBT of PORTUGAL, at 5th January, 1822.
Reduced
£
895,522
7
9
Annual Appropriation for Redemption of Loan, 1809
30,000
0
0
Redeemed by the Commissioners
745,056
0
0
745,056
0
0
500,638
7
2
67¼
Annual Interest on
£
22,351
13
7
Debt Unredeemed at 5th January 1822
150,466
7
9
52,351
13
7
An Account of the Progress made in the Redemption of tile FUNDED Debt of IRELAND, payable in Ireland, at 5th January, 1822, in British Currency.
Terminable and Life Annuities.
Annual Charge per Act 37 Geo. 3,
62,445
5
7
Terminable Annuities expired
66,616
6
6
£
22,101,263
0
8
10,292,180
15
5
8,126,669
8
10
79
Part of per Centage on Loans and Outstanding Treasury Bills, at 5th Jan. 1822
251,418
6
8
£
1,513,476
18
6
435,184
12
3¾
385,623
16
5¾
88⅝
Annual Interest on
£
£
£
£
360,226
6
6¼
£
12,902,280
6
2
110,340
12
8
1,538,909
6
7¼
1,382,187
1
2
89¾
Annual Interest on
£
17,407
7
8¼
36,517,020
5
4
12,266,274
14
4
9,894,480
6
5¾
Annual Interest on
£
76,945
9
3¾
Chargeable on Sinking Fund:
855,059
2
3¼
Redeemed by the Commissioners
12,266,274
14
4
Note.—The Unredeemed Debt of £. 24,250,145 11 includes £.596,115 7 8 created by the Sinking Fund Loan of £.500,000 part of £ 13,000,000 raised Anno 1821; and the Capital Redeemed amounting to £.12,266,274 14 4 above stated, includes
£
Interest cancelled in Ireland, to wards defraying the Charge of Treasury Bills, reised anno 1816 &c. the remainder being cancelled in England
£
Deduct Annuities expired
66,616
6
6
Deduct for Sinking Fund for said Bills
25,023
5
1
161,729
5
1¼
Actual Sinking Fund of Ireland payable in Ireland
673,329
17
2
Debt Unredeemed at 5th January, 1822
24,250,745
11
0
43,724
6
2
VII.—UNFUNDED DEBT.
An Account of the UNFUNDED DEBT, and DEMANDS OUTSTANDING, on the 5th day of January, 1822.
AMOUNT OUTSTANDING.
EXCHEQUER:
£
s
d
£
s
d
Exchequer Bills
Provided for or for
2,566,550
0
0
Unprovided for
29,000,000
0
0
31,566,550
0
0
TREASURY:
Miscellaneous Services
901,854
9
7¾
Warrants for Army Services
167,672
19
7¾
Treasury Bills of Exchange, drawn from Abroad
218,331
0
0
Irish Treasury Bills (Exchequer Bills)
Provided for
—
Unprovided for
1,105,181
9
4¾
2,393,039
18
8¼
ARMY
912,296
18
11
NAVY
1,105,630
11
7¼
ORDNANCE
267,208
17
9¾
BARRACKS
Nil.
36,244,726
7
0¼
Whitehall, Treasury Chambers, 25th March, 1822.
C. ARBUTHNOT.
VIII.—DISPOSITION OF GRANTS.
An Account, showing how the MONIES given for the SERVICE of the United Kingdom of GREAT BRITAIN and IRELAND, for the Year 1821, have been disposed of; distinguished under their several Heads; to the 5th January, 1822.
SERVICES.
SUMS voted of Granted.
SUMS Paid.
£
s
d
£
s
d
NAVY
6,282,685
11
5
5,164,742
11
5¼
ORDNANCE
1,195,107
0
0
946,715
7
8¼
FORCES
8,736,092
6
8
7,307,528
18
5¾
FOR defraying the Charge of the CIVIL ESTABLISHMENTS under-mentioned, viz.
Of Sierra Leone; from the 1st of January to the 31st of Dec.1821.
22,444
3
0
21,000
0
0
Of Sierra New South Wales January to the 31st of Dec.1821.
17,081
5
0
8,500
0
0
Of Sierra Newfoundland January to the 31st of Dec.1821.
6,283
10
0
5,000
0
0
Of Sierra Prince Edward's Island January to the 31st of Dec.1821.
3,520
15
0
1,700
0
0
Of Sierra New Brunswick January to the 31st of Dec.1821.
6,757
10
0
3,000
0
0
Of Sierra Nova Scotia January to the 31st of Dec.1821.
14,267
15
0
7,133
17
6
Of Sierra Upper Canada January to the 31st of Dec.1821.
11,107
10
0
4,500
0
0
Of Sierra Dominica January to the 31st of Dec.1821.
600
0
0
300
0
0
Of Sierra Bahama Islands, in addition to the Salaries now paid to the Public Officers out of the Duty Fund, and the Incidental Charges attending the same
3,147
15
0
3,147
15
0
SERVICES.
SUMS voted of Granted.
SUMS Paid.
£
s
d
£
s
d
For defraying the Charge of the Royal Military College; from the 25th Dec. 1820 to the 24th Dec. 1821
16,915
8
4
15,428
3
3
Charge of the Royal Military Asylum
32,226
6
10
25,517
2
5
For discharging Interest on Exchequer Bills, Irish Treasury Bills and Mint Notes; for 1821
1,000,000
0
0
914,142
9
2
One hundredth part of twenty-nine millions of Exchequer Bills, authorized in the last Session, to be issued and charged upon the Aids granted in the present Session, to be issued and paid by equal Quarterly Payments to the Governor and Company of the Bank of England, to be by them placed to the Account of the Commissioners for the Reduction of the National Debt; for the year ending the 1st Feb. 1822
290,000
0
0
217,500
0
0
To enable his Majesty to provide for such Expenses of a Civil nature, as do riot form a part of the ordinary Charges of the Civil List; for the year 1821
280,000
0
0
269,685
10
7
Expenses of the Establishment of the Royal Naval Asylum for 1,000 Orphan Children of Sailors and Marines; for one year, commencing the lot Jan. 1821
9,117
11
8
—
Expense of Works and Repairs of Public Buildings; for 1821
40,000
0
0
1,764
16
7
Extraordinary Expense in the Department of the Lord Chamberlain; for seven quarters, from the 5th April 1820 to the 5th Jan. 1822, for Fittings and Furniture to the Two Houses of Parliament
22,500
0
0
16,776
6
4
Extraordinary Expenses that may be incurred for Prosecutions, &c. relating to the Coin of this Kingdom; for 1821
8,000
0
0
4,000
0
0
Expense of Law Charges; for 1821
25,000
0
0
25,000
0
0
Salaries and Allowances to the Officers of the Houses of Lords and Commons; for 1821
22,800
0
0
22,136
9
8
Expense attending the confining, maintaining and employing Convicts at home; for 1821
90,532
0
0
90,532
0
0
For defraying the amount of Bills drawn or to be drawn from New South Wares; for 1821
100,000
0
0
60,000
0
0
To make good the Deficiencies of the Fee Funds, in the Departments of the Treasury, three Secretaries of State, and Privy Council; for 1821
69,415
0
0
48,444
9
7
To make good the Deficiency of the Sum granted in the last Session, to defray the Contingent Expenses and Messengers Bills the Departments of the Treasury, three Secretaries of State, Privy Council, and Lord Chamberlain; for 1821
8,706
0
2
8,706
0
2
For defraying the Contingent Expenses and Messengers Bills, in the Departments of the Treasury, three Secretaries of State, Privy Council, and Lord Chamberlain; for 1821
80,005
0
0
75,044
6
7
For defraying the Expenses of the Houses of Lords and Commons; for 1821
19,055
0
0
13,589
10
1
For his Majesty's Foreign and other Secret Services; for 1821
25,000
0
0
1,034
10
0
Extraordinary Expenses of the Mint in the Gold Coinage; for 1821
25,000
0
0
25,000
0
0
For defraying the Charge for printing Acts of Parliament for the two Houses of Parliament, for the Sheriffs, Clerks of the Peace, and Chief Magistrates throughout the United Kingdom, and for the acting Justices throughout Great Britain; also for printing Hills, Reports, Evidence, and other Papers and Accounts for the House of Lords; for 1821
21,000
0
0
—
For defraying the Expense incurred in 1821, for printing 1,750 Copies of the 76th Volume of Journals of the House of Commons, being for the present Session
3,500
0
0
—
For defraying the Expense of printing the Votes of the House of Commons, during the present Session
3,500
0
0
3,500
0
0
For defraying the Expense of printing Bills, Reports, and other Papers, by Order of the House of Commons, during the present Session
20,000
0
0
—
For defraying the Deficiency of the Grant in 1820, for re-printing Journals and Reports of the House of Commons
3,178
2
7
3,178
2
7
For defraying the expense of re-printing Journals and Reports of the House of Commons, in 1821
3,000
0
0
—
SERVICES.
SUMS voted of Granted.
SUMS Paid.
£
s
d
£
s
d
To defray the Deficiency of the Grant of 1820, for the Expense of printing Bills, Reports and other Papers, by order of the House of Commons, during the last Session of Parliament
5,731
6
7
5,731
6
7
To defray the Deficiency of the Grant of 1820, fur the Charge for printing Acts of Parliament for the two Houses of Parliament. for the Sheriffs, Clerks of the Peace, and Chief Magistrates throughout the United Kingdom, and for the acting Justices throughout Great Britain; also for printing Bills, Reports, Evidence, and other Papers and Accounts for the House of Lords
3,700
1
10½
—
For defraying the Salaries to certain Officers, and Expenses of the Court and Receipt of Exchequer, for 1821
7,000
0
0
6,287
0
10
For defraying the Expenses of the Establishment of the Public Office Bow-street, including the Horse and Foot Petiole, and of the Establishment of the River Police; for 1821
33,567
0
0
18,252
4
8
For defraying the Charge of the Forts and Possessions of the African Company, now about to be vested in his Majesty
15,000
0
0
257
11
9
For completing the Measures authorized by an Act of the 53rd of his late Majesty, for making a New Street from Marylebone Park to Charing Cross
100,000
0
0
80,000
0
0
For conveying and victualling Settlers to the Cape of Good Hope; in 1821
86,760
5
4
—
For making good the Deficiency of the Grant of the last Session of Parliament, fur printing 1,750 Copies of the 75th Volume of Journals of the House of Commons
1,068
4
7½
1,068
4
7½
For paying the Salaries of the Commissioners of the Insolvent Debtors Court, of their Clerks, and the Contingent Expenses of the Office; in the year 1821
8,400
0
0
4,400
0
0
For paying, in 1821, the Salaries of the Officers, and the Contingent Expenses in the Office for the Superintendence of Aliens, and also the Superannuation or Retired Allowances to Officers formerly employed in that Service
5,135
1
6
2,581
10
0
For paving the Salaries or Allowances granted to certain Professors in the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge, for reading Courses of Lectures; in 1821
953
7
6
—
For paying the usual Allowances to Protestant Dissenting Ministers in England, poor French Protestant Refugee Clergy, and poor Protestant Refugee Laity, and sundry small Charitable and other Allowances to the Poor of St. Martins-in-the-fields and others; in 1821
7,236
8
10
2,268
4
5
To defray the Expense of certain Colonial Services heretofore paid out of tile Extraordinaries of the Army; for 1821
2,442
10
0
2,442
10
0
The following SERVICES are directed to be paid, without any Fee or other Deduction whatsoever:
For enabling the Trustees of the British Museum to carry on the Trust reposed in them by Parliament
8,479
0
0
8,479
0
0
For defraying the Expense of Works carrying on at the College of Edinburgh; for 1821
10,000
0
0
10,000
0
0
For defraying the Expense of the building of a Penitentiary House at Milbank; for 1821
40,000
0
0
40,000
0
0
For defraying, in the present year, the payment of the Awards of the Commissioners established in London in pursuance of the 58th of his late Majesty, for carrying into effect a Convention between his late Majesty and his Most Faithful Majesty, signed at London, the 28th July 1817, to Claimants of Portuguese Vessels and Cargoes captured by British Cruizers, on account of the unlawful Trading in Slaves; since the 1st June 1814
75,000
0
0
55,591
8
6
For defraying, in 1821, the Salaries and Incidental Expenses of the Commissioners appointed on the part of his Majesty antler the Treaties with Spain, Portugal, and the Netherlands, for preventing the illegal Traffic in Slaves; and in pursuance of the Acts of the 58th and 59th of his late Majesty, for carrying the said Treaties into effect
18,700
0
0
1,156
8
0
SERVICES.
SUMS voted of Granted.
SUMS Paid.
£
s
d
£
s
d
For defraying the Expense of the National Vaccine Establishment; for 1821
3,000
0
0
3,000
0
0
For the Relief of American Loyalists; for 1821
8,000
0
0
2,000
0
0
For defraying the Expense of confining and maintaining Criminal Lunatics; for 1821
3,306
10
0
1,636
12
10
For defraying the Charge of the Allowances or Compensations granted or allowed as Retired Allowances or Superannuations to Persons formerly employed in Public Offices or Departments, or in the Public Service, according to the Provisions of the 50th of his late Majesty; for 1821
6,631
6
0
2,565
0
0
For the support of the Institution called The Refuge for the Destitute:" for 1821
5,000
0
0
5,000
0
0
To enable his Majesty to grant relief, in 1821, to Toulonese and Corsican Emigrants, Knights of Malta, Dutch Naval Officers, Saint Domingo Sufferers, and others who have heretofore received Allowances from his Majesty, and who, from Services performed or Losses sustained in the British Service, have special Claims upon his Majesty's Justice or Liberality
22,100
0
0
12,000
0
0
For defraying the Expense of the Establishment of the Penitentiary House at Milbank; from the 24th June 1821 to the 24th June 1822
23,000
0
0
7,000
0
0
For defraying the Expense of Repairs of Henry the Seventh's Chapel; for 1821
2,456
4
7¾
2,456
4
7¾
For defraying the Sum that may be wanted for 1821, in further execution of an Act of the 46th of his late Majesty, for discharging outstanding Demands, and purchasing Houses and Ground for the further Improvement of Westminster, in conformity to the Recommendation of the Select Committee of the House of Commons, by their Report, dated the 31st May 1810
4,901
5
0
4,901
5
0
To enable the Commissioners for making Roads and building Bridges in the Highlands of Scotland, to fulfil their Engagements and close their Accounts, the Residue to be held applicable to the maintenance of the said Roads and Bridges, under the Act of the 59th year of the reign of his late Majesty; and also to enable the said Commissioners to close their Accounts with regard to Harbours and other public Works in Scotland, under the Act of the 46th year of the reign of his late Majesty
10,000
0
0
10,000
0
0
To be applied by the Commissioners appointed by an Act of the 43rd of his late Majesty, for making Roads and building Bridges in the Highlands of Scotland, towards making a road in the Isle of Skye, being part of a line of Road, the northern portion of which has already been completed under the name of the Stein Road
3,650
0
0
3,650
0
0
To be paid to General Stephen Borne, Baron des Forneaux, or his Representative, as a Compensation for Losses and Damage sustained at the Capture of Guadaloupe, in 1794
3,500
0
0
—
To enable the Commissioners appointed for providing a convenient Place for transacting the Business in Bankruptcy, to defray the Expenses of erecting new Courts for the Commissioners of Bankrupts in Basinghall-street
2,300
0
0
2,300
0
0
To enable the Commissioners acting under an act of the 55th of his late Majesty, to complete sundry Improvements in the Holyhead Road
6,798
0
0
—
For defraying the Charges of preparing and drawing the Lotteries for 1821, &c.
18,000
0
0
—
For defraying the Charge of the following SERVICES in IRELAND, Which are directed to be paid Nett in British Currency.
Civil Contingencies in Ireland; for the year ending 5th Jan. 1822
20,000
0
0
19,500
0
9¾
Probable Expenditure of the Board of Works in Ireland; for 1821
14,000
0
0
8,542
6
4¾
Charge of Printing, Stationery, and other Disbursements for the Chief and Under Secretaries Offices and Apartments, and other Public Offices in Dublin Castle, &c.; and for Riding Charges
SERVICES.
SUMS voted of Granted.
SUMS Paid.
£
s
d
£
s
d
and other Expenses of the Deputy Pursuivants, and extra Messengers attending the said Offices; and also Superannuated Allowances in the said Chief Secretary's Office; fur one year ending the 5th Jan. 1822
16,700
0
0
13,703
14
4¾
Expense of publishing Proclamations and other matters of a public nature, in the Dublin Gazette and other Newspapers in Ireland; for one year ending 5th Jan. 1822
7,000
0
0
6,908
6
0¾
Expense of printing 1,500 Copies of a compressed Quarto Edition of the Statutes of the United Kingdom, for the use of the Magistrates of Ireland; and also 250 Copies of a Folio Edition of the same, bound for the use of the Lords, Bishops, and Public Officers in Ireland
3,000
0
0
1,253
4
2¾
Expense of Criminal Prosecutions, and other Law Expenses in Ireland; for one year ending 5th Jan. 1822
20,000
0
0
15,445
4
9½
Expense of apprehending Public Offenders in Ireland; for one year ending 5th Jan. 1822
1,000
0
0
258
9
2¾
For completing the Sum necessary for the Support of the Non-conforming Ministers in Ireland; for the same time
8,697
4
7½
6,522
18
5½
For the Support of the Seceding Ministers from the Synod of Ulster in Ireland; for one year ending 25th March 1822
4,034
15
5
2,017
7
8½
For the Support of the Protestant Dissenting Ministers in Ireland; for one year ending 5th Jan. 1822
756
0
0
756
0
0
For paying the Salaries of the Lottery Offices in Ireland; for one year ending the 24th June 1821
1,718
0
0
1,718
0
0
Works of Howth Harbour; in 1821
3,978
0
0
3,978
0
0
Works at Dunmore Harbour; in 1821
10,000
0
0
2,769
4
7¼
For the Establishment and Maintenance of the Public Navigations in Ireland, vested in the Directors of Inland Navigations; for 1821
4,000
0
0
4,000
0
0
Expense of the Police and Watch Establishments of the City and District of Dublin; for the year ending the 5th Jan. 1822
25,000
0
0
25,000
0
0
For enabling the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland to issue Money from time to time, in aid of Schools established by Voluntary Contributions
4,000
0
0
1,041
6
2¾
For paying the Salaries of the Commissioners appointed to inquire into the Duties, Salaries and Emoluments of the Officers, Clerks, and Ministers of Justice in all Temporal and Ecclesiastical Courts in Ireland; for one year ending the 5th Jan. 1822
6,000
0
0
4,500
0
0
For defraying the Expense of building Churches and Glebe Houses and of purchasing Glebes in Ireland; for one year, ending 5th Jan. 1822
9,230
0
0
9,230
0
0
For further defraying the Expense of building Churches and Glebe Houses, and of purchasing Glebes in Ireland; for the same time
18,461
0
0
18,461
0
0
Trustees of the Linen and Hempen Manufactures, for the same time; to be by the said Trustees applied in such manner as shall appear to them to be most conducive to promote and encourage the said Manufactures in Ireland
19,938
9
2¾
19,938
9
2¾
Commissioners for making wide and convenient Streets in Dublin; for one year ending 5th Jan. 1822
11,000
0
0
11,000
0
0
Additional Allowance to the Chairman of the Board of Inland Navigation in Ireland; for the same time
276
18
5½
276
18
5½
To be applied in Aid of the Royal Irish Academy; for the same time
300
0
0
Protestant Charter Schools of Ireland; for the same time
20,000
0
0
13,846
3
1
Foundling Hospital in Dublin; for the same time
30,000
0
0
30,000
0
0
House of Industry, Hospitals and Asylums for Industrious Children in Dublin; for the same time
19,600
0
0
19,600
0
0
Richmond Lunatic Asylum in Dublin; for the same time
5,500
0
0
5,500
0
0
Hibernian Society for Soldiers Children; for the same time
8,000
0
0
8,000
0
0
Hibernian Marine Society in Dublin; for the same time
1,600
0
0
1,600
0
0
Female Orphan House in the Circular Road near Dublin; for the same time
2,400
0
0
2,400
0
0
Westmorland Lock Hospital in Dublin; for the same time
3,400
0
0
3,400
0
0
Lying-in Hospital in Dublin; for the same time
2,800
0
0
1,846
3
1
Dr. Steven's Hospital; for the same time
1,400
0
0
1,400
0
0
SERVICES.
SUMS voted of Granted.
SUMS Paid.
£
s
d
£
s
d
Fever Hospital and House of Recovery in Cork-street Dublin; for the same time
4,500
0
0
4,500
0
0
Hospital for Incurables in Dublin; for the same time
300
0
0
300
0
0
Roman Catholic Seminary in Ireland; for the same time
8,928
0
0
8,928
0
0
Association incorporated for discountenancing Vice and promoting the Knowledge and Practice of the Christian Religion in Ireland for the same time
6,464
0
0
6,464
0
0
Green Coat Hospital of the City of Cork; for the same time
107
0
0
107
0
0
Cork Institution for the same time
2,300
0
0
2,300
0
0
Society for promoting the Education of the Poor in Ireland; for the same time
10,000
0
0
10,000
0
0
Dublin Society; for the same time
7,000
0
0
7,000
0
0
Farming Society of Ireland; for the same time
2,500
0
0
923
1
6½
19,415,251
10
6½
15,914208
7
0¾
To pay off and discharge Exchequer Bills, and that the same be issued and applied towards paying off and discharging any Exchequer Bills charged upon the Aids or Supplies of the years 1818, 1819, 1820 and 1821, now remaining unpaid or unprovided for
29,000,000
0
0
To pay off and discharge Exchequer Bills issued pursuant to several Acts of 57th and 58th of his' late Majesty, and one Act of the first year of the reign of his present Majesty, for authorizing the issue of Exchequer Bills, for the carrying on Public Works and Fisheries in the United Kingdom, and for building and promoting the building of additional Churches, over and above the amount granted in the last Session of Parliament, for the discharge of Exchequer Bills, issued under the two first-mentioned Acts
206,400
0
0
29,206,400
0
0
16,751,700
0
0
To pay off and discharge Irish Treasury Bills charged upon the Aids or Supplies of the year 1821, outstanding and unprovided for
1,500,000
0
0
1,500,000
0
0
50,121,651
10
6½
34,165,908
7
0¾
PAYMENTS FOR OTHER SERVICES.
Not being part of the Supplies granted for the Service of the Year.
£
s
d
James Fisher, Esq. on his Salary, for additional trouble in preparing Exchequer Bills, pursuant to Act 48 Geo. 3, c. 1
469
16
6½
Expenses in the Office of the Commissioners for the Reduction of the National Debt
6,700
0
0
Expenses in the Office of the Commissioners for issuing Commercial Exchequer Bills
4,000
0
0
Expenses in the Office of the Commissioners for the Redemption of the Land Tax
2,335
19
4
Expenses in the Office of the Commissioners for inquiring into the Collection and Management of the Revenue in Ireland
4,000
0
0
To enable the Commissioners or Governors of the Royal Hospital for Seamen at Greenwich to provide for the payment of Out-Pensioners of the said Hospital, pursuant to Act 1 & 2 Geo. 4, c. 98
251,400
0
0
Bank of England, for Management on Life Annuities
1,700
18
1½
Bank for receiving the Lotteries of 1821
3,000
0
0
273,606
14
0
Amount of Sums voted, as above
50,121,651
10
6½
TOTAL Sums voted, and Payments for Services not voted
50,395,258
4
6½
WAYS AND MEANS
for answering the foregoing SERVICES.
£
s
d
Duty on Malt, Sugar, Tobacco and Snuff, Foreign Spirits and Sweets, and on Pensions, Offices, &c
4,000,000
0
0
Excise Duty on Tea, per Act 59, Geo. 3. c. 53
1,500,000
0
0
Profits of Lotteries, estimated at
200,000
0
0
Monies to arise from the Sale of Old Naval and Victualling Stores
163,400
0
0
Loan per Act 1 & 2 Geo. 4. c. 70, from the Commissioners for the Reduction of the National Debt
13,000,000
0
0
Bank of Ireland, advance for Increase of their Capital
461,538
9
2¾
Indemnity payable by the French Government
500,000
0
0
Surplus of the Grants, for the year 1820
81,630
6
0
Unclaimed Dividends, &c, after deducting repayments to the Bank, for Deficiencies of Balance in their Hands
83,580
4
3
Interest on Land Tax redeemed by Money
82
8
1½
Repayments on Account of Exchequer Bills issued pursuant to two Acts of the 57th year of his late Majesty, for carrying on Public Works and Fisheries in the United Kingdom
114,570
3
6
20,104,801
11
1½
Exchequer Bills voted in Ways and Means; 1 & 2 Geo. 4, c. 71
£.29,000,000
0
0
Irish Treasury Bills, 1 & 2 Geo. 4, c. 80
1,000,000
0
0
30,000,000
0
0
Total Ways and Means
50,104,801
11
1¼
Sums granted as per preceding page
50,121,651
10
6½
Paid for Services not voted
273,606
14
0
50,395,258
4
6½
Amount of Ways and Means, as above
50,104,801
11
1¼
Deficiency of Ways and Means
290,456
14
5¼
Whitehall Treasury Chambers, 25th March, 1822.
C. ARBUTHNOT.
INDEX
INDEX TO DEBATES IN THE HOUSE OF LOADS.
A
Agricultural Distress, 325
Aliens Regulation Bill, 1851
B
Bankrupt Laws, 1028
C
Corn Importation Bill, 1504, 1556
E
Examination Questions; Bishop of Peterborough's, 824
G
Greek Hostages at Constantinople, 1665
I
Ireland, Scarcity of Provisions in, 141, 470, 671
Ireland; State of, 1045
Irish Insurrection Bill, 1714
Irish Poor Employment Bill, 725
M
Marriage Act Amendment Bill, 1128, 1143, 1198, 1373, 1452
N
Naval and Military Pensions, Bill, 1319, 1396
Navigation Laws, 1119
P
Pensions Bill; Naval and Military, 1319, 1396
Peterborough, Bishop of; his Examination Questions, 824
R
Roman Catholic Peers' Bill, 1216
S
Scarcity of Provisions in Ireland, 141, 470, 671
Scots Representative Peers, 314
Small Notes Bill, 1661
INDEX TO DEBATES IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS.
A
Absentees, 653
Advertisements; Government, 365
Agricultural Distress, 142, 150, 333, 371, 423, 454, 520
Ale-Houses; Licensing of, 327, 560, 735, 1397
Aliens' Regulation Bill, 805, 1092, 1433, 1717
Antient Historians, 1737
Army Extraordinaries, 1514
B
Bank of England Charter, 760
Beer Bill, 1692
Budget, The, 1413
C
Calcutta Bankers, 1502
Canada Government and Trade Bill, 1199, 1698, 1729
Cash Payments; Resumption of, 877, 928
Cattle Bill; Ill-treatment of, 758, 873
Cape of Good Hope; Slavery at, 1783
Catholic Claims, 210, 211, 475, 673
Chief Baron O'Grady, 1500
Civil List, 604
Colonial Trade Bill, 674
Commission of Inquiry into the State of the Colonies, 1801, 1850
Consuls; Fees of, 366, 1658.
Corn Importation Bill, 788, 874
Criminal Laws, 790.
Crown; Influence of the, 1265.
Currency; State of the, 297, 877, 1596
County Court of Middlesex, 1145
D
Diplomatic Expenditure, 604, 659
E
Embassy to the Swiss Cantons, 659
Excise Licenses Regulation Bill, 1457
F
Fees of Consuls, 366, 1658
Finance Resolutions; Mr. Hume's, 1740
G
Government Advertisements, 365
Greeks; Cause of the, 1649
H
Historians; Antient, 1737
Hope, Mr.; Complaint against, 1548, 1634, 1668
House and Window Tax, 1458
Hunt, Mr. Henry; Treatment of, 1, 2
I
Ilchester Gaol, 1,518
Ill-treatment of Cattle Bill, 758, 873
Influence of the Crown, 1265
Ireland; Scarcity of Provisions in, 146, 1123
Ireland, Tithes of Potatoes in, 597
Ireland; State of Tithes, and the Church Establishment in, 1147
Ireland, Chief Baron of, 1500
Ireland, Poor Rates in, 1736
Joint Postmaster-General, 298, 315
Ionian Islands, 562
Irish Postmaster-General, 560
Irish Poor Employment Bill, 670, 698, 1265
Irish Linen Trade, 701
Irish Payment of Rent Bill, 721
Irish Civil List, 722
Irish Constables Bill, 852
Irish Tithes Leasing Bill, 1029
Irish Butter Bill, 1210
Irish Insurrection Act, 1498, 1522, 1653
K
Kent Petition, 1078
L
Labourers Wages, 1122
Licensing Ale-Houses, 327, 560, 735, 1397
Lord Advocate; Conduct of the, with regard to the Public Press of Scotland, 1324
M
Marriage Act Amendment Bill, 702, 1635
Maritime Rights, 1511, 1648
Menzies, Mr.; Complaint against, 1548, 1691
Ministerial Pensions Bill, 1381
Morning Chronicle; Complaint against The, 421
N
National Debt and Sinking Fund; Mr. Hume's Resolutions relative to, 1740
Naval and Military Pensions, 280, 316, 737, 782
Navigation Bill, 708
O
O'Grady, Chief Baron, 1500
P
Parliamentary Reform, 49, 51, 280, 779, 1073
Pensions Bill, Ministerial, 1381
Pensions; Naval and Military, 280, 316,737, 782
Piracy in the West Indies, 1725
Poor Laws, 1560
Poor Removal Bill, 761
Poor Rates in Ireland, 1736
Postmaster-General, 298, 315
Postmaster-General in Ireland, 560
Potatoes; Tithes of, in Ireland, 597
Press of Scotland; Conduct of the Lord Advocate with regard to, 1324
R
Reform of Parliament, 49, 51, 280, 779, 1078
Resumption of Cash Payments, 877, 928
Retail of Beer Bill, 1692
Roman Catholic Claims, 210, 211, 475, 673
Roman Catholic Peers Bill, 211, 475, 673
S
Salford Hundred Court Extension Bill, 513
Salt Duties, 1407
Saurin, Mr., 1406
Scotland, National Monument in, 1513, 1660
Scotch Burghs Accounts Bill, 1126
Scotch Juries Bill, 1200
Sinking Fund, 1740
Slave Trade, 1399, 1783
Small Notes Bill, 1456, 1521
Steam Boats, 1716
Superannuation Act Amendment Bill, 1844
Swiss Cantons; Embassy to the, 659
T
Tithes Leasing Bill; Irish, 1029
Tithes, and the Church Establishment in Ireland, 1147
Trinidad, State of, 1801
V
Vice Chancellor's Court, 1374
W
Warehousing Bill, 1264
Welsh Judicature, 728, 759
West Indies, Piracy in the, 1725
West India and American Trade Bill, 674
Window Tax, 1458
Y
York shire Election Polls Bill, 846
INDEX OF NAMES—HOUSE OF LORDS.
B
Bathurst, Earl, 1121, 1504
Blesinton, Earl of, 473, 727
Bute, Marquis of, 1122
C
Calthorpe, Lord, 845, 1664
Canterbury, Archbishop of, 1143
Carnarvon, Earl of, 846, 1509, 1557, 1661
Chester, Bishop of, 11986
Colchester, Lord, 1217
D
Dacre, Lord, 824, 845, 1508
Darnley, Earl of, 141, 470, 671, 727, 1072, 1511, 1715, 1852
Dononghmore, Earl of, 1068, 1715
Downshire, Marquis of, 727, 1068
E
Eldon, Lord;
see
Ellenborough, Lord, 474, 1069, 1128, 1144, 1198, 1373, 1453, 1454, 1510, 1715
Erskine, Lord, 1226, 1507, 1556
G
Grenville, Lord, 1251
Grey, Earl, 325, 474, 1236
Grosvenor, Earl, 1556, 1665
H
Harewood, Earl of, 1121
Harrowby, Earl of, 845, 1143, 1374, 1397, 1509, 1556
Holland, Lord, 475, 841, 1072, 1143, 1144, 1256, 1453, 1667, 1716, 1852
K
King, Lord, 726, 1323, 1396
L
Lansdown, Marquis of, 472, 672, 725, 727, 1045, 1322, 1374, 1454, 1714
Lauderdale, Earl of, 475, 1323, 1556
Limerick, Earl of, 474, 726, 1066, 1119, 1715
Liverpool, Earl of, 141, 326, 471, 474, 671, 727, 1058, 1142, 1143, 1144, 1244, 1319, 1374, 1454, 1663, 1666, 1668, 1714, 1851
Lord Chancellor [Eldon], 845, 846, 1028 1067, 1141, 1198, 1230, 1373, 1453, 1455
M
Morley, Earl of, 1511
P
Peterborough, Bishop of, 828
Portland, Duke of, 1216
R
Redesdale, Lord, 1143, 1198, 1454, 1510, 1557, 1715
Roden, Earl of, 1716
Rosebery, Earl of, 314
Rosslyn, Earl of, 1715
S
Stowell, Lord, 1132, 1452
W
Wellington, Duke of, 475
Westmoreland, Earl of, 1137 1374, 1454
Y
York, Archbishop of, 1144
INDEX OF NAMES—HOUSE OF COMMONS.
A
Abercromby, Hon. James, 597, 861, 1324, 1682
Allen, J. H. 728
Althorp, Viscount, 426, 445, 454, 519, 529, 863, 1410, 1634
Arbathnot, Right Hon. C. 1514
Astell, W. 1503
Attorney General [Sir Robert Gifford], 518, 734, 799, 1379, 1644
Attwood, Matthias, 371, 396, 533, 552, 965, 1611
B
Bankes, Henry, 304, 363, 441, 1390, 1392
Barham, John Foster, 679, 730, 759
Beaumont, T. W. 286, 434
Becher, W. 148, 602, 699
Bennet, Hon. Henry Grey, 146, 324, 332, 560, 724, 736, 928, 1087, 1091, 1309, 1391, 1398, 1518, 1657, 1661, 1740
Benett, John, 296, 351, 435, 436, 461, 753, 788.
Bernal, Ralph, 316, 697, 735, 1398, 1717.
Binning, Lord, 1128, 1208, 1513, 1552, 1661, 1680
Blake, Sir F. 310
Bridges, Mr. Alderman, 779
Bright, Henry, 285, 307, 435, 676, 875, 1458, 1713, 1723, 1729
Brougham, Henry, 202, 296, 297, 318, 365, 434, 449, 519, 557, 697, 720, 735, 782, 786, 870, 1017, 1083, 1090, 1193, 1265, 1317,, 1394, 1406, 1432, 1502,1504, 1521, 1553, 1678, 1692, 1697
Browne, Dennis, 324, 434, 465, 600, 655, 702, 873, 1041, 1182, 1498
Burdett, Sir Francis, 2, 47, 404, 954, 1087, 1633, 1674, 1730, 1731
Burrell, Sir Charles, 466, 778
Burrell, Walter, 163
Butler, Colonel, 602
Buxton, Thomas Fowell, 46, 329, 674, 800, 1694, 1800
C
Caloraft, John, 746, 780, 784, 788, 1083, 1398, 1431, 1498, 1712, 1844
Calvert, Charles, 332, 561
Calvert, N. 448
Canning, Right Hon. George, 106, 211, 273, 512, 673, 788, 874, 876, 1648, 1688, 1725, 1845
Carew, R. S. 1045
Chaloner, Mr. 529, 846
Chancellor of the Exchequer [Right Hon. Nicholas Vansittart], 280, 303, 323, 435, 658, 725, 737, 786, 1409, 1413, 1458, 1491, 1698, 1737, 1738, 1781, 1846
Chetwynd, George, 778
Clifton, Lord, 1086
Cockburn, Sir George, 1726
Coffin, Sir Isaac, 433, 561, 658
Coke, T. W. 143, 779
Colborne, R. 561.
Colthurst, Sir N. 448, 601, 699, 869, 1045, 1210
Concannon, Lucius, 1535
Cooper, E. S. 597
Copley, Sir John,
see
Courtenay, William, 503, 803, 1146, 1548, 1634, 1677
Courtenay, Thomas Peregrine, 774, 1504, 1520
Cranborne, Lord, 463, 1397
Creevey, Thomas, 643, 1381, 1395
Cripps, Joseph, 317, 440, 758
Curteis, E. J. 602
Curtis, Sir William, 674
Curwen, John Christian, 359, 434, 461, 752, 779, 786, 1408, 1457
D
Daly, James, 1045, 1192
Davenport, D. 719, 752
Davies, Colonel, 285, 520, 783, 1535
Davis, Hart, 1457, 1522
Dawson, George, 23, 601, 1042
De Crespigny, Sir W. 670, 719
Denison, J. W. 297, 454, 1409
Denman, Thomas, 136, 760, 819, 1500, 1714, 1722
Dickinson, William, 30, 657
Douglas, Keith, 434
Duncombe, William, 100
E
Eastnor, Lord, 463
Ebrington, Lord, 50, 295
Ellice, Edward, 334, 553, 681, 1178, 1199, 1265, 1425, 1705, 1729
Ellis, Hon. G. A. 246
Ellis, C. R. 676
Estcourt, T. G. 47
F
Filzgerald, Vesey, 870, 1123
Folkestone, Viscount, 89, 1457, 1499
Forde, Colonel, 1045
Foster, J. L. 502, 1035
Freemantle, W. 779
G
Gascoyne, Isaac, 519, 749, 788
Gifford, Sir Robert,
see
Gilbert, Davies, 363, 707, 1123
Gooch, Thomas, 142, 447
Goulburn, Henry, 148, 598, 600, 670, 698, 852, 1029, 1124, 1186, 1499, 1519, 1522, 1657, 1714, 1843
Gower, lord, F. 261
Grant, Right Hon. Charles, 863, 871, 1661
Grant, J. P. 324, 1126
Grattan, James, 603, 870
Grenfell, Pascoe, 295, 561, 760, 782, 1433
Griffith, J. W. 448
Gurney, Hudson, 286, 427, 655, 756, 934, 1211, 1450, 1513, 1522, 1643, 1660, 1717, 1737, 1739
H
Haldimand, Mr. 937
Hamilton, Lord Archibald, 312, 925, 1126, 1653, 1658, 1690
Hart, General, 1657
Heron, Sir Robert, 50
Heygate, Alderman, 469, 757, 933, 1633
Hill, Sir George, 701
Hobhouse, John Cam, 27, 1433, 1458, 1725
Honey wood, W. P. 1079
Hotham, Lord, 851
Hume, Joseph, 290, 316, 366, 421, 547, 562, 600, 722, 749, 782, 785, 1087, 1091, 1127, 1147, 1196, 1429, 1433, 1495, 1503, 1514, 1521, 1650, 1658, 1737, 1740, 1805, 1850
Huskisson, Right Hon. W. 206, 288, 305, 328, 361,444, 538, 755, 897, 965, 1215, 1519, 1695
Hutchinson, Hon. C. H. 603, 700, 753, 1045, 1194, 1215, 1650, 1653
J
James, William, 280, 780, 1456, 1457
Jones, Mr. 730
Irving, John, 364, 448
K
Kennedy, T. F. 1200
Knatchbull, Sir Edward, 363, 1079, 1083
L
Lennard, T. B. 604, 1145, 1731
Lethbridge, Sir Thomas, 210, 402, 447, 653, 673
Leycester, Ralph, 360, 936, 1408
Littleton, E. J. 557, 1122, 1409
Lockhart, John, 424, 465, 1089, 1372, 1458, 1521,
Londonderry, Marquis of, 150, 293, 308, 356, 363, 365, 369, 396, 434, 452, 464, 510, 545, 558, 560, 611, 665, 701, 707, 724, 748, 777, 783, 787, 821, 862, 874, 876, 1026, 1044, 1081, 1082, 1085, 1091, 1299,1370, 1392, 1395, 1403, 1412, 1433, 1500, 1512, 1552, 1647, 1648, 1652, 1656, 1659, 1684, 1714, 1727, 1731, 1733, 1847
Lord Advocate of Scotland [Sir W. Rae], 1126, 1204, 1348
Lushington, Stephen Rumbold, 1410, 1430, 1458
Lushington, Dr. 704, 1146, 1513, 1639
M
Maberly, John, 295, 754, 1423, 1493
Maberly, William, 758, 775
Macdonald, James, 310
Mackintosh, Sir James, 39, 630, 703, 705, 731, 790, 804, 810, 1092, 1199, 1205, 1363, 1404, 1511, 1512, 1645, 1649, 1690, 1701, 1729, 1730, 1734, 1738
Manning, W. 697, 761
Mansfield, John, 772
Marryat, James, 691, 1728, 1729, 1805
Martin, J. 286, 317, 758, 1090
Martin, R. 263, 310, 506, 662, 700, 701, 759, 869, 874, 1045, 1196, 1410, 1655
Maxwell, J. 558, 1128, 1498
Milton, Lord, 1610
Monck, J. B. 296, 298, 333, 356, 426, 761, 773, 1089, 1123, 1216, 1398, 1497, 1654, 1661
Money, W. T. 311, 677, 1798
Moore, Peter, 520, 779, 1503
N
Newport, Sir John, 285, 416, 598, 603, 721, 749, 780, 822, 859, 1039, 1125, 1182, 1213
Nolan, Michael, 776, 1560
Normanby, Lord, 298, 668, 851
Nugent, Lord, 261, 1803
O
O'Brien, Sir E. 146, 149, 670, 1125
O'Grady, Captain, 701, 1043
Ommaney, Sir F. 1411
Onslow, Mr. Serjeant, 297, 674, 819
P
Parnell, Sir Henry, 602, 849, 1037
Pearse, John, 761, 954, 1521
Peel, Mr. Secretary, 34, 139, 246, 430, 507, 548, 673, 725, 760, 780, 803, 805, 823, 860, 1009,
Peel, William, 504
Pelham, Hon. C. A. 49
Philips, George, 433, 520, 530, 1089
Phillimore, Dr. 502, 702, 705, 1504, 1635, 1800
Plunkett, Right Hon. W. C. 266, 600, 855, 1040, 1105, 1195, 1500, 1503, 1545, 1640
Powlett, Hon. W. 435
Prendergast, M. G. 1503
R
Ricardo, David, 199, 287, 317, 392, 417, 455, 533, 654, 690, 720, 753, 761, 783, 788, 789, 938, 1091, 1123, 1214, 1265, 1427, 1606
Ramsden, J. C. 847
Rice, Thomas Spring, 560, 600, 670, 702, 857, 1041, 1125, 1192, 1214, 1501, 1535, 1657
Ridley, Sir M. W. 719, 776
Robertson, Mr. 465, 1494, 1502
Robinson, Right Hon. Frederick, 104, 370, 414, 642, 675, 1123, 1212, 1447
Russell, Lord John, 51, 756, 1080, 1082
S
Scarlett, James, 519, 733, 761, 818, 874, 1116
Scott, Mr. 1411
Sebright, Sir John, 306, 332, 362, 524, 786
Shelley, Sir John, 362, 467, 775
Smith, Alderman, C. 1398
Smith, T. A. 475
Smith, W. 658, 677, 700, 752, 1127, 1655, 1796
Smith, John, 525, 699, 781, 1083, 1124, 1409, 1431, 1543
Speaker, The [Right Hon. C. M. Sutton], 1394, 1551
Stanley, Lord, 823, 1123
Stuart Wortley, John, 307, 1313, 1413, 1677
Sumner, Holme, 306
Sutton, Right Hon. C. M.
see
Sykes, Daniel, 533
T
Tavistock, Marquis of, 50
Taylor, Michael Angelo, 735, 1374
Tierney, Right Hon. George, 434, 644, 1551, 1552, 1555, 1684
Titchfield, Marquis of, 1871
Tremayne, J. H. 307
Trench, Colonel, 602, 1654
Twiss, Horace, 88, 815, 1209, 1381
V
Vansittart, Right Hon. Nicholas,
see
Vivian, Sir H. 466
W
Wallace, Thomas, 708, 1264, 1265
Warre, J. 264, 659
Western, C. C. 197, 297, 429, 468, 525, 877, 1087, 1215, 1596
Wetherell, Charles, 271, 476, 703, 705, 1411, 1502, 1643, 1718
Whitbread, S. 333
Whitmore, W. 317, 363, 467, 789
Wigram, W. 1503
Wilberforce, W. 309, 697, 847, 1399, 1651, 1655, 1783
Wilbraham, Bootle, 519
Williams, William, 296, 676, 757
Williams, John, 430, 594, 1380, 1449
Wilmot, R. J. 499, 584, 1199, 1517, 1650, 1698, 1795, 1801, 1850
Wilson, Sir Robert, 426, 780, 817, 1499, 1529, 1653, 1673, 1678, 1724
Wilson, Thomas, 287, 318, 364, 435, 557, 677, 754, 1089, 1215
Wilson, Charles, 520, 734
Wodehouse, E. 144, 146, 363, 1410, 1457
Wood, Mr. Alderman, 518, 1398, 1696
Wood, Colonel, 734, 778, 1410
Wynn, Sir W. W. 448, 529
Wynn, C. W. W. 45, 100, 505, 660, 734, 780, 804, 853, 1494, 1551, 1554, 1686
Wyvill, M. 423
END OF VOL. VII.