HANSARD'S
FORMING A CONTINUATION OF THE WORK ENTITLED
"THE PARLIAMENTARY HISTORY OF ENGLAND,
FROM THE EARLIEST PERIOD TO THE YEAR 1803."
New Series;
COMMENCING WITH THE ACCESSION OF GEORGE IV.
VOL. XXII.
COMPRISING THE PERIOD FROM
THE FOURTH DAY OF FEBRUARY,
TO
THE EIGHTH DAY OF MARCH, 1830.
[FIRST VOLUME OF THE SESSION.]
LONDON:
Printed by T.C Hansard at the Pater-noster-Row Press.
FOR BALDWIN AND CRADOCK; J. BOOKER; LONGMAN, REES, ORME, AND CO.; J. M. RICHARDSON; PARBURY, ALLEN, AND CO.; J. HATCHARD AND SON; J. RIDGWAY; E. JEFFERY AND SON; J. RODWELL; CALKIN AND BUDD; R. H. EVANS; J. BOOTH; AND T. C. HANSARD.
1830.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
NEW SERIES.
ROLL of the LORDS SPIRITUAL and TEMPORAL in the Fourth Session of the Eighth Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland xi
Alphabetical List of MEMBERS of the HOUSE OF COMMONS of the Second Parliament of GEORGE IV.—4th Feb. 1830.—11 GEO. IV xvii
Alphabetical List of COUNTIES, BOROUGHS, &C. and their REPRESENTATIVES.—ENGLAND and WALES xxiii
SCOTLAND xxvii
IRELAND xxviii
Chief Officers of the House xxix
High Officers of State xxx
I. DEBATES IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS.
II. DEBATES IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS.
III. KING'S SPEECHES.
IV. ADDRESSES.
V. PARLIAMENTARY PAPERS.
VI. PETITIONS.
VII. PROTESTS.
VIII. LISTS.
I. DEBATES IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS.
Page
1830. Feb. 4. Address on the King's Speech
4
1830. Feb. 8. Greece
179
1830. Feb. 9. East-India Company and Trade
248
Poor-Rate Returns
264
1830. Feb. 12. Settlement of Greece
39,5
1830. Feb. 15. Treaty with Austria
480
1830. Feb. 18. Currency
581
Candia and Greece
584
Portugal
591
1830. Feb. 22. State of the Nation
795
1830. Feb. 25. Terceira
925
State of the Nation
928
1830. Feb. 26. Returns of Foreign Corn
1002
—British Timber
1002
1830. Feb. 26. State of the Poor
1002
Salaries and Pensions
1004
1830. March 1. National Distress
1059
Conduct of Russia
1060
Affairs of Greece
1062
1830. March 4. East-India Affairs
1245
Distress of the Country
1247
Timber
1253
Foreign Corn
1254
1830. March 5. Ecclesiastical Law
1305
1830. March 8. Bank Notes
1342
II. DEBATES IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS.
1830. Feb. 4. Clergy, Churches, and Chapels
57
Ecclesiastical Courts
58
Address on the King's Speech
59
1830. Feb. 5. East-India Charter and Judicature—Lord Ellenborough's Letter
124
West Indies and the United States
133
Malt Duties
134
Commons' Gallery—Admission of Strangers
134
Unrepresented Towns
136
Private Bills
137
Report on the Address on the Speech
137
1830. Feb. 8. Motion for Returns of the number of Barrels of Beer exported
210
Order in Council for consolidating the Laws relating to Slaves
213
Upon the Malt and Beer duties
213
Mexico, Cuba, and Spain
215
On the King's Speech
224
Compositions for Tythes
244
1830. Feb. 9. Small Debts
267
Court of Chancery
270
Silver Standard
270
Court of Chancery
270
East-India Company's Charter
271
Exports, Real and Official Value
305
Supply
325
1830. Feb. 11. Motion for Returns of Stamps on Irish Newspapers
332
Bill for Relief of Smugglers families
332
Lord Ellenborough's Letter
334
Bill for the Abolition of Fees in Criminal Courts
334
Bill for the Prevention of Bribery and Corruption in the Borough of East Retford
334
Illusory Appointments—Court of Chancery
363
Liability of Real Property
368
Commitments for Contempt of Court of Chancery
369
State of the Currency
381
Supply
389
1830. Feb. 11. Smugglers Families
392
1830. Feb. 12. Illusory Appointments
429
Supply—Reduction of Salaries
436
1830. Feb. 15. Supply—Reduction of Establishments
480
System of Banking
528
1830. Feb. 16. Army Estimates
535
Subletting Act (Ireland)
536
Settlement of Greece
544
Motion for Address on the Slave Trade
568
1830. Feb. 17. Military Officers holding Civil Situations
569
Fees paid by persons acquitted of Criminal Charges
570
Clerks of the Peace
573
Return of Charitable Establishments in Ireland
573
Supply
580
Law Reforms
650
Parliamentary Reforms
678
1830. Feb. 19. Ways and Means
743
Supply—Reductions
743
Committee of Supply
774
1830. Feb. 22. Court of Admiralty (Ireland)
795
Ways and Means—Quarantine in Georgia
799
Committee of Supply—Army Estimates
800
Game Laws
845
1830. Feb. 23. Malt and Spirit Duties
846
West-India Duties
848
Administration of Justice in the Colonies
856
Representation of Manchester, Birmingham, and Leeds
858
1830. Feb. 24. Dramatic Writings
918
Illusory Appointments
918
1830. Feb. 26. Land Revenues
1005
The Distressed Weavers
1005
Leather Duties
1009
Dublin Jurors
1009
Truck System
1010
Supply of Water to the Metropolis
1010
Privilege—Parliamentary Agency
1010
Committee of Supply
1041
1830. March 1. St. Katharine's Docks
1052
Wool Trade
1063
Absentees
1065
West-India Trade
1066
Misrepresentation of Mr. Brougham's Speech
1068
Deputy Speaker of the House of Lords
1075
Borough of Newark—Duke of Newcastle
1077
Committee of Supply
1122
Navy Estimates
1122
Ways and Means
1144
1830. March 2. Wexford Election Petition
1146
1830. Mar. 2. St. Giles's Vestry Bill
1146
Currency
1147
Commissions of Lunacy
1148
Mr. Nash—Crown Lands
1154
Ex Officio Prosecutions
1167
1830. Mar. 3. Duty on Prints and Books
1246
Trials in Cork
1246
Leeds Railway
1256
Committee on Indian Affairs
1256
Ireland—Case of Francis Mc Brian
1258
Duty on Prints and Maps
1263
Law Reform
1264
Reform in Colonial Judicature
1264
Military Punishment
1264
1830. Mar. 4. Church of Ireland
1265
Portugal
1292
Supreme Court of Judicature at Bombay
1292
Beer Trade
1304
1830. Mar. 5. New South Wales—General Darling
1314
Assessed Taxes
1316
Supply
1317
East Retford
319
Subletting Act (Ireland)
1341
1830. Mar. 8. Fees on Private Bills
1343
Affair at Patras
1350
Supply
1352
British Museum
1352
Bombay Judicature
1370
III. KING'S SPEECHES.
1830. Feb. 4. The KING'S SPEECH on opening the Session
1
The King's Answer to the Address on the Lords Commissioners' Speech
124, 180, 212
IV. ADDRESSES.
1830. Feb. 4. Address on the Lords Commissioners' Speech
121
V. PARLIAMENTARY PAPERS.
1830. Feb. 8. Order of the King in Council on the Condition of Slaves in the West Indies
180
VI. PETITIONS.
1830. Feb. 5. PETITION from Limerick, against a renewal of the East-India Company's Charter
124
PETITION from Daniel Meagher and others, against the return of Gerard Callaghan, Esq., to serve in Parliament for the City of Cork
136
1830. Feb. 8. PETITION for the Repeal of the Malt and Beer Duties
209
PETITION from Cumberland, praying the House of Commons to take into consideration the Distress of the Agricultural and Mining Population
209
PETITION from Francis Lyons and others, against the return of Gerard Callaghan, Esq., for Cork
213
PETITION from Charles Roper and others, complaining of the Election for the town of Wexford
213
PETITION from the Corn Market in London, against the Malt and Beer Duties
213
PETITION from Cumberland, complaining of Distress, and praying for Relief
247
1830. Feb. 9. PETITION from certain parishes in Cork, against the Vestry and Subletting Acts
266
1830. Feb. 11. PETITION from the Burgesses of East Retford, praying for two Writs for the Election of two new Members
327
PETITION from certain individuals, praying for Reform in Law
328
1830. Feb. 12. PETITION from Proprietors of Coal Mines
392
PETITION from the Merchants of Plymouth, against the renewal of the East-India Company's Charter
429
PETITION from Manchester, for a modification in the East-India Company's Charter
429
PETITION from Tunstead, in Norfolk, for a revision of the Corn Laws, and against the Malt and Beer Duties
429
PETITION from Lincoln, on the Distress of the Country
429
PETITION from Essex, on the State of the Country
438
1830. Feb. 15. PETITION from Chipping-Norton, complaining of the Agricultural Distress, and praying for Repeal of Malt and Beer Duties
478
PETITION from Dr. Towsey, for the adoption of a remedy to prevent Inoculation
528
1830. Feb. 16. from Hindon, complaining of distress, and praying for Reduction of Taxation
529
PETITION from Clare, for the establishment of Poor-Laws in Ireland
531
PETITION from Leeds, against a renewal of the East-India Company's Charter
532
1830. Feb. 17. PETITION for Relief from the Tobacco and Snuff Duties, from Snuff Manufacturers from London, Westminster, and Southwark
569
PETITION for Relief from the Tobacco and Snuff Duties, from Snuff Manufacturers from Ipswich
569
PETITION for Relief from the Tobacco and Snuff Duties, from Snuff Manufacturers from Norwich
569
1830. Feb. 18. PETITION from Tunbridge, complaining of Distress, and praying for Repeal of Malt and Beer Duties
580
1830. Feb. 18. PETITION from the Ladies of Worcester, against the burning of Hindoo Widows
644
PETITION from Dublin, against the Subletting Act
644
PETITION from Bilston, against the Truck System
645
1830. Feb. 19. PETITION involving a question of the Privileges of the House, from Mr. T. E. Lee, of Birmingham
727
PETITION of the Commutation of Sentences
734
1830. Feb. 22. PETITION from the Jews, for Emancipation
796
1830. Feb. 23. PETITION from Romney-Marsh, praying for Alteration of Duties on Wool
846
PETITION from Suffolk, complaining of Agricultural Distress, and praying for Repeal of Malt Tax
846
PETITION from West-India Planters, praying for reduction of Duties on Sugar and Rum
848
PETITION from Sheffield, for the extension of the Elective Franchise to their Town
858
1830. Feb. 25. PETITION from the Jews, for Emancipation
923
PETITION from Carmarthen, against any alteration in Welsh Judicature
924
1830. Feb. 26. from Mr. J. Wright, of Nottingham, praying for re vision of Corn Laws
1004
PETITION from Manchester and Hull, against the renewal of the East-India Company's Charter
1004
PETITION from the Roman Catholic Bishops, on Education in Ireland
1005
PETITION from Articled Clerks, against the Stamp Duty
1005
PETITION from the Cotton Weavers of Preston, on the Distress of their Trade
1005
PETITION from Lincoln, complaining of Agricultural Distress and Taxation
1008
PETITION from the County of Salop, against the Malt and Beer Duties
1008
1830. March 1. PETITION from Kent, on Agricultural Distress
1059
PETITION from Romney-Marsh, complaining of depression in the Wool Trade
1063
PETITION from Staffordshire, against the Truck System
1064
PETITION from Kent and Sussex, against the Malt Tax
1066
PETITION from the West-India Merchants of Bristol, against the Sugar and Rum Duties
1066
PETITION from the Catholics of the Island of Granada, against Colonial Disabilities
1068
PETITION from the County of Salop, against the Malt Duties
1076
PETITION from Drogheda, complaining of Distress
1076
PETITION from Newark
1077
PETITION from Mr. Burgess, of Lombard-street, on the Distress of the Country
1147
1830. March 3. PETITION from Manchester, for reduction of Taxation
1238
1830. March 4. PETITION from Land-owners of Suffolk, on the Distress of the Country
1247
PETITION from certain Land Proprietors, against the Leeds Railway Bill
1256
1830. Mar. 4. PETITION from Foxford, Mayo County, respecting the Irish Clergy
1259
1830. Mar. 5. PETITION from certain Jews, praying for Relief
1308
PETITION from the County of Suffolk, complaining of Agricultural Distress
1309
PETITION from the Ship-owners of Whitby, complaining of Distress
1310
1830. Mar. 8. PETITION from Eye, complaining of Agricultural Distress
1345
PETITION from Bristol, complaining of Taxation
1349
VII. PROTESTS.
1830. Feb. 4. Against the Address on the King's Speech
55
1830. Feb. 25. Lord Eldon's, on the Debate respecting the State of the Nation
1001
VIII. LISTS.
1830. Feb. 4. LISTS of the Minority in the House of Lords on the Address on the King's Speech
55
LISTS of the Minority in the House of Commons on the Address on the King's Speech
120
1830. Feb. 11. LISTS of the Majority and Minority in the Commons, on Mr. Calvert's Bill for the Prevention of Bribery in East-Retford
360
LISTS also of the Minority on Lord Howick's Motion on the same subject
363
1830. Feb. 18. LISTS of the Majority and Minority in the House of Commons, on the Marquis of Blandford's Motion for Reform
724
1830. Feb. 23. LISTS of Majority and Minority in the House of Commons, on the Representation of Manchester, Birmingham, and Leeds
915
1830. Feb. 25. LISTS of the Minority in the House of Lords, on State of the Nation
1000
1830. Feb. 26. LISTS of the Minority in the House of Commons, on the Debate on the Privilege
1041
1830. March 1. LISTS of the Minority in the House of Commons, on Mr. Thomson's Motion respecting the Borough of Newark
1121
LISTS of the Minority in the House of Commons, on the Navy Estimates
1143
LISTS of the Minority in the House of Commons, on Mr. Tennyson's Motion respecting East-Retford
1331
1830. March 8. LISTS of the Minority in the House of Commons, on the Bombay Judicature Bill
1393
ROLL
IN THE FOURTH SESSION OF THE EIGHTH PARLIAMENT
OF THE
UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND.
His Royal Highness WILLIAM HENRY Duke of CLARENCE and of SAINT ANDREWS.
His Royal Highness ERNEST AUGUSTUS Duke of CUMBERLAND and of TEVIOTDALE.
His Royal Highness AUGUSTUS FRED. Duke of SUSSEX.
His Royal Highness ADOLPHUS FRED. Duke of CAMBRIDGE.
His Royal Highness WILLIAM FRED. Duke of GLOUCESTER and of EDINBURGH.
WILLIAM Archbishop of CANTERBURY.
JOHN SINGLETON Lord LYNDHURST,
Lord Chancellor
EDWARD Archbishop of YORK.
WILLIAM Archbishop of DUBLIN.
HENRY Earl BATHURST,
Lord President of the Council.
JAMES Earl of ROSSLYN,
Lord Privy Seal.
BERNARD EDWARD Duke of NORFOLK,
Earl Marshal of England.
EDWARD ADOLPHUS Duke of SOMERSET.
CHARLES Duke of RICHMOND.
GEORGE HENRY Duke of GRAFTON.
HENRY CHARLES Duke of BEAUFORT.
WILLIAM AUBREY DE VERE Duke of
ST. ALBANS.
GEORGE WILLIAM FREDERICK Duke of LEEDS.
JOHN Duke of BEDFORD.
WILLIAM SPENCER Duke of DEVONSHIRE.
GEORGE Duke of MARLBOROUGH.
JOHN HENRY Duke of RUTLAND.
ALEXANDER Duke of BRANDON. (
Duke of Hamilton and Brandon.
WILLIAM HENRY CAVENDISH Duke of PORTLAND.
WILLIAM Duke of MANCHESTER.
CHARLES Duke of DORSET.
HENRY Duke of NEWCASTLE.
HUGH Duke of NORTHUMBERLAND.
ARTHUR Duke of WELLINGTON.
RICHARD Duke of BUCKINGHAM and CHANDOS,
HENRY Marquess CONYNGHAM,
Lord Steward of the Household.
CHARLES INGOLDESBY Marquess of WINCHESTER.
CHARLES Marquess of QUEENSBERRY. (
Elected for Scotland.
GEORGE Marquess of TWEEDDALE. (
Elected for Scotland.
HENRY Marquess of LANSDOWNE.
GEORGE GRANVILLE Marquess of STAFFORD.
GEORGE Marquess TOWNSHEND.
JAMES BROWNLOW WILLIAM Marquess
of SALISBURY.
THOMAS Marquess of BATH.
JAMES Marquess of ABERCORN.
FRANCIS CHARLES Marquess of HERTFORD.
JOHN Marquess of BUTE.
WILLIAM Marquess of THOMOND. (
Lord Tadcaster.
Elected for Ireland.
BROWNLOW Marquess of EXETER.
SPENCER. JOSHUA ALWINE Marquess of the County of NORTHAMPTON.
JOHN JEFFREYS Marquess CAMDEN.
HENRY WILLIAM Marq. of ANGLESEY.
GEORGE HORATIO Marquess of CHOLMONDELEY.
HENRY Marquess CONYNGHAM. (
In another place as Lord Steward of the Household.
Lord Minster.
Elected for Ireland.
GEORGE AUGUSTUS FRANCIS Marquess of HASTINGS.
CHARLES Marquess of AILESBURY.
FREDERICK WILLIAM Marquess of BRISTOL.
WILLIAM HARRY Marquess of CLEVELAND.
JAMES GRAHAM (
Lord Chamberlain of the Household.
Duke of Montrose.
JOHN Earl of SHREWSBURY.
EDWARD Earl of DERBY.
FRANCIS THEOPHILUS HENRY Earl of HUNTINGDON.
ROBERT HENRY Earl of PEMBROKE and MONTGOMERY.
THOMAS Earl of SUFFOLK and BERKSHIRE.
WILLIAM BASIL PERCY Earl of DENBIGH.
JOHN Earl of WESTMORELAND.
ALBEMARLE Earl of LINDSEY.
GEORGE HARRY Earl of STAMFORD and WARRINGTON.
GEORGE WILLIAM Earl of WINCHILSEA and NOTTINGHAM.
GEORGE Earl of CHESTERFIELD.
CHARLES Earl of THANET.
JOHN WILLIAM Earl of SANDWICH.
GEORGE Earl of ESSEX.
ROBERT Earl of CARDIGAN.
GEORGE Earl of CARLISLE.
WALTER FRANCIS Earl of DONCASTER. (
Duke of Buccleuch.)
CROPLEY ASHLEY Earl of SHAFTESBURY.
—Earl of BERKELEY.
MONTAGUE Earl of ABINGDON.
OTHER ARCHER Earl of PLYMOUTH.
RICHARD Earl of SCARBROUGH.
WILLIAM HENRY Earl of ROCHFORD.
WILLIAM CHARLES Earl of ALBEMARLE.
GEORGE WILLIAM Earl of COVENTRY.
GEORGE Earl of JERSEY.
JOHN Earl POULETT.
WILLIAM GEORGE Earl of ERROLL. (
Elected for Scotland.
GEORGE SHOLTO Earl of MORTON. (
Elected for Scotland.
ALEXANDER Earl of HOME. (
Elected for Scotland.
THOMAS Earl of ELGIN and KINCARDINE. (
Elected for Scotland.
ARCHIBALD JOHN Earl of ROSEBFRY.
(
Lord Rosebery.
Elected for Scotland.
EDWARD Earl of OXFORD and Earl MORTIMER.
WASHINGTON Earl FERRERS.
WILLIAM Earl of DARTMOUTH.
CHARLES AUGUSTUS Earl of TASKERVILLE.
HENEAGE Earl of AYLESFORD.
PETER LEOPOLD LOUIS FRANCIS Earl
COWPER.
PHILLIP HENRY Earl STANHOPE.
ROBERT Earl of HARBOROUGH.
GEORGE Earl of MACCLESFIELD.
GEORGE Earl of POMFRET.
JAMES Earl GRAHAM. (
In another place as Lord Chamberlain of the Household.
Duke of Montrose.
JOHN JAMES Earl WALDEGRAVE.
GEORGE Earl of ASHBURNHAM.
CHARLES Earl of HARRINGTON.
JOHN CHARLES Earl of PORTSMOUTH.
HENRY RICHARD Earl BROOKE and Earl of WARWICK.
GEORGE ROBERT Earl of BUCKINGHAMSHIRE.
WILLIAM Earl FITZWILLIAM.
GEORGE Earl of EGREMONT.
WILLIAM Earl HARCOURT.
FRANCIS Earl of GUILFORD.
JAMES Earl CORNWALLIS.
PHILIP Earl of HARDWICKE.
HENRY STEPHEN Earl of ILCHESTER.
GEORGE JOHN Earl DE LA WARR.
WILLIAM Earl of RADNOR.
GEORGE JOHN Earl SPENCER.
JOHN Earl of CHATHAM.
HENRY Earl BATHURST. (
In another place as Lord President of the Council.
ARTHUR Earl of HILLSBOROUGH. (
Marquess of Downshire.
JOHN CHARLES Earl of CLARENDON.
HENRY Earl of ABERGAVENNY.
GEORGE Earl of NORWICH. (
Duke of Gordon.
CHARLES CHETWYSD Earl TALBOT.
ROBERT Earl GROSVENOR.
JOHN Earl STRANGE. (
Duke of Athol.
RICHARD Earl of MOUNT E DGCUMBE.
HUGH Earl FORTESCUE.
EDWARD Earl of DIGBY.
ALGERNON Earl of BEVERLEY.
WILLIAM Earl of MANSFIELD.
HENRY GEORGE Earl of CARNARVON.
CHARLES CECIL COPE Earl of LIVERPOOL.
CHARLES HENRY Earl CADOGAN.
JAMES EDWARD Earl of MALMESBURY.
SOMERSET RICHARD Earl of CARRICK. (
Elected for Ireland.
FRANCIS WILLIAM Earl of CHARLEMONT. (
Elected for Ireland.
GEORGE Earl of KINGSTON. (
Lord Kingston.
Elected for Ireland.
STEPHEN Earl of MOUNT CASHELL. (
Elected for Ireland.
THOMAS Earl of LONGFORD. (
Lord Silchester.
Elected for Ireland.
JOHN Earl of MAYO. (
Elected for Ireland.
JOHN WILLOUGHBY Earl of ENNISKILLEN. (
Lord Grinstead.
Elected for Ireland.
WILLIAM Earl of WICKLOW. (
Elected for Ireland.
RICHARD Earl of LUCAN. (
Elected for Ireland.
SOMERSET LOWRY Earl of BELMORE. (
Elected for Ireland.
CHARLES HENRY Earl O'NEILL. (
Elected for Ireland.
FRANCIS Earl of BANDON. (
Elected for Ireland.
DUPRÉ Earl of CALEDON. (
Elected for Ireland.
JAMES Earl of ROSSLYN. (
In another place as Lord Privy Seal.
WILLIAM Earl of CRAVEN.
ARTHUR GEORGE Earl of ONSLOW.
CHARLES Earl of ROMNEY.
HENRY THOMAS Earl of CHICHESTER.
THOMAS Earl of WILTON.
EDMUND HENRY Earl of LIMERICK.(
Lord Foxford.
Elected for Ireland.
RICHARD Earl of CLANCARTY. (
Visc. Clancarty.
Elected for Ireland.
EDWARD Earl of POWIS.
WILLIAM Earl NELSON.
ARCHIBALD Earl of GOSFORD. (
Elected for Ireland.
LAWRENCE Earl of ROSSE. (
Elected for Ireland.
CHARLES WILLIAM Earl of CHARLEVILLE. (
Elected for Ireland.
CHARLES HERBERT Earl MANVERS.
HORATIO Earl of ORFORD.
CHARLES Earl GREY.
WILLIAM Earl of LONSDALE.
DUDLEY Earl of HARROWBY.
HENRY Earl of MULGRAVE.
HENRY Earl of HAREWOOD.
GILBERT Earl of MINTO.
WILLIAM Earl CATHCART.
JAMES WALTER Earl of VERULAM.
JOHN Earl BROWN LOW.
WILLIAM Earl of SAINT GERMANS.
JOHN Earl of MORLEY.
GEORGE AUGUSTUS FREDERICK HENRY
Earl of BRADFORD.
JOHN REGINALD Earl BEAUCHAMP
RICHARD Earl of GLENGALL. (
Elected for Ireland.
JOHN Earl of ELDON.
EDWARD Earl of FALMOUTH.
RICHARD WILLIAM PENN Earl HOWE.
JOHN Earl SOMERS.
EDWARD CORNWALLIS Earl of STRAD-BROKE.
CHARLES WILLIAM Earl VANE. (
Marquess of Londonderry.
WILLIAM PITT Earl AMHERST.
JOHN WILLIAM Earl of DUDLEY. (
One of the Principal Secretaries of State.
JOHN FREDERICK Earl CAWDOR.
HENRY Viscount HEREFORD.
JOHN Viscount ARBUTHNOTT. (
Elected for Scotland.
JAMES ANDREW JOHN LAURENCE CHAS.
Viscount STRATHALLAN. (
Elected for Scotland.
HENRY Viscount BOLINGBROKE.
GEORGE Viscount TORRINGTON.
AUGUSTUS FRED. Viscount LEINSTER (
Duke of Leinster.
WILLIAM Viscount COURTENAY.
HENRY Viscount MAYNARD.
JOHN THOMAS Viscount SYDNEY.
HENRY Viscount HOOD.
ROBERT Viscount DUNCAN.
EDWARD JERVIS Viscount ST. VINCENT.
ROBERT Viscount MELVILLE.
HENRY Viscount SIDMOUTH.
THOMAS WILLIAM Viscount ANSON.
ROBERT EDWARD Viscount LORTON. (
Elected for Ireland.
FRANCIS GERARD Viscount LAKE.
GEORGE Viscount GORDON. (
Earl of Aberdeen.
GRANVILLE Viscount GRANVILLE.
EDWARD Viscount EXMOUTH.
CHARLES Viscount GORT. (
Elected for Ireland.
JOHN HELY Viscount HUTCHINSON. (
Earl of Donoughmore.
WILLIAM CARR Viscount BERESFORD.
RICHARD Viscount CLANCARTY. (
In another place as Earl of Clancarty.
STAPLETON Viscount COMBERMERE.
FREDERICK JOHN Viscount GODERICH.
CHARLES JAMES Bishop of LONDON.
WILLIAM Bishop of DURHAM.
CHAS. RICHARD Bishop of WINCHESTER.
FOLLIOTT HERBERT Bp. of WORCESTER.
HENRY WILLIAM Bishop of BANGOR.
GEORGE ISAAC Bishop of HEREFORD.
THOMAS Bishop of SALISBURY.
HENRY Bishop of NORWICH.
JOHN Bishop of ST. ASAPH.
BOWYER EDWARD Bishop of ELY.
GEO. HENRY Bp. of BATH and WELLS.
HENRY Bp. of LICHFIELD and COVENTRY.
HERBERT Bishop of PETERBOROUGH.
JOHN Bishop of LINCOLN.
WILLIAM Bishop of EXETER.
CHRISTOPHER Bishop of GLOUCESTER.
ROBERT JAMES Bishop of CHICHESTER.
JOHN BANKS Bishop of ST. DAVID'S.
ROBERT Bishop of BRISTOL.
HUGH Bishop of CARLISLE.
GEORGE Bishop of ROCHESTER.
JOHN BIRD Bishop of CHESTER.
RICHARD Bishop of OXFORD.
EDWARD Bishop of LLANDAFF.
WILLIAM Bishop of RAPHOE.
JOHN Bishop of LIMERICK, ARDFORT and AGHADOE.
JAMES Bishop of DROMORE.
THOMAS Lord LE DESPENCER.
EDWARD Lord DE CLIFFORD.
GEORGE JOHN Lord AUDLEY.
PETER ROBERT Lord WILLOUGHBY D'ERESBY.
THOMAS Lord DACRE.
ROB. COTTON ST, JOHN Lord CLINTON.
WILLIAM Lord STOURTON.
HENRY Lord WILLOUGHBY DE BROKE.
KENNETH ALEXANDER Lord HOWARD of EFFINGHAM.
ST. ANDREW BEAUCHAMP Lord ST. JOHN of BLETSO.
CHAS. AUG. Lord HOWARD de WALDEN.
WILLIAM FRANCIS HENRY Lord PETRE.
GREGORY WILL. Lord SAYE and SELE.
JAMES EVERARD Lord ARUNDELL of WARDOUR.
JOHN Lord CLIFTON. (
Earl of Darnley.
JOSEPH THADDEUS Lord DORMER.
HENRY FRANCIS Lord TEYNHAM.
GEORGE WILLIAM Lord STAFFORD.
GEORGE ANSON Lord BYRON.
CHAS. Lord CLIFFORD of CHUDLEIGH.
GEORGE GRANVILLE Lord GOWER.
JAS. OCHONCAR Lord FORBES. (
Elected for Scotland.
ALEXANDER GEORGE Lord SALTOUN. (
Elected for Scotland.
FRANCIS Lord GRAY. (
Elected for Scotland.
CHARLES Lord SINCLAIR. (
Elected for Scotland.
JOHN Lord COLVILLE of CULROSS. (
Elected for Scotland.
WILLIAM JOHN Lord NAPIER. (
Elected for Scotland.
ROBERT MONTGOMERY Lord BELHAVEN and STENTON. (
Elected for Scotland.
EDMUND Lord BOYLE. (
Earl of Cork and Orrery.
THOMAS ROBERT Lord HAY. (
Earl of Kinnoul.
HENRY Lord MIDDLETON.
PETER Lord KING.
FREDERICK JOHN Lord MONSON.
HENRY Lord MONTFORT.
FREDERICK Lord PONSONBY. (
Earl of Besborough.
LEWIS RICHARD Lord SONDES.
THOMAS PHILIP Lord GRANTHAM.
NATHANIEL Lord SCARSDALE.
GEORGE Lord BOSTON.
HENRY RICHARD Lord HOLLAND.
JOHN Lord LOVELL and HOLLAND. (
Earl of Egmont.
GEORGE CHARLES Lord VERNON.
THOMAS Lord DUCIE.
GEORGE WILLIAM Lord SUNDRIDGE and HAMILTON. (
Duke of Argyll.
EDWARD WILLIAM Lord HAWKE.
GEORGE Lord RIVERS.
THOMAS Lord FOLEY.
GEORGE TALBOT Lord DYNEVOR.
GEORGE Lord WALSINGHAM.
WILLIAM Lord BAGOT.
CHARLES Lord SOUTHAMPTON.
FLETCHER Lord GRANTLEY.
GEORGE Lord RODNEY.
GEORGE Lord CARTERET.
THOMAS NOEL Lord BERWICK.
JOHN Lord SHERBORNE.
HEN. JAMES MONTAGU Lord MONTAGU.
HENRY Lord TYRONE. (
Marquess of Waterford.
HENRY Lord CARLETON. (
Earl of Shannon.
EDWARD Lord SUFFIELD.
GUY Lord DORCHESTER.
GEORGE Lord KENYON.
RICHARD Lord BRAYBROOKE.
GEORGE AUGUSTUS Lord FISHERWICK. (
Marquess of Donegal.
ARCHIBALD Lord DOUGLAS of DOUGLAS.
HENRY HALL Lord GAGE.
WILLIAM WYNDHAM Lord GRENVILLE
EDWARD THOMAS Lord THURLOW.
GEORGE Lord AUCKLAND.
WILLIAM HENRY Lord LYTTELTON.
HENRY Lord MENDIP. (
Viscount Clifden.
HENRY JOHN Lord SELSEY.
LAWRENCE Lord DUNDAS.
CHAS. ANDERSON Lord YARBOROUGH.
FRANCIS Lord STUART of CASTLE STUART. (
Earl of Moray.
GEORGE Lord STEWART of GARLIES. (
Earl of Galloway.
JAMES GEORGE Lord SALTERSFORD. (
Earl of Courtown.
JOHN CHRISTOPHER Lord DAWNAY. (
Viscount Downe.
GEORGE Lord BRODRICK. (
Viscount Middleton.
GEORGE GOUGH Lord CALTHORPE.
FRANCIS Lord DE DUNSTANVILLE and BASSETT.
JOHN Lord ROLLE.
RICHARD Lord WELLESLEY. (
Marquess Wellesley.
ROBERT Lord CARRINGTON.
HENRY WILLIAM Lord BAYNING.
WILLIAM POWLETT Lord BOLTON.
JOHN Lord WODEHOUSE.
JOHN Lord NORTHWICK.
THOMAS ATHERTON Lord LILFORD.
THOMAS Lord RIBBLESDALE.
JOHN Ld. FITZGIBBON. (
Earl of Clare.
JOHN Lord CARBERY. (
Elected for Ireland.
JOHN Ld. FARNHAM. (
Elect, for Ireland.
JAMES Lord DUFFERIN and CLANEBOYE. (
Elected for Ireland.
HENRY Lord DUNALLEY. (
Elected for Ireland.
CHARLES Lord MOORE. (
Marquess of Drogheda.
JOHN Lord LOFTUS. (
Marquess of Ely.
JOHN Lord CARYSFORT. (
Earl of Carysfort.
WILLIAM Lord ALVANLEY.
GEORGE Lord ABERCROMBY.
ALLEYNE Lord ST. HELEN'S.
JOHN THOMAS Lord REDESDALE.
EDWARD Lord ELLENBOROUGH.
CHARLES GEORGE Lord ARDEN.
GEORGE AUGUSTUS FREDERICK CHAS. Lord SHEFFIELD. (
Earl of Sheffield.
CHARLES NOEL Lord BARHAM.
DAVID MONTAGU Lord ERSKINE.
HOWE PETER Lord MOUNT EAGLE. (
Marquess of Sligo.
ARCHIBALD Lord ARDROSSAN. (
Earl of Eglintoun.
JAMES Lord LAUDERDALE. (
Earl of Lauderdale.
GEORGE Lord GRANARD. (
Earl of Granard.
JOHN Lord CREWE.
JOHN Lord PONSONBY of IMOKILLY.
ARCHIBALD Lord AILSA. (
Earl of Cassillis.
JOHN Lord BREADALBANE. (
Earl of Breadalbane.
ALAN LEGGE Lord GARDNER.
THOMAS Lord MANNERS.
JAMES Lord GAMBIER.
JOHN Lord HOPETOUN and NIDDRY. (
Earl of Hopetoun.
THOMAS Lord LYNEDOCH.
ROWLAND Lord HILL.
GEORGE Lord DALHOUSIE. (
Earl of Dalhousie.
GEORGE Lord MELDRUM. (
Earl of Aboyne.
GEORGE Lord Ross. (
Earl of Glasgow.
JOHN WILLOUGHBY Lord GRINSTEAD. (
In another place as Earl of Enniskillen.
EDMUND HENRY Lord FOXFORD. (
In another place as Earl of Limerick.
WILLIAM Lord MELBOURNE.
FRANCIS ALMERICK Lord CHURCHILL.
WILLIAM GEORGE Lord HARRIS.
ALGERNON Lord PRUDHOE.
CHARLES Lord COLCHESTER.
JOHN WILLIAM ROBERT Lord KER. (
Marquess of Lothian
HENRY Lord MINSTER. (
In another place as Marquess Conyngham.
JAMES Lord ORMONDE. (
Marquess of Ormonde.
FRANCIS CHARTERIS Lord WEMYSS. (
Earl of Wemyss and March.
ROBERT Lord CLANBUASSIL. (
Earl of Roden.
GEORGE Lord KINGSTON. (
In another place as Earl of Kingston.
THOMAS Lord SILCHESTER. (
In another place as Earl of Longford.
JAMES Lord GLENLYON.
WILLIAM Lord MARYBOROUGH.
THOMAS HENRY Lord ORIEL.
WILLIAM Lord STOWELL.
THOMAS HENRY Lord RAVENSWORTH.
THOMAS Lord DELAMERE.
JOHN GEORGE Lord FORESTER.
NICHOLAS Lord BEXLEY.
ROBERT FRANCIS Lord GIFFORD.
PERCY-CLINTON-SYDNEY Lord PENSHURST. (
Viscount Strangford.
WILLIAM Lord TADCASTER. (
In another place as Marquess of Thomond.
ULIC JOHN Lord SOMERHILL. (
Marquess of Clanricarde.
JAMES Lord WIGAN. (
Earl of Balcarres.
THOMAS Lord RANFURLY. (
Viscount Northland.
CHARLES Lord FARNBOROUGH.
GEORGE Lord DE TABLEY.
JAMES ARCHIBALD Lord WHARNCLIFFE.
CHARLES Lord FEVERSHAM.
CHARLES ROSE Lord SEAFORD.
JOHN SINGLETON Lord LYNDHURST. (
In another place as Lord Chancellor.
JAMES Lord FIFE.
CHARLES Lord TENTERDEN.
WILLIAM CONYNGHAM Lord PLUNKET.
THOMAS Lord MELROS. (
Earl of Haddington.
HENRY Lord COWLEY.
CHARLES Lord STUART DE ROTHESAY.
WILLIAM Lord HEYTESBURY.
ARCHIBALD JOHN Lord ROSEBERT. (
In another place as Earl of Rosebery
RICHARD Lord CLANWILLIAM. (
Earl of Clanwilliam.
JOHN GEORGE Lord DURHAM.
EDWARD Lord SKELMERSDALE.
THOMAS Lord WALLACE.
WILLIAM DRAPER Lord WYNFORD.
MEM.—
According to the Usage of Parliament, when the House appoints a Select Committee, the Lords appointed to serve upon it are named in the Order of their Rank, beginning with the Highest; and so, when the House sends a Committee to a Conference with the Commons, the Lord highest in Rank is called first, and the rest go forth in like Order: But when the Whole House is called over for any Purpose within the House, or for the Purpose of proceeding forth to Westminster Hall, or upon any public Solemnity, the Call begins invariably with the Junior Baron.
HOUSE OF COMMONS,
BEING THE
FOURTH SESSION OF THE EIGHTH PARLIAMENT OF THE UNITED KINGDOM OF
GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND,
AND THE SECOND PARLIAMENT OF GEORGE IV.
APPOINTED TO MEET AT WESTMINSTER THE 4TH OF FEB. 1830,
IN THE ELEVENTH YEAR OF
GEORGE THE FOURTH.
(
Corrected to the First Day of Meeting.
ABERCROMBY, rt. hon. J.
Calne
ACLAND, sir Thos. D., bt.
Devonshire
A'COURT, Edw. Henry
Heytesbury
ALCOCK, Thos.
Newton, Lancashire
ALEXANDER, Henry
Barnstaple
ALEXANDER, James
Old Sarum
ALTHORP, viscount
Northamptonshire
ANSON, sir George
Lichfield
ANSON, hon. George
Yarmouth
ANTROBUS, Gibbs Crawf.
Plympton
APSLEY, lord
Cirencester
ARBUTHNOT, rt. hon. Chas.
St. Ives
ARBUTHNOT, hon. H.
Kincardineshire
ARCEDECKNE, Andrew
Dunwich
ARCHDALL, Mervyn
Fermanaghshire
ARKWRIGHT, Richard
Rye
ASHBURNHAM, hon. P.
Beeralston
ASHLEY, lord
Woodstock
ASHLEY-COOPER, hon. A. W.
Dorchester
ASHURST, William H.
Oxfordshire
ASTELL, William
Bridgewater
ASTLEY, sir John D., bt.
Wiltshire
ATKINS, John
Arundel
ATTWOOD, Matt
Callington
BAILLIE, John
Hedon
BAKER, Edward
Wilton
BALFOUR, James
Crail, &c.
BANKES, George
Corfe-Castle
BANKES, Henry
Dorsetshire
BANKES, William John
Marlborough
BARCLAY, Charles
Dundalk
BARCLAY, David
Penryn
BARING, sir Thos., bt.
Wycombe
BARING, Alexander
Callington
BARING, Francis
Portsmouth
BARING, William B.
Thetford
BARNE, Michael
Dunwich
BASTARD, Edm. Pollexfen
Devonshire
BASTARD, John
Dartmouth
BATLEY, Charles H.
Beverley
BEAUMONT, Thomas W.
Stafford
BECKETT, rt. hon. sir J. bt.
Haslemere
BECTIVE, earl of
Meathshire
BELFAST, earl of
Belfast
BELGRAVE, visc.
Chester
BELL, Matthew
Northumberland
BENETT, John
Wiltshire.
BENSON, Ralph
Stafford
BENTINCK, lord George
King's Lynn
BERESFORD, sir J. P. bt.
Northallerton
BERESFORD, Marcus
Berwick
BERNAL, Ralph
Rochester
BERNARD, Thomas
King's County
BINGHAM, lord
Mayo
BIRCH, Joseph
Nottingham
BLACKBURNE, John
Lancashire
BLAIR, James
Minehead
BLAKE, sir Francis, bt.
Berwick
BLANDFORD, marquis
Woodstock
BONHAM, Henry
Rye
BORRADAILE, R.
Newcastle-under-Line
BOURNE, rt. hon. W. Sturg.
Ashburton
BOUVERIE, hon. Barth.
Downton
BOUVERIE, hon. Dunc. P.
New Sarum
BOYD, Walter
Lymington
BOYLE, hon. John
Corkshire
BRADSHAW, Rob. Haldane
Brackley
BRADSHAW, James
Brackley
BRECKNOCK, earl of
Bath
BRIGHT, Henry
Bristol
BROGDEN, James
Launceston
BROUGHAM, Henry
Winchelsea
BROUGHAM, James
Tregony
BROWNE, James
Mayo
BROWNLOW, Charles
Armaghshire
BRUEN, Henry
Carlowshire
BRYDGES, sir John
Coleraine
BUCK, Lewis W.
Exeter
BULLER, Charles
West Looe
BURDETT, sir F., bt.
Westminster
BURRARD, George
Lymington
BURRELL, sir C. M., bt.
New Shoreham
BURRELL, Walter
Sussex
BUXTON, John Jacob
Bedwyn
BUXTON, Thos. Fowell
Weymouth
BYNG, George
Middlesex.
BYRON, Thomas
Hertford
CALCRAFT, rt. hon. John
Wareham
CALLAGHAN, Gerard
Cork
CALTHORPE, hon. Fred. G.
Bramber
CALTHORPE, hon. Arthur
Hindon
CALVERT, Charles
Southwark
CALVERT, John
Huntingdon
CALVERT, Nicolson
Hertfordshire
CAMPBELL, John
Dumbartonshire
CAMPBELL, Walter F.
Argyleshire
CAMPBELL, Archibald
Glasgow, &c.
CANNING, rt. hon. Str.
Old Sarum
CAPEL, John
Queenborough
CAREW, Rob. Shapl.
Wexfordshire
CARMARTHEN, marquis
Helleston
CARRINGTON, sir E. C.
St. Mawes
CARTER, John
Portsmouth
CARTWRIGHT, Wm, R.
Northamptonsh.
CASTLEREAGH, viscount
Downshire
CAULFIELD, hon. Henry
Armaghshire
CAVE, Robert O.
Leicester
CAVENDISH, Id. G. A. H.
Derbyshire
CAVENDISH, Henry F. C.
Derby
CAVENDISH, Chas. C.
Newton, Hants
CAVENDISH, William
Cambridge Univers.
CAWTIIORNE, John F.
Lancaster
CECIL, lord Thomas
Stamford
CHAMBERLAYNE, Wm.
Southampton
CHANDOS, marquis
Bucks
CHAPLIN, Charles
Lincolnshire
CHAPLIN, Thomas
Stamford
CHICHESTER, sir A., bt.
Carrickfergus
CHICHESTER, Arthur
Milborne-Port
CHOLMELEY, M. J.
Grantham
CHOLMONDELEY, Id. H.
Castle Rising
CLEMENTS, viscount
Leitrimshire
CLARKE, hon. Chas. H. B.
Kilkennysh.
CLERK, sir Geo., bt.
Edinburghshire
CLIFTON, lord
Canterbury
CLINTON, C. J. F.
Aldborough
CLIVE, viscount
Ludlow
CLIVE, hon. Robert H.
Ludlow
CLIVE, Edw. B.
Hereford
CLIVE, Henry
Montgomery
COCKBURN, Rt. hon. sir G.
Plymouth
COCKERELL, sir Chas., bt.
Evesham
COCKS, James
Ryegate
COKE, Thomas Wm.
Norfolk
COLBORNE, Nich. W. R.
Horsham.
COLE, sir Christ.
Glamorganshire
COLE, hon. Arthur H.
Enniskillen
COLLETT, Ebenezer John
Cashell
COOKE, sir Henry F.
Orford
COOPER, Rob. Bransby
Gloucester
COOPER, Edward Synge
Sligoshire
COOTE, sir Chas. H., bt.
Queen's County
CORBETT, Panton
Shrewsbury
CORRY, viscount
Fermanaghshire
COURT, hon. Hen. T. L.
Tyroneshire
COTTERELL, sir J. G., bt.
Herefordshire
COURTENAY, rt. hon. T. P.
Totness
CRADOCK, Sheldon
Camelford
CRIPPS, Joseph
Cirencester
CROKER, rt. hon. J. W.
Dublin Univers.
CROMPTON, Samuel
Derby
CURTEIS, Edward Jer
Sussex
CURZON, hon. Robert
Clitherow
CUST, hon. Edward
Lestwithiel
CUST, hon. Peregrine F.
Clitherow
DALRYMPLE, Adol. J.
Haddington, &c.
DALY, James
Galwayshire
DARLINGTON, earl
Totness
DAVENPORT, Davies
Cheshire
DAVENPORT, Edw. D.
Shaftesbury
DAVIDSON, Duncan
Cromartyshire
DAVIES, Thos. Henry
Worcester
DAVIS, Richard Hart
Bristol
DAWKINS, Henry
Boroughbridge
DAWSON, Alexander
Louth
DAWSON, Geo. R.
Londonderry County
DAWSON, James H. M.
Clonmell
DENISON, Wm. Joseph
Surrey
DENISON, John E.
Hastings
DICK, Quintin
Orford
DICK, Hugh
Maldon
DICKINSON, William
Somersetshire
DOHERTY, John
Kilkenny
DOMVILLE, sir C., bt.
Okehampton
DOTTIN, Abel R.
Southampton
DOUGLAS, Wm. R. K.
Dumfries, &c.
DOURO, marquis
Aldeburgh
DOWDESWELL, John Edm.
Tewkesbury
DOWNES, lord
Queenborough
DOWNIE, Robert
Inverkeithing, &c.
DRAKE, Thomas T.
Agmondesham
DRAKE, William T.
Agmondesham
DRUMMOND, Henry H.
Stirlingshire
DUCANE, Peter
Steyning
DUFF, hon. Alexander
Elgin, &c.
DUGDALE, Dugd. Stratf.
Warwickshire
DUCANNON, viscount
Kilkennyshire
DUNCOMBE, Thomas S.
Hertford
DUNCOMBE, hon. Wm.
Yorkshire
DUNDAS, rt. hon. Wm.
Edinburgh
DINDAS, hon. sir R. L.
Richmond
DUNDAS, hon. G. H. L.
Orkney
DUNDAS, hon. Henry
Rochester
DUNDAS, hon. Thomas
Richmond
DUNDAS, Robert Adam
Ipswich
DUNDAS, Charles
Berkshire
EAST, sir Edward H. bt.
Winchester
EASTHOPE, John
St. Alban's
EASTNOR, viscount
Hereford
EBRINGTON, viscount
Tavistock
EDEN, hon. Robert H.
Fowey
EGERTON, Wilbraham
Cheshire
ELIOT, lord
Liskeard
ELLIS, hon. G. J. W. A.
Ludgershall
ELLIS, hon. Augustus F.
Seaford
ELLISON, Cuthb.
Newcastle-upon-Tyne
ENCOMBE, viscount
Truro
ENNISMORE, viscount
Kerryshire
ESTCOURT, Thos. G. B.
Oxford Univ.
ESTCOURT, T. H. S. B.
Marlborough
EUSTON, earl
Bury St. Edmunds
EWART, William
Blechingley
FANE, sir Henry
Sandwich
FANE, hon. Henry S.
Lyme Regis
FANE, John
Oxfordshire
FANE, John Thomas
Lyme Regis
FARQUHAR, sir Rob. T. bt.
Hythe
FARQUHAR, James
Portarlington
FAZAKERLEY, John N.
Lincoln
FELLOWES, Wm. Hen.
Huntingdonshire
FERGUSON, sir Ronald C.
Dysart, &c.
FERGUSSON, Rob. C.
Kirkcudbright
FETHERSTON, sir G. R. bt.
Longfordshire
FITZGERALD, Id. Wm. C.
Kildareshire
FITZGERALD, rt. hon. Mau.
Kerryshire
FITZGERALD, rt. hon. W. V.
Newport.
FITZGERALD, John
Seaford
FITZ-GIBBON, hon. Rd.
Limerickshire
FITZROY, lord Charles
Thetford
FLEMING, John
Hampshire
FOLEY, Edward T.
Ludgershall
FOLEY, John H. H.
Droitwich
FORBES, viscount
Longfordshire
FORBES, sir Chas., bt.
Malmesbury
FORBES, John
Malmesbury
FORESTER, hon. G. C. W.
Wenlock
FORTESCUE, hon. Geo. M.
Hindon
FOSTER, John Leslie
Louth
FRANKLAND, Robert
Thirsk
FREMANTLE, sir Thos., bt.
Buckingham
FRENCH, Arthur
Roscommonskire
FYLER, Thomas B.
Coventry
GARLIES, viscount
Cockermouth
GASCOYNE, Isaac
Liverpool
GILBERT, Davies
Bodmyn
GOOCH, sir Thomas S. bt.
Suffolk
GORDON, sir James W.
Launceston
GORDON, hon. Will.
Aberdeenshire
GORDON, John
Weymouth
GORDON, Robert
Cricklade
GOULBURN, rt. hon. Henry
Armagh
GOWER, lord F. L.
Sutherlandshire
GRAHAM, marquis of
Cambridge
GRAHAM, sir J. R. G.
Cumberland
GRANT, sir Alex. Cray, bt.
Aldborough
GRANT, rt. hon. C.
Inverness-shire
GRANT, hon. Francis W.
Elginshire
GRANT, Robert
Fortrose, &c.
GRATTAN, Henry
Dublin
GRATTAN, James
Wicklowshire
GREENE, Thomas
Lancaster
GREVILLE, hon. sir C. J.
Warwick
GROSVENOR, hon. Robt.
Chester
GROSVENOR, Thomas
Stockbridge
GUEST, Josiah John
Honiton
GUISE, sir B. W. bt.
Gloucestershire
GURNEY, Hudson
Newton, Hants
GYE, Frederick
Chippenham
HALSE, James
St. Ives
HANDCOCK, Richard
Athlone
HARDINGE, rt. hon. sir H.
Durham City
HART, George Vaughan
Donegalshire
HARVEY, sir Eliab
Essex
HARVEY, Daniel W.
Colchester
HASTINGS, sir C. A. bt.
Leicester
HAY, lord John
Haddingtonshire
HAY, Adam
Selkirk, &c.
HEATHCOTE, sir Gilbert, bt.
Rutland
HEATHCOTE, sir W. bt.
Hampshire
HEATHCOTE, Gilbert John
Boston
HEATHCOTE, Richard E.
Coventry
HENEAGE, George F.
Grimsby
HERON, sir Robert, bt.
Peterborough
HERRIES, rt. hon. John C.
Harwich
HILL, lord Arthur
Downshire
HILL, Rt. hon. sir G. F. bt.
Londonderry
HILL, sir Rowland, bt.
Shropshire
HOBHOUSE, John Cam.
Westminster
HODGSON, Frederic
Barnstaple
HODSON, James Alex.
Wigan
HOLDSWORTH, Arthur H.
Dartmouth
HOLMESDALE, visc.
East Grinstead
HOLMES, William
Bishop's Castle
HONEYWOOD, William P.
Kent
HOPE, hon. sir Alex.
Linlithgowshire
HOPE, sir W. Johnstone
Dumfries-shire
HOPE, Henry T.
East Looe
HORTON, rt. hn. R. J. W.
Newcast. Staff.
HOTHAM, lord
Leominster
HOULDSWORTH, Thomas
Pontefract
HOWARD, hon. Fulk G.
Castle Rising
HOWARD, Henry
New Shoreham.
HOWARD, Ralph
Wicklowshire
HOWICK, viscount
Winchelsea.
HUGHES, William Lewis
Wallingford
HULSE, sir Charles, bt.
West Looe
HUME, Joseph
Aberdeen, &c.
HUSKISSON, rt. hon. Wm.
Liverpool
HCTCHINSON, John H.
Cork
HUTCHINSON, John H.
Tipperary
INGILBY, sir W. A., bt.
Lincolnshire
INGLIS, sir R. H. bt.
Oxford Univers.
INNES, sir Hugh, bt.
Kirkwall, &c.
IRVING, John
Bramber
JEPHSON, C. D. O.
Mallow
JERMYN, earl
Bury St. Edmund's
JOLLIFFE, Hylton
Petersfield
JONES, John
Carmarthen
KAVANAGH, Thomas
Carlowshire
KECK, George A. L.
Leicestershire
KEKEWICH, Samuel T.
Exeter
KEMP, Thos. Read
Lewes
KENNEDY, Thomas Francis
Ayr, &c.
KERRISON, sir Edward, bt.
Eye
KILDERBEE, Spenser H.
Aldeburgh
KING, sir John D., bt.
Wycombe
KING, hon. Robert
Corkshire
KING, hon. Robert
Roscommonshire
KING, hon. Henry
Sligo
KNATCHBULL, sir Edw., bt.
Kent
KNIGHT, Robert
Walling ford
KNOX, hon. John Henry
Newry
KNOX, hon. Thomas
Dungannon
LABOUCHERE, Henry
St. Michael's
LAMB, hon. George
Dungarvon
LAMBERT, James S.
Galwayshire
LANGSTON, James H.
Oxford
LASCELLES, hon. W. S.
East Looe
LASCELLES, hon. Henry
Northallerton
LATOUCHE, Robert
Kildareshire
LAWLEY, Francis
Warwickshire
LEAKE, William
St. Michael's
LEGGE, hon. Arthur C.
Banbury
LEGH, Thomas
Newton, Lancashire
LENNARD, Thomas B
Maldon
LENNOX, lord John Geo.
Chichester
LESTER, Benjamin Lester
Poole
LETHBRIDGE, sir T. B., bt.
Somersetshire
LEWIS, rt. hon. T. F.
Radnorshire
LEYCESTER, Ralph
Shaftesbury
LIDDELL, hon. H. T.
Northumberland
LINDSAY, hon. Hugh
Forfar, &c.
LINDSAY, James
Wigan
LITTLETON, Edward John
Staffordshire
LLOYD, sir Edw. Price, bt.
Flint
LLOYD, Thomas
Limerickshire
LOCH, James
St. Germain's
LOCKHART, John Ingram
Oxford
LOCKHART, William Elliot
Selkirkshire
LOMBE, Edward
Arundel
LOTT, Harry B
Honiton
LOVAINE, lord
Beeralston
LOWTHER, viscount
Westmorland
LOWTHER, sir John, bt.
Cumberland
LOWTHER, hon. Henry C.
Westmorland
LOWTHER, John Henry
Wigton, &c.
LUCY, George
Fowey
LUMLET, John S
Nottinghamshire
LUSHINGTON, rt. hon. S. R.
Canterbury
LUSHINGTON, Stephen
Tregony
LUSHINGTON, James L.
Carlisle
LUTTRELL, John Fownes
Minehead
LYGON, hon. Hen. B.
Worcestershire
MABERLY, John
Abingdon
MABERLY, William L.
Northampton
MACAULAY, Colin
Saltash
MACDONALD, sir James, bt.
Calne
MACKINNON, Charles,
Ipswich
MACKINTOSH, rt. hon. sir J.
Knaresboro'
MACKENZIE, sir J. W. bt.
Ross-shire
MACLEOD, John N
Sudbury
M'NAUGHTEN, Edm. A.
Antrimshire
MACQUEEN Thomas P.
Bedfordshire
MAITLAND, viscount
Appleby
MAITLAND, hon. Antony
Berwickshire
MAITLAND, Eben. F.
Chippenham
MALCOLM, Neill
Boston
MANDEVILLE, viscount
Huntingdonshire
MANNERS, lord C. S.
Cambridgesh.
MANNERS, lord Robert
Leicestershire
MANNING, William
Penryn
MARJORIBANKS, Stewart
Hythe
MARRYATT, Joseph
Sandwich
MARSHALL, John
Yorkshire
MARSHALL, William
Petersfield
MARTIN, sir Thomas B.
Plymouth
MARTIN, John
Tewkesbury
MAULE, hon. William R.
Forfarshire
MAXWELL, sir Wm. bt.
Wigtonshire
MAXWELL, Henry
Cavanshire
MAXWELL, John
Renfrewshire
MAXWELL, John Waring
Downpatrick
MEYNELL, Henry
Lisburne
MILBANK, Mark
Camelford
MILDMAY, Paulet St. John
Winchester
MILES, Philip J
Corfe-Castle
MILTON, viscount
Yorkshire
MONCK, John Berkeley
Reading
MONTGOMERY, sir James, bt.
Peebleshire
MOORE, George
Dublin
MORGAN, sir C, bt.
Monmouthshire
MORGAN, George Gould
Brecon
MORISON, John
Banfshire
MORLAND, sir Scrope B., bt
St. Mawes
MORPETH, viscount
Morpeth
MOSTYN, sir Thomas, bt
Flintshire
MOUNTCHARLES, earl
Donegalshire
MUNDY, Francis
Derbyshire
MUNDY, George
Boroughbridge
MURRAY, rt. hon. sir Geo.
Perthshire
NEWBOROUGH, lord
Carnarvonshire
NEWPORT, rt. hon. sir J., bt.
Waterford
NICHOLL, rt. hon. sir John
Bedwyn
NOEL, sir Gerard N., bt.
Rutland
NORMANBY, viscount
Malton
NORTH, John H.
Milborne-Port
NORTHCOTE, Henry S.
Heytesbury
NORTON, George C
Guildford
NUGENT, lord
Aylesbury
NUGENT, sir George, bt.
Buckingham
O'BRIEN, Lucius
Clare
O'BRIEN, William S
Ennis
O'CONNELL, Daniel
Clare
O'HARA, James
Galway
O'NEIL, hon. John R. B.
Antrimshire
O'NEILL, Aug. J.
Kingston-upon-Hull
ONSLOW, Arthur
Guildford
ORD, William
Morpeth
OSBORNE, lord F. G.
Cambridgeshire
OWEN, sir John, bt.
Pembrokeshire
OWEN, Hugh O
Pembroke
OXMANTOWN, lord
King's County
PAGET, lord William
Carnarvon
PALK, sir Lawrence V., bt.
Ashburton
PALLMER, Charles N
Surrey
PALMER, Charles F
Reading
PALMER, Robert
Berkshire
PALMERSTON, visc.
Cambr, Univers.
PARNELL, sir Henry, bt.
Queen's County
PEACH, Nathaniel Will
Truro
PEACHY, William
Taunton
PEARSE, John
Devizes
PEEL, right hon. Robert
Westbury
PEEL, Jonathan
Norwich
PEEL, Lawrence
Cockermouth
PEEL, William Yates
Tamworth
PELHAM, John Cresset
Shropshire
PENDARVIS, Edw. W. W.
Cornwall
PENNANT, Geo. H. D
Romney
PENRUDDOCK, John H
Wilton
PERCEVAL, Spencer
Newport, I. of W.
PETIT, Louis H
Ripon
PHILLIMORE, Jos.
Yarmouth, Hants
PHILIPPS, sir R. B., bt.
Haverfordwest
PHILIPS, sir Geo. bt.
Wootton-Bassett
PHILIPS, George Richard
Steyning
PHIPPS, hon. Edmund
Scarborough
PIGOTT, Geo. E. G. F.
Kinross-shire
PITT, Joseph
Cricklade
PLANTA, Joseph
Hastings
POLLEN, sir John W., bt.
Andover
PONSONBY, hon. F. C.
Higham Ferrars
PONSON BY, hon. George
Youghall
PONSONBY, hon. Will. F. S.
Poole
PORTMAN, Edw. Berkeley
Dorsetshire
POWELL, Alexander
Downton
POWELL, W. Edward
Cardiganshire
POWER, Richard
Waterfordshire
POWLETT, lord W. I. F.
Durham Coun.
POYNTZ, William Stephen
Chichester
PRENDERGAST, Michael Geo.
Gatton
PRICE, Robert
Herefordshire
PRICE, Richard
New Radnor
PRINGLE, sir Wm, Henry
Liskeard
PRITTIE, hon. Francis A.
Tipperary
PROTHEROE, Edward
Evesham
PRYSE, Pryse
Cardigan
RAE, sir William, bart
Harwich
RAINE, Jonathan
Newport, Cornwall
RAMSBOTTOM, John
Windsor
RAMSDEN, John Charles
Malton
RANCLIFFE, lord
Nottingham
RICE, Thomas Spring
Limerick
RICKFORD, William
Aylesbury
RIDLEY, sir M. W., bt.
Newcastle-up.-T.
ROBARTS, Abraham W.
Maidstone
ROBERTS, Wilson A
Bewdley
ROBINSON, sir George, bt.
Northampton
ROBINSON, George R.
Worcester
ROCHFORT, Gust.
Westmeath County
ROGERS, Edward
Bishop's Castle
ROSE, rt. hon. sir. Geo. H.
Christchurch
ROSE, George P
Christchurch
ROSS, Charles
St. Germain's
ROWLEY, sir W., bart
Suffolk
RUM BOLD, Charles E
Yarmouth
RUSSELL, lord John
Bandon-bridge
RUSSELL, lord George W.
Bedford
RUSSELL, lord William
Tavistock
RUSSELL, John
Kinsale
RUSSELL, Robert G
Thirsk
RUSSELL, William
Durham County
RYDER, right hon. Richard
Tiverton
ST. PAUL, sir H. D. Chol. bt.
Bridport
SADLER, Michael T
Newark
SANDERSON, Richard
Colchester
SANDON, viscount
Tiverton
SAUNDERSON, Alex.
Cavanshire
SCARLETT, sir James
Peterborough
SCOTT, sir William
Carlisle
SCOTT, hon. William
Gatton
SCOTT, hon. Wm. H. I.
Newport, I. of W.
SCOTT, Henry F.
Roxburghshire
SCOTT, Samuel
Whitchurch
SEBRIGHT, sir J. S., bart.
Hertfordshire
SEFTON, earl of
Droitwitch
SEYMOUR, Henry
Taunton
SEYMOUR, Horace B
Bodmyn
SHELLEY, sir John, bart
Lewes
SHIRLEY, Evelyn J
Monaghanshire
SIBTHORP, Charles
Lincoln
SINCLAIR, hon. James
Caithness
SLANEY, Robert A
Shrewsbury
SMITH, hon. Rob. J.
Buckinghamshire
SMITH, Abel
Midhurst
SMITH, Christopher
St. Alban's
SMITH, George
Wendover
SMITH, John
Midhurst
SMITH, Samuel
Wendover
SMITH, Thos. Assheton
Andover
SMITH, William
Norwich
SMITH, Robert V
Tralee
SOMERSET, lord G. C. H.
Monmouthsh.
SOMERSET, Id. Rob. E. H.
Gloucestersh.
SOMERVILLE, sir Marc. bt.
Meathshire
SOTHERON, Frank
Nottinghamshire
SPENCE, George
Ripon
SPOTTISWOODE, Andrew
Saltash
STANLEY, lord
Lancashire
STANLEY, hon. Edw. G. S.
Preston
STARKIE, Le Gendre N.
Pontefract
STEPHENSON, Rowland
Leominster
STEWART, sir Mich. S. bt.
Lanarkshire
STEWART, Alex. R.
Londonderryshire
STEWART, John
Beverley
STEWART, William
Tyrone County
STOPFORD, viscount
Wexfordshire
STRATHAVEN, lord
Grinstead
STRUTT, Joseph Holden
Okehampton
STUART, Id. Pat. J. H, E.
Cardiff
STUART, Henry V.
Waterfordshire
STUART, James
Huntingdon
SUGDEN, Edward B
Weymouth
SURRY, Earl of
Horsham
SUTTON, rt. hon. C. M.
Scarborough
SYKES, Daniel
Kingston-upon-Hull
TALBOT, Richard Wogan
Dublinshire
TALMASH, hon. Fred. J.
Grantham
TALMASH, hon. Felix T.
Ilchester
TALMASH, hon. Lionel
Ilchester
TAPPS, George W
Romney
TAVISTOCK, marquis of
Bedfordshire
TAYLOR, sir Chas. Wm. bt.
Wells
TAYLOR, George Watson
Devizes
TAYLOR, Mich. Angelo
Durham City
TENNYSON, Charles
Blechingley
THOMPSON, George L.
Haslemere
THOMPSON, Paul B
Wenlock
THOMPSON, William
London
THOMSON, Charles P
Dover
THYNNE, lord Henry
Weobly
THYNNE, lord John
Bath
THYNNE, lord William
Weobly
TIERNEY, rt. hon. Geo.
Knaresborough
TOMES, John
Warwick
TOWNSHEND, lord Chas. F.
Tamworth
TOWNSHESD, lord J. N. B.
Halleston
TOWNSHEND, hon. J. R.
Whitchurch
TRAST, William H
Dover
TRENCH, Fred. William
Cambridge
TREVOR, hon. Geo. Rice
Carmarthen
TUDWAY, John P
Wells
TUFTON, hon. H
Appleby
TUITE, Hugh M
Westmeath
TULLAMORE, lord
Carlow
TUNNO, Edward R
Bossiney
TWISS, Horace
Wootton-Bassett
TYNTE, Chas. Kemys
Bridgewater
URE, Masterton
Weymouth
UXBIDGE, earl of
Anglesey
VALLETORT, viscount
Lestwithiel
VAN HOMRIGH, Peter
Drogheda
VAUGHAN, sir R. W. bt.
Merionethsh.
VERNON, Geo. Grany. V.
Lichfield
VILLIERS, Thomas H
Hedon
VIVIAN, sir R. Hussey, bt.
Windsor
VYVYAN, sir Rd. Rawl. bt.
Cornwall
WAITHMAN, Robert
London
WALL, Charles Baring
Wareham
WALLACE, Thomas
Yarm. I. of Wight
WALPOLE, hon. John
King's Lynn
WALROND, Bethel
Sudbury
WARBURTON, Henry
Bridport
WARD, William
London
WARRENDER, rt. hn. sir G. bt.
Westbury
WEBB, Edward
Gloucester
WELLS, John
Maidstone
WEMYSS, James
Fife
WEST, Frederick R
Denbigh
WESTENRA, hon. H. R.
Monaghansh.
WESTERN, Charles Callis
Essex
WETHERELL, sir C.
Plympton-Earle
WHITBREAD, Sam. Chas.
Middlesex
WHITBREAD, Wm. Henry
Bedford
WHITE, Henry
Dublinshire
WHITE, Samuel
Leitrimshire
WHITMORE, Thomas
Bridgenorth
WHITMORE, Will. Wolr.
Bridgenorth
WIGRAM, William
NewRoss
WIGRAM, Sir Robt.
Wexford
WILBRAHAM, George
Stockbridge
WILLIAMS, sir Rob., bt.
Beaumaris
WILLIAMS, Owen
Marlow
WILLIAMS, Robert
Dorchester
WILLIAMS, Thomas Peers
Marlow
WILLOUGHBY, Henry
Newark
WILSON, sir Robert T.
Southwark
WILSON, James
York
WILSON, Richard F
Yorkshire
WINNINGTON, sir T. E. bt.
Worcestersh.
WODEHOUSE, Edmond
Norfolk
WOOD, Charles
Grimsby
WOOD, John
Preston
WOOD, Matthew
London
WOOD, Thomas
Breconshire
WORCESTER, marquis of
Monmouth
WORTLEY, hon. John S.
Bossiney
WROTTESLEY, sir J., bt.
Staffordshire
WYNDHAM, Wadham
New Sarum
WYNN, sir Watkin Wm., bt.
Denbighsh.
WYNN, rt. hn. C. W. W.
Montgomerysh.
WYNNE, Owen
Sligo
WYVILL, Marmaduke
York
YORKE, sir Joseph Sydney
Ryegate
SPEAKER,
THE RIGHT HON. CHARLES MANNERS SUTTON.
HOUSE OF COMMONS,
IN ALPHABETICAL ORDER OF COUNTIES, BOROUGHS, &c.
ENGLAND AND WALES.
ABINGDON.
John Maberly.
AGMONDESHAM,
T. T. Drake,
W. T. Drake.
ALBANS, ST.
Christopher Smith,
John Easthope.
ALDBOROUGH.
C. J. Fynes Clinton,
Sir Alex. C. Grant, bart.
ALDEBURGH.
Marquis of Douro.
Spenser H. Kilderbee.
ANDOVER.
Sir John W. Pollen, bart.
T. A. Smith, jun.
ANGLESEY.
Earl of Uxbridge.
APPLEBY.
Hon. Henry Tufton,
Viscount Maitland.
ARUNDEL.
Edward Lombe,
John Atkins.
ASHBURTON.
Rt. hon. W. S. Bourne.
Sir L. V. Palk, bart.
AYLESBURY.
Lord Nugent,
William Rickford.
BANBURY.
Hon. Arth. C. Legge.
BARNSTAPLE.
Frederick Hodgson,
Henry Alexander.
BATH.
Lord John Thynne,
Earl of Brecknock.
BEAUMARIS.
Sir Robert Williams, bart.
BEDFORDSHIRE.
Thomas P. Macqueen,
Marquis of Tavistock.
BEDFORD.
Lord Geo. Wm. Russell,
William Henry Whitbread.
GREAT BEDWIN.
Rt. hon. sir J. Nicholl,
John Jacob Buxton.
BEERALSTON.
Lord Lovaine,
Hon. P. Ashburnham.
BERKSHIRE.
Charles Dundas,
Robert Palmer.
BERWICK.
Marcus Beresford,
Sir Francis Blake, bart.
BEVERLEY.
John Stewart,
Charles H. Batley.
BEWDLEY.
Wilson A. Roberts.
BISHOP'S CASTLE.
William Holmes,
Edward Rogers.
BLECHINGLEY.
Charles Tennyson,
William Ewart.
BODMYN.
Davies Gilbert,
Horace B. Seymour.
BOROUGHBRIDGE.
George Mundy,
Henry Dawkins.
BOSSINEY.
Hon. J. Stuart Wortley,
Edward Rose Tunno.
BOSTON.
Gilbert John Heathcote,
Neill Malcolm.
BRACKLEY.
R. Haldane Bradshaw.
James Bradshaw.
BRAMBER.
John Irving,
Hon. Fred. G. Calthorpe.
BRECONSHIRE.
Thomas Wood.
BRECON.
George Gould Morgan.
BRIDGENORTH.
Thomas Whitmore,
Will. Wolryche Whitmore.
BRIDGEWATER.
William Astell,
Chas. Kemeys K. Tynte.
BRIDPORT.
Sir H. D. C. St. Paul,
Henry Warburton.
BRISTOL.
Rich. Hart Davis,
Henry Bright.
BUCKINGHAMSHIRE.
Marquis of Chandos,
Hon. Robert J. Smith.
BUCKINGHAM.
Sir George Nugent, bart.
Sir Thos. F. Fremantle, bt.
CALLINGTON.
Alexander Baring,
Matthias Attwood.
CALNE.
Rt. hon. Jas. Abercromby,
Sir James Macdonald, bart.
CAMBRIDGESHIRE.
Rt. hon. lord C. S. Manners,
Rt. hon. lord F. G. Osborne.
CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY.
Viscount Palmerston,
William Cavendish.
CAMBRIDGE BOROUGH.
Marquis of Graham,
Fred. Wm. Trench.
CAMELFORD.
Mark Milbank,
Sheldon Cradock.
CANTERBURY.
Rt. hon. S. R. Lushington,
Lord Clifton.
CARDIFF.
Lord P. J. H. C. Stewart.
CARDIGANSHIRE.
William Edward Powell.
CARDIGAN.
Pryse Pryse,
CARLISLE.
James Law Lushington,
Sir William Scott, bart.
CARMARTHENSHIRE.
Hon. G. R. Rice Trevor.
CARMARTHEN.
John Jones.
CARNARVONSHIRE.
Lord Newborough.
CARNARVON.
Lord William Paget.
CASTLE RISING.
Lord H. Cholmondeley,
Hon. F. Grev. Howard.
CHESHIRE.
Davies Davenport,
Wilbraham Egerton.
CHESTER.
Viscount Belgrave,
Hon. Robert Grosvenor.
CHICHESTER.
Rt. hon. Id. J. Geo. Lennox,
William Stephen Poyntz.
CHIPPENHAM.
Eben. Fuller Maitland,
Frederick Gye.
CHRISTCHURCH.
Rt. hon. sir G. H. Rose,
George Pitt Rose.
CIRENCESTER.
Rt. hon. lord Apsley,
Joseph Cripps.
CLITHEROW.
Hon. Robert Curzon,
Hon. P. F. Cust.
COCKERMOUTH.
Viscount Garlies,
Lawrence Peel.
COLCHESTER.
Daniel Whittle Harvey.
Richard Sanderson.
CORFE-CASTLE.
George Bankes,
Philip John Miles.
CORNWALL.
Sir R. Raw. Vyvyan, bt.
E. W. W. Pendarvis.
COVENTRY.
Richard E. Heathcote,
Thomas Bilcliffe Fyler.
CRICKLADE.
Joseph Pitt,
Robert Gordon.
CUMBERLAND.
Sir John Lowther, bart,
Sir J. R. G. Graham, bart.
DARTMOUTH.
John Bastard,
Arthur Howe Holdsworth.
DENBIGHSHIRE.
Sir W. W. Wynn, bart.
DENBIGH.
Frederick Richard West.
DERBYSHIRE.
Lord G. A. H. Cavendish,
Francis Mundy.
DERBY.
Hen. Fred. C. Cavendish,
Samuel Crompton.
DEVIZES.
John Pearse,
George Watson Taylor.
DEVONSHIRE.
Sir Thos. D. Acland, bart.
Edm. Pollexfen Bastard.
DORCHESTER.
Robert Williams,
Hon. A. W. Ashley-Cooper.
DORSETSHIRE.
Henry Bankes,
Edw. Berkeley Portman.
DOVER.
Chas. Poulett Thomson,
William Henry Trant.
DOWNTON.
Hon. Barth. Bouverie,
Alexander Powell.
DROITWICH.
Earl of Sefton,
John Hodgetts H. Foley.
DUNWICH.
Michael Barne,
Andrew Arcedeckne.
DURHAM, COUNTY.
Lord W. J. F. Powlett,
William Russell.
DURHAM.
Michael Angelo Taylor,
Rt. hon. sir Hen. Hardinge.
EAST LOOE.
Hon. Will. Seb. Lascelles.
Henry T. Hope.
EDMUND'S, BURY ST.
Earl of Euston,
Earl Jermyn.
ESSEX.
Sir Eliab Harvey,
Charles Callis Western.
EVESHAM.
Sir Chas. Cockerell, bart.,
Edward Protheroe.
EXETER.
Sam. Trehawke Kekewich,
Lewis William Buck.
EYE.
Sir Edward Kerrison,
Sir Miles Nightingall.
FLINTSHIRE.
Sir Thomas Mostyn, bart.
FLINT.
Sir Edw. Price Lloyd, bart.
FOWEY.
Hon. Rob. Henley Eden,
George Lucy.
GATTON.
Hon. William Scott,
Michael Geo. Prendergast.
ST. GERMAIN'S.
Charles Ross,
James Loch.
GLAMORGANSHIRE.
Sir Christopher Cole,
GLOUCESTERSHIRE.
Lord R. E. H. Somerset,
Sir Berk. Will. Guise, bart.
GLOUCESTER.
Edward Webb,
Robert Bransby Cooper.
GRANTHAM.
Frederick James Talmash,
Montague John Cholmeley.
GREAT GRIMSBY.
Charles Wood,
George Fieschi Heneage.
EAST GRINSTEAD.
Lord Strathaven,
Viscount Holmsdale.
GUILDFORD.
George Chappie Norton,
Arthur Onslow.
HALLESTON.
Marquis of Carmarthen,
Lord J. N. B. B. Townshend.
HAMPSHIRE.
Sir Will. Heathcote, bart.
John Fleming.
HARWICH.
Rt. hon. sir Will. Rae, bart.
Rt. hon. John C. Herries.
HASLEMERE.
Rt. hon. sir J. Beckett, bt.
George Lowther Thompson.
HASTINGS.
John Evelyn Denison,
Joseph Planta.
HAVERFORDWEST.
Sir Richard B. Philipps, bt.
HEDON.
John Baillie,
Thomas Hyde Villiers.
HEREFORDSHIRE.
Sir J. Geers Cotterell, bart.
Robert Price.
HEREFORD.
Viscount Eastnor,
Edward Bolton Clive.
HERTFORDSHIRE.
Sir John S. Sebright,
Nicholson Calvert.
HERTFORD.
Thomas Byron,
Thomas S. Duncombe.
HEYTESBURY.
Edward Henry A'Court,
Henry Stafford Northcote.
HIGHAM-FERRERS.
Hon. Fred. Cav. Ponsonby.
HINDON.
Hon. Geo. M. Fortescue,
Hon. Arthur G. Calthorpe,
HONITON.
Josiah John Guest,
Harry Baines Lott.
HORSHAM.
Nich. Will. Ridley Colborn.
Earl of Surry.
HUNTINGDONSHIRE.
Viscount Mandeville,
William Henry Fellowes.
HUNTINGDON.
John Calvert,
James Stuart.
HYTHE.
Stewart Marjoribanks,
Sir R. T. T. Farquhar, bart.
IPSWICH.
Charles Mackinnon,
Robert Adam Dundas.
IVELCHESTER.
Hon. Lionel Talmash,
Hon. Felix Thos. Talmash.
IVES, ST.
Rt. hon. Chas. Arbuthnot,
James Haise.
KENT.
Sir Edw. Knatchbull, bart.
Wm, Philip Honywood.
KING'S LYNN.
Rt. hn. ld. G.F.C. Bentinck.
Hon. John Walpole.
KINGSTON-UPON-HULL.
Augustus John O'Neill,
Daniel Sykes.
KNARESBOROUGH.
Rt. hon. Geo. Tierney,
Rt. hon. sir J. Mackintosh.
LANCASHIRE.
John Blackburne,
Lord Stanley.
LANCASTER.
John Fenton Cawthorne,
Thomas Greene.
LAUNCESTON.
Sir James W. Gordon,
James Brogden.
LEICESTERSHIRE.
Rt. hon. lord Rob. Manners,
George Ant. Legh Keck.
LEICESTER.
Sir Chas. A. Hastings, bart.
Robert Otway Cave.
LEOMINSTER.
Lord Hotham,
Rowland Stephenson.
LEWES.
Sir John Shelley, bart.
Thomas Read Kemp.
LINCOLNSHIRE.
Sir W. Am. Ingleby, bart.
Charles Chaplin.
LINCOLN.
John Nicholas Fazakerley,
Chas. D. W. Sibthorp.
LISKEARD.
Lord Eliot,
Sir William Henry Pringle.
LICHFIELD.
Sir George An son,
George Granv. V. Vernon.
LIVERPOOL.
Rt. hon. Will. Huskisson,
Isaac Gascoyne,
LONDON.
William Thompson,
Robert Waithman,
William Ward,
Matthew Wood.
LESTWITHIEL.
Viscount Valletort,
Hon. Edward Cust.
LUDGERSHALL.
Hon. Geo. J. W. A. Ellis,
Edward Thos. Foley.
LUDLOW.
Viscount Clive,
Hon. Robert Henry Clive.
LYME REGIS.
Hon. Henry Sutton Fane,
John Thomas Fane.
LYMINGTON.
Walter Boyd,
George Burrard.
MAIDSTONE.
John Wells,
Abraham Wildey Robarts.
MALDON.
Thomas Barrett Lennard.
Hugh Dick.
MALMESBURY.
Sir Charles Forbes, bart.
John Forbes.
MALTON.
John Charles Ramsden,
Visccunt Normanby.
MARLBOROUGH.
Thos. Hen. S. B. Estcourt,
William John Bankes.
GREAT MARLOW.
Owen Williams,
Thomas Peers Williams.
MAWES, ST.
Sir Scrope B. Morland, bt.
Sir C. E. Carrington, bart,
MERIONETHSHIRE.
Sir Rob. W. Vaughan, bt.
MICHAEL, ST.
Henry Labouchere,
William Leake.
MIDDLESEX.
George Byng,
Samuel Chas. Whitbread.
MIDHURST.
John Smith,
Abel Smith.
MILBORNE-PORT.
Arthur Chichester,
John Henry North.
MINEHEAD.
John Fownes Luttrell,
James Blair.
MONMOUTHSHIRE.
Sir Charles Morgan, bart.
Rt. hn. Id. G.C.H. Somerset,
MONMOUTH.
Marquis of Worcester.
MONTGOMERYSHIRE.
Rt. hon. C. W. W. Wynn.
MONTGOMERY.
Henry Clive.
MORPETH.
Viscount Morpeth,
William Ord.
NEWARK.
Henry Willoughby.
Michael Thomas Sadler.
NEWCASTLE-UNDER-LINE.
Rt. hon. R. J. W. Horton,
Richardson Borradaile.
NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE.
Sir M. W. Ridley, bart.,
Cuthbert Ellison.
NEWPORT, CORNWALL.
Rt. hn. W. F. V. Fitzgerald,
Jonathan Raine.
NEWPORT, ISLE OF W.
Hon. Wm. Hen. J. Scott,
Spencer Perceval.
NEWTON, LANCASHIRE.
Thomas Legh,
Thomas Alcock.
NEWTON, HANTS.
Hudson Gurney,
Chas. Compton Cavendish.
NORFOLK.
Thomas William Coke,
Edmond Wodehouse.
NORTHALLERTON.
Hon. Henry Lascelles,
Sir John P. Beresford, bart.
NORTHAMPTONSHIRE.
Viscount Althorp,
Wm. Ralph Cartwright.
NORTHAMPTON.
Sir G. Robinson, bart.
William Leader Maberly.
NORTHUMBERLAND.
Hon. Henry Thos. Liddell,
Matthew Bell.
NORWICH.
William Smith,
Jonathan Peel.
NOTTINGHAMSHIRE.
Frank Sotheron,
John Saville Lumley.
NOTTINGHAM.
Joseph Birch,
Lord Rancliffe.
OKEHAMPTON.
Sir Compton Domville, bt.
Joseph Holden Strutt.
ORFORD.
Sir Henry Fred. Cooke,
Quintin Dick.
OXFORDSHIRE.
William Henry Ashurst,
John Fane.
OXFORD.
Jas. Haughton Langston,
John Ingram Lockhart.
OXFORD UNIVERSITY
Thomas G. B. Estcourt,
Sir Robert Harry Inglis, bt.
PEMBROKESHIRE.
Sir John Owen, bart.
PEMBROKE.
Hugh Owen Owen.
PENRYN.
David Barclay,
William Manning.
PETERBOROUGH.
Sir Robert Heron, bart.
Sir James Scarlett.
PETERSFIELD.
Hylton Jolliffe,
William Marshall.
PLYMOUTH.
Rt. hon. sir G. Cockburn,
Sir Thos. B. Martin, bart.
PLYMPTON-EARLE,
Gibbs Crawfurd Antrobus,
Sir Chas. Wetherell, knt.
PONTEFRACT.
Thomas Houldsworth,
Le Gendre N. Starkie.
POOLE.
Hon. W. F. S. Ponsonby,
Benjamin Lester Lester,
PORTSMOUTH.
John Bonham Carter,
Francis Baring.
PRESTON.
Hon. E. G. S. Stanley,
John Wood.
QUEEN BOROUGH.
Rt. hon. lord Downes,
John Capel,
RADNORSHIRE.
Rt. hon. Thomas F. Lewis.
RADNOR.
Richard Price.
READING.
John Berkeley Monck,
Charles Fyshe Palmer.
RICHMOND.
Hon. Thomas Dundas,
Hon. sir R. L. Dundas.
RIPON.
Louis Hayes Petit,
George Spence.
ROCHESTER.
Hon. Henry Dundas,
Ralph Bernal,
ROMNEY.
Geo. Hay Dawk. Pennant,
George William Tapps.
RUTLAND.
Sir Gerard Noel Noel, bt.
Sir Gilbert Heathcote, bt.
RYE.
Richard Arkwright,
Henry Bonham.
RYEGATE.
Sir Joseph Sidney Yorke,
James Cocks.
SALOP.
Sir Rowland Hill, bart.
John Cressett Pelham.
SALTASH.
Andrew Spottiswoode,
Colin Macaulay.
SANDWICH.
Joseph Marryatt.
Sir Henry Fane.
SARUM, NEW.
Hon. Dunc. P. Bouverie,
Wadham Wyndham.
SARUM, OLD.
Rt. hon. Stratford Canning.
James Alexander.
SCARBOROUGH.
Rt. hon. Chas. M. Sutton,
Hon. Edmond Phipps.
SEAFORD.
Hon. Augustus Fred. Ellis,
John Fitzgerald.
SHAFTESBURY.
Ralph Leycester,
Edward Davies Davenport.
SHOREHAM.
Sir Chas. M. Burrell, bt.
Henry Howard.
SHREWSBURY.
Panton Corbett,
Robert Aglionby Slaney.
SOMERSETSHIRE.
William Dickinson,
Sir T. B. Lethbridge, bart.
SOUTHAMPTON.
William Chamberlayne,
Abel Rous Dottin.
SOUTHWARK.
Charles Calvert,
Sir Robert Thos. Wilson.
STAFFORDSHIRE.
Edward John Littleton,
Sir John Wrottesley, bart.
STAFFORD.
Ralph Benson,
Thos. W. Beaumont.
STAMFORD.
Rt. hon. lord Thomas Cecil,
Thomas Chaplin.
STEYNING.
George Richard Philips,
Peter Du Cane.
STOCKBRIDGE.
Thomas Grosvenor,
George Wilbraham.
SUDBURY.
Bethel Walrond,
John Norman Macleod.
SUFFOLK.
Sir Thos. Sherl. Gooch, bt.
Sir William Rowley, bart.
SURREY.
William Joseph Denison,
Charles Nicholas Pallmer.
SUSSEX.
Walter Burrell,
Edward Jeremiah Curteis.
TAMWORTH.
Rt. hn. ld. C.V. Townshend,
William Yates Peel.
TAVISTOCK.
Rt. hon. visc. Ebrington,
Rt. hon. lord Wm. Russell,
TAUNTON.
Henry Seymour,
William Peachy.
TEWKESBURY.
John Edmund Dowdeswell,
John Martin.
THETFORD.
Rt. hon. lord Chas. Fitzroy,
William Bingham Baring.
THIRSK.
Robert Frankland,
Robt. Greenhill Russell.
TIVERTON.
Viscount Sandon,
Rt. hon. Richard Ryder.
TOTNESS.
Thos. Peregrine Courtenay,
Earl of Darlington.
TREGONY.
Stephen Lushington,
James Brougham.
TRURO.
Viscount Encombe,
Nathaniel William Peach.
WALLINGFORD.
William Lewis Hughes,
Robert Knight.
WAREHAM.
Rt. hon. John Calcraft,
Charles Baring Wall.
WARWICKSHIRE.
Dugdale Strat. Dugdale,
Francis Lawley.
WARWICK.
Hon. sir Chas. J. Greville,
John Tomes.
WELLS.
Sir Chas. Wm. Taylor, bt.
John Paine Tudway.
WENDOVER.
Samuel Smith,
George Smith.
WENLOCK.
Hon. Geo. C. W. Forester
Paul Beilby Thompson.
WEOBLY.
Rt. hon. lord H. F. Thynne,
Rt. hon. lord Wm. Thynne,
WESTBURY.
Right hon. Robert Peel,
Rt. hon. sir G. Warrender.
WEST LOOE.
Charles Buller,
Sir Charles Hulse, bart.
WESTMINSTER.
Sir Francis Burdett, bart.
John Cam Hobhouse.
WESTMORLAND.
Viscount Lowther,
Hon. Hen. Cecil Lowther.
WEYMOUTH & MELCOMBE REGIS.
Masterton Ure,
Thos. Fowell Buxton,
John Gordon,
Edw. Burtenshaw Sugden.
WHITCHURCH.
Hon. John R. Townshend,
Samuel Scott.
WIGAN.
James Alex. Hodson,
James Lindsay.
WILTON.
John Hung. Penruddocke,
Edward Baker.
WILTSHIRE.
John Benett,
Sir John Dugd. Astley, bt.
WINCHELSEA.
Viscount Howick,
Henry Brougham.
WINCHESTER.
Sir Edward Hyde East, bt.
Paulet St. John Mildmay.
WINDSOR.
Sir Richard Hussey Vivian.
John Ramsbottom.
WOODSTOCK.
Marquis of Blandford,
Lord Ashley.
WOOTTON-BASSETT.
Sir George Philips, bt.
Horace Twiss.
WORCESTERSHIRE.
Sir T. E. Winnington, bt.
Hon. Henry B. Lygon.
WORCESTER.
Thomas Henry H. Davies,
George Richard Robinson.
WYCOMBE.
Sir John D. King, bart.
Sir Thomas Baring, bart.
YARMOUTH.
Hon. George Anson,
Charles Edmund Rumbold,
YARMOUTH, HANTS.
Joseph Phillimore.
Thomas Wallace,
YORKSHIRE.
Viscount Milton,
Hon. William Duncombe,
Richard Fountayne Wilson
John Marshall.
YORK.
Marmaduke Wyvill,
James Wilson.
SCOTLAND.
ABERDEENSHIRE.
Hon. William Gordon.
ABERDEEN, &C.
Joseph Hume.
ARGYLESHIRE.
Walter Fred. Campbell.
AYRSHIRE.
AYR, &C.
Thos. Fras. Kennedy.
BANFSHIRE.
John Morison.
BERWICKSHIRE.
Hon. Anthony Maitland.
CAITHNESS and BUTE.
Hon. James Sinclair.
CRAIL, &C.
James Balfour.
CROMARTY and NAIRN.
Duncan Davidson, jun.
DUMBARTONSHIRE.
John Campbell.
DUMFRIES-SHIRE.
Sir Will. Johnstone Hope.
DUMFRIES, &C.
William Rob. K. Douglas.
DYSART, &C.
Sir Ronald C. Ferguson.
EDINBURGHSHIRE.
Sir George Clerk, bart.
EDINBURGH.
Right hon. Will. Dundas.
ELGINSHIRE.
Hon. Francis Will. Grant.
ELGIN, &C.
Hon. Alexander Duff.
FIFESHIRE.
James Wemyss.
FORFARSHIRE.
Hon. Will. Ramsay Maule.
FORFAR, &C.
Hon. Hugh Lindsay.
FORTROSE, &c.
Robert Grant.
GLASGOW, &C.
Archibald Campbell.
HADDINGTONSHIRE.
Lord John Hay.
HADDINGTON, &C.
Adolphus John Dalrymple.
INVERKEITHING, &C.
Robert Downie.
INVERNESS-SHIRE.
Right hon. Charles Grant.
KINCARDINESHIRE.
Hon. Hugh Arbuthnot.
KINROSS and CLACKMANASHIRE.
George Edw. G. F. Pigott.
KIRKCUDBRIGHT.
Robert Cutlar Fergusson.
KIRKWALL, &C.
Sir Hugh Innes, bart.
LANARKSHIRE.
Sir Michael S. Stewart, bt.
LINLITHGOWSHIRE.
Hon. sir Alexander Hope.
ORKNEY and SHETLANDSHIRE.
Hon. Geo. H. L. Dundas.
PEEBLESHIRE.
Sir Jas. Montgomery, bart.
PERTHSHIRE.
Rt. hon. sir George Murray.
RENFREWSHIRE.
John Maxwell.
ROSS-SHIRE.
Sir J. W. Mackenzie.
ROXBURGHSHIRE.
Henry Francis Scott, jun.
SELKIRKSHIRE.
William Elliot Lockhart.
SELKIRK, &C.
Adam Hay.
STIRLINGSHIRE.
Henry Home Drummond.
SUTHERLANDSHIRE.
Rt. hon. lord F. L. Gower.
WIGTONSHIRE.
Sir William Maxwell, bart.
WIGTON, &C.
John H. Lowther.
IRELAND.
ANTRIMSHIRE.
Hon. John B. R. O'Neil,
Edm. Alex. M'Naughten.
ARMAGHSHIRE.
Hon. Henry Caul field,
Charles Brownlow.
ARMAGH, BOROUGH.
Rt. hon. Henry Goulburn.
ATHLONE.
Richard Handcock, jun.
BANDON-BRIDGE.
Rt. hon. lord John Russell.
BELFAST.
Earl of Belfast.
CARLOWSHIRE.
Henry Bruen,
Thomas Kavanagh.
CARLOW.
Lord Tullamore,
CARRICKFERGUS.
Sir Arthur Chichester, bt.
CASHELL.
Ebenezer John Collett.
CAVANSHIRE.
Henry Maxwell,
Alexander Saunderson.
CLARE.
Lucius O'Brien,
Daniel O'Connell.
CLONMEL.
Jas. Hewitt Massy Dawson.
COLERAINE.
Sir John Will. H. Brydges.
CORKSHIRE.
Hon. Robert King,
Hon. John Boyle.
CORK, CITY.
John Hely Hutchinson.
Gerrard Callaghan.
DONEGALSHIRE.
Earl of Mountcharles,
George Vaughan Hart.
DOWNSHIRE.
Lord Arthur Hill,
Viscount Castlereagh.
DOWN PATRICK.
John Waring Maxwell.
DROGHEDA.
Peter Van Homrigh.
DUBLINSHIRE.
Henry White,
Richard Wogan Talbot,
DUBLIN, CITY.
George Moore,
Henry Grattan.
DUBLIN, UNIVERSITY.
Rt. hon. John W. Croker.
DUNDALK.
Charles Barclay.
DUNGANNON.
Hon. Thomas Knox.
DUNGARVAN.
Hon. George Lamb.
ENNIS.
William Smyth O'Brien.
ENNISKILLEN.
Hon. Arthur Henry Cole.
FERMANAGHSHIRE.
Mervyn Archdall,
Viscount Corry.
GALWAYSHIRE.
James Daly,
James Staunton Lambert.
GALWAY.
James O'Hara.
KERRYSHIRE.
Rt. hon. Mau. Fitzgerald,
Viscount Ennismore.
KILDARESHIRE.
Rt. hn. 1d. W.C. Fitzgerald,
Robert Latouche.
KILKENNYSHIRE.
Hon. Chas. H. B. Clarke,
Viscount Duncannon.
KILKENNY.
John Doherty.
KING'S COUNTY.
Thomas Bernard.
Lord Oxmantown.
KINSALE.
John Russell.
LEITRIM.
Viscount Clements,
Samuel White.
LIMERICK.
Hon. Rich. H. Fitzgibbon,
Thomas Lloyd.
LIMERICK, CITY.
Thomas Spring Rice.
LISBURNE.
Henry Meynell.
LONDONDERRY.
George Robert Dawson,
Alexander Robert Stewart.
LONDONDERRY, CITY.
Rt. hon. sir G. F. Hill, bart.
LONGFORDSHIRE.
Rt. hon. viscount Forbes.
Sir Geo. R. Fetherstone, bt.
LOUTHSHIRE.
Alexander Dawson,
John Leslie Foster.
MALLOW.
Charles D. O. Jephson.
MAYO.
Lord Bingham,
James Browne.
MEATHSHIRE.
Earl of Bective,
Sir Marcus Somerville, bt.
MONAGHAN.
Evelyn John Shirley,
Hon. Hen. Rob. Westenra.
NEWRY.
Hon. John Henry Knox.
PORTARLINGTON.
James Farquhar.
QUEEN'S COUNTY.
Sir Chas. Henry Coote, bt.
Sir Henry Parnell, bart.
ROSCOMMONSHIRE.
Arthur French,
Hon. Robert King.
NEW ROSS, TOWN.
William Wigram.
SLIGOSHIRE.
Hon. Henry King,
Edward Synge Cooper,
SLIGO.
Owen Wynne.
TIPPERARY.
Hon. Francis A. Prittie,
John Hely Hutchinson.
TRALEE.
Robert Vernon Smith.
TYRONESHIRE.
William Stewart,
Hon. H. T. Lowry Corry.
WATERFORD.
Richard Power,
Henry Villiers Stuart.
WATERFORD, CITY.
Rt. hon. sir J. Newport, bt.
WESTMEATH.
Gustavus Rochfort,
Hugh Morgan Tuite.
WEXFORDSHIRE.
Rt. hon. viscount Stopford,
Rob. Shapland Carew, jun.
WEXFORD.
Sir Robt. Wigram, knt.
WICKLOW.
James Grattan.
Ralph Howard.
YOUGHALL.
Hon. George Ponsonby.
The NUMBER of MEMBERS sent by each County, &c. to Parliament.
Bedfordshire
4
Berkshire
9
Buckinghamshire
14
Cambridgeshire
6
Cheshire
4
Cornwall
42
Cumberlands
6
Derbyshire
4
Devonshire
26
Dorsetshire
20
Durham
4
Essex
8
Gloucestershire
8
Herefordshire
8
Hertfordshire
6
Huntingdonshire
4
Kent
10
Lancashire
14
Leicestershire
4
Lincolnshire
12
Middlesex
8
Monmouthshire
3
Norfolk
12
Northamptonshire
9
Northumberland
8
Nottinghamshire
8
Oxfordshire
9
Rutlandshire
2
Shropshire
12
Somersetshire
18
Hampshire
26
Staffordshire
10
Suffolk
16
Surrey
14
Sussex
20
Warwickshire
6
Westmoreland
4
Wiltshire
34
Worcestershire
9
Yorkshire
32
473
Cinque Ports
16
Wales
24
Scotland
45
Ireland
100
Total
658
Members for ENGLAND and WALES
513
SCOTLAND
45
IRELAND
100
TOTAL
658
CHIEF OFFICERS OF THE HOUSE.
Chief clerk,
Clerk Assistant,
Second Ditto,
Clerk of Committees of Privileges and Elections,
Prin. Com. Clks.,
GEORGE WHITTAM, SAM. GUNNELL, and WILLIAM G. ROSE, Esqrs.
Clerk of the Journals and Papers,
Clerks of the Ingrossments,
Serjeant at Arms,
Chaplain,
Secretary to Speaker,
OFFICERS OF STATE.
(APRIL, 1829.)
MINISTRY OF ENGLAND.
Duke of Wellington
First Lord of the Treasury
Prime Minister
Right Hon. Henry Goulburn
Chancellor and Under Treasurer of the Exchequer.
Lord Lyndhurst
Lord High Chancellor.
Earl Bathurst
Lord President of the Council.
Earl of Rosslyn
Lord Privy Seal.
Right Hon. Robert Peel
Secretary of State for the Home Department.
Earl of Aberdeen
Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs.
Right Hon. Sir Geo. Murray
Secretary of State for the Colonial Department.
Lord Viscount Melville
First Lord of the Admiralty.
Right Hon. John C. Herries
Master of the Mint.
Lord Ellenborough
President of the Board of Control.
Right Hon. W. V. Fitzgerald
Treasurer of the Navy, and President of the Board of Trade.
The above form the Cabinet.
Right Hon. Sir Hen. Hardinge
Secretary at War.
Viscount Beresford
Master General of the Ordnance.
Duke of Montrose
Lord Chamberlain.
Marquis Conyngham
Lord Steward.
Duke of Leeds
Master of the Horse.
Marquis of Winchester
Groom of the Stole.
Right Hon Ch. Arbuthnot
Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster.
Right Hon. John Calcraft
Paymaster of the Forces.
Viscount Lowther
First Commissioner of Land Revenue.
Thomas P. Courtenay, Esq
Vice President of the Board of Trade.
Duke of Manchester
Postmaster General.
Sir William Henry Clinton
Lieut.-general of the Ordnance.
Sir James Scarlett, Knt
Attorney General.
Sir Edward B. Sugden, Knt.
Solicitor General.
MINISTRY OF IRELAND.
Duke of Northumberland
Lord Lieutenant.
Rt. Hon. Sir Anth. Hart, Knt.
Lord High Chancellor.
Lieut.-Gen. sir John Byng
Commander of the Forces.
Lord Francis Levison Gower
Chief Secretary.
Rt. Hon. Sir G. Fitz. Hill, Bt.
Vice Treasurer of the Exchequer
Rt. Hon. Henry Joy
Attorney General.
John Doherty, Esq
Solicitor General
During the
of the
of the United Kingdom of
and
appointed to meet at Westminster the
th of February,
in the Eleventh Year of the Reign of His Majesty
GEORGE THE FOURTH.
1830.
1
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Thursday, February 4th, 1830.
THE LORDS COMMISSIONERS
The Fourth Session of the Eighth Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland was this day opened by Commission. The Lords Commissioners were the Lord Chancellor (LYNDHURST); the Lord President of the Council (BATHURST); the Lord Privy Seal (ROSSLYN); the First Lord of the Treasury (WELLINGTON); and the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, (ABERDEEN). Mr. Pulman, acting for Mr. Quarme the Yeoman Usher of the Black Rod, summoned the attendance of the Commons; and the Speaker, attended by numerous Members, appearing at their lordships' bar, (the Commission for opening the Parliament having been read) the Lord Chancellor delivered the Speech of the Lords Commissioners to both Houses of Parliament, which was as follows:—
My Lords, and Gentlemen,
We are commanded by His Majesty to inform you, that His Majesty receives from all Foreign Powers the strongest Assurances of their Desire to maintain and cultivate the most friendly Relations with this Country.
2
His Majesty has seen with Satisfaction that the War between Russia and the Ottoman Porte has been brought to a Conclusion. The Efforts of His Majesty to accomplish the main Objects of the Treaty of the 6th July 1827 have been unremitted.
His Majesty, having recently concerted with His Allies Measures for the Pacification and final Settlement of Greece, trusts that He shall be enabled, at an early Period, to communicate to you the Particulars of this Arrangement, with such Information as may explain the Course which His Majesty has pursued throughout the Progress of these important Transactions.
His Majesty laments that He is unable to announce to you the Prospect of a Reconciliation between the Princes of the House of Braganza.
His Majesty has not yet deemed it expedient to re-establish, upon their ancient Footing, His Majesty's Diplomatic Relations with the Kingdom of Portugal; but the numerous Embarrassments arising from the continued Interruption of these Relations increase His Majesty's Desire to effect the Termination of so serious an Evil.
3
Gentlemen of the House of Commons,
His Majesty has directed the Estimates for the current Year to be laid before you. They have been framed with every Attention to Economy, and it will be satisfactory to you to learn that His Majesty will be enabled to propose a considerable Reduction in the Amount of the Public Expenditure, without impairing the Efficiency of our Naval or Military Establishments.
We are commanded by His Majesty to inform you, that although the National Income during the last Year has not attained the full Amount at which it had been estimated, the Diminution is not such as to cause any Doubt as to the future Prosperity of the Revenue.
My Lords, and Gentlemen,
His Majesty commands us to acquaint you, that His Attention has been of late earnestly directed to various important Considerations connected with Improvements in the general Administration of the Law.
His Majesty has directed that Measures shall be submitted for your Deliberation, of which some are calculated, in the Opinion of His Majesty, to facilitate and expedite the Course of Justice in different Parts of the United Kingdom, and others appear to be necessary Preliminaries to a Revision of the Practice and Proceedings of the Superior Courts.
We are commanded to assure you, that His Majesty feels confident that you will give your best Attention and Assistance to Subjects of such deep and lasting Concern to the Well-being of His People.
His Majesty commands us to inform you, that the Export in the last Year of British Produce and Manufactures has exceeded that of any former Year.
His Majesty laments that, notwithstanding this Indication of active Commerce, Distress should prevail among the Agricultural and Manufacturing Classes in some Parts of the United Kingdom.
4
It would be most gratifying to the paternal Feelings of His Majesty to be enabled to propose for your Consideration Measures calculated to remove the Difficulties of any Portion of His Subjects, and at the same Time compatible with the general and permanent Interests of His People.
It is from a deep Solicitude for those Interests, that His Majesty is impressed with the Necessity of acting with extreme Caution in reference to this important Subject.
His Majesty feels assured that you will concur with him in assigning due Weight to the Effect of unfavourable Seasons, and to the Operation of other causes which are beyond the Reach of Legislative Control or Remedy.
Above all, His Majesty is convinced that no Pressure of temporary Difficulty will induce you to relax the Determination which you have uniformly manifested to maintain inviolate the Public Credit, and thus to uphold the high Character and the permanent Welfare of the Country.
MINUTES.] The Commons afterwards withdrew. Their Lordships resumed at five o'clock.—The LORD BISHOP OF OXFORD then took the Oaths and his Seat.—Lord ARUNDELL took the Oath prescribed by the 10th Geo. 4th. to be taken by Peers professing the Roman Catholic Religion.—The Certificate of the Return of the Earl of GLENGALL as a Peer for Ireland, in the room of the Earl of Blessinton, deceased, was read.—The Select Vestries Bill was brought in and read the first time
pro formâ:
ADDRESS ON THE LORDS COMMISSIONERS SPEECH.]
This Speech having been again read, first by the Lord Chancellor, and then by the Clerk at the Table,
The Duke of Buccleugh
rose:—
5
hear
6
hear, hear
hear, hear
7
Lord Saltoun
seconded the Address.
8
9
10
Earl Stanhope
said:—My Lords, I should consider it a base dereliction of my duty not to take this, the earliest, opportunity, of stating my opinion to your lordships. Under a state of difficulty and distress, universal in extent, and unequalled in intensity, it behoves your lordships to address the Throne, not in the language of compliment, but of truth; discharging with decision and firmness our duty to our country, for the benefit of which we have received political power. I am never disposed to treat any of the speeches from the Throne with disrespect, but I must speak plainly of this. A speech, I must say, more inept and more inappropriate was never delivered from the Throne. In the country there was unusual distress, universal in its extent, unprecedented in its degree, intolerable in its pressure. After congratulating Parliament upon the close of the war in Turkey, we are informed that distress prevails amongst the agricultural and manufacturing classes in "some" parts of the United Kingdom. Surely it would have been much more correct for his Majesty to have told us that unexampled distress prevails in every class, and every interest J [
hear
11
terra incognita
hear, hear
cheers
12
hear, hear
cheers, and a laugh
13
hear, hear
hear
14
hear
hear
laugh
15
hear
16
hear
17
18
Viscount Goderich
said:—My lords, although it is my intention to support the Address proposed by the noble duke, and to oppose the Amendment, I beg to assure the noble earl, that among the many considerations which have induced me to take that course, cannot be reckoned any insensibility to the distresses I know and feel to prevail to so great an extent, and which, were it within our power, it is clearly within our duty to redress. I feel, if I were to acquiesce in the Amendment, I should only be lending myself to a delusion. [
hear
19
hear
20
21
bona fide
22
hear
cheers
23
hear
24
hear, hear
25
The
Duke of Richmond
said: but for the line of argument pursued by the noble viscount, especially on the subject of the wool-trade and duty, he should not on the present occasion have trespassed on their lordships' attention. The noble duke declared that he had only named the wool question because he thought that the wool-trade had been unfairly excepted from the general rule, and was not protected in the same ratio as others. He could refer to papers to show that it was not equally protected with others, he guarded against going into the subject of free trade, and had expressed no opinion on it, and therefore he ought not to have been charged with improperly referring to our ancestors' conduct on that subject. There was now
26
The Earl of Caernarvon
considered the language used in the Speech to be quite unworthy of our most gracious sovereign, and were only the expressions of those who now formed his councils. They alone must be answerable for them. On the whole, he must say that they were a most insulting, unfeeling, and cold-blooded allusion to the distresses of the country. He had felt a painful sensation in reading them; especially the confusion and incapacity manifested in the words which were put into the mouth of the sovereign, as to the impossibility of relieving the distresses.
27
28
29
l.
.
30
l.
l.,
31
hear, hear
32
"Me me adsum qui feci: in me convertite ferrum."
33
hear
hear, hear
34
hear
The Duke of Wellington
.— If, my lords, I could entertain any doubt as to the propriety of the determination which I had formed not to refer to those points of the motion of my noble friend near me, relative to foreign affairs, in answer to noble lords opposite—1 say, my lords, if I had ever harboured any such doubts, they would be entirely removed by the latter parts of the speech of the noble earl (Carnarvon) who has just sat down. The noble earl, instead of referring to those parts in his Majesty's Speech, and in the Address of my noble friend, which have relation to the transactions of the present year, has found it necessary to refer to the history of the last two years, in order to find ground of blame against his Majesty's government. In the very last session of parliament I declared my earnest anxiety that your lordships would be pleased to discuss the very question which the noble earl has taken advantage of this night's discussion to introduce to your consideration—taken advantage of to introduce, without notice to any one concerned, or opportunity given them to consult the documents, that we might see whether the noble earl quoted them correctly, or whether any others were necessary to the elucidation of those transactions to which he referred. It was not to those transactions that the noble earl addressed himself, but to certain papers for which he had
35
36
hear
hear, hear, from Lord Holland
37
hear. No, from the Opposition
38
hear
hear
Hear, and Yes, from the Opposition.
39
l
Bank of England notes
£30,000,0000
Country-bank notes
23,000,000
Gold
4,000,000
Silver
7,000,000
Total
£64,000,000
Bank of England notes
£19,900,000
Country-bank notes
9,200,000
Gold
28,000 000
Silver
8,000,000
Total
£65,100,000
hear
40
hear
hear
l.
hear
l
hear
41
The Marquis of Clanricarde
said, notwithstanding the tone in which the noble duke had thought proper to comment upon the observations of the noble earl (Carnarvon), he contended that there never was a session in which parliament waited with so much patience and composure for information respecting our foreign relations as the last session. Some of the most important papers, relating to the Portugal affair, were not laid before this House till the close of the last session. The noble earl, in his opinion, had taken a proper opportunity to canvass these papers to-night, for this was in fact the first opportunity which had offered for such an inquiry. Could it be said that the notice of them was unseasonable now, when government were about, by their own confession, to recognise Don Miguel? [
hear
42
hear
hear
The Earl of Aberdeen
explained. No advantage was intended to be taken of the House with respect to the negotiation with Don Miguel because their lordships might concur in this Address. Their lordships might rest assured that all due information would be laid before them before any steps were taken in that recognition—
Lord Holland
.—Steps?—[
hear
The Earl of Aberdeen
.—What I mean to say is, that before any thing is done, parliament will be furnished with information tending to explain and justify the advice which we may give, [
hear, hear, from the Opposition
Lord Holland
.—I do not rise to prolong this discussion, but to have, if I can, a clear understanding of the meaning of the noble lord's expression. If I understand him rightly, he says that, when the happy period arrives when we are to acknowledge as king of Portugal that usurper whose whole course has been marked by the greatest hostility and perfidy to this country, parliament is to be made acquainted with all about it; but is it to be before or after, for there lies all the difference? In the early part of his short address, the noble lord used the expression "steps taken," which he afterwards qualified, by saying that the information
43
laughter
hear
44
The Earl of Aberdeen
said, he could state to the noble baron, that whenever his Majesty's ministers thought proper to advise their sovereign to remove diplomatic relations with Portugal, they should not ask his advice as to the course that ought to be adopted. Their lordships might depend upon being furnished with the fullest information—with information which he trusted would fully justify the government in every step that had been taken. The noble lord, who never spoke of Don Miguel but in terms of strong vituperation and almost of horror, [
hear, from Lord Holland
45
Lord Holland
said, he had never expected that the noble Earl would ask his advice upon any subject, for he appeared to take all his measures without consulting parliament or indeed any body else. In allusion to some peculiar expressions that had fallen from the noble Earl, he wished to say a few words merely in explanation. The noble Earl had said that he would not ask advice as to the time of re-opening the relations with Portugal; but he trusted parliament would not wait till the noble earl chose to give information, but would of itself call upon ministers to lay the documents connected with the subject on the table. With respect to Don Miguel, he was not merely a usurper, but he had seized the throne in spite of the promises he had made. He had directly broken faith with us; and it was not merely because he was a usurper that he (Lord Holland) was unwilling to acknowledge Don Miguel. That prince was a far different sort of a person from Napoleon, who was no usurper, but had been called to the government of France, in the same manner as the royal family of this kingdom, by the voice of parliament, and the representatives of the people; and therefore he had been disposed to acknowledge him as the king of France. The noble earl had said that it was the interest of this country to maintain a connexion with Portugal. It then
46
The Earl of Winchilsea
said, he would give with heartfelt satisfaction his support to the Amendment to the Address, the character and nature of which had been much misrepresented by the noble duke opposite. The proposed Amendment called on the House to take into its serious consideration the present distressed situation of the country—distress admitted on all hands to exist, and from which all interests were suffering—and to consider what remedies ought to be applied to it: it did not allude to any specific remedy. He felt regret at the slight allusion made in his Majesty's Speech to the unparalleled distress existing in the country. The slightness of the allusion might have arisen from the advisers of the Crown, whose duty it was to inform his Majesty of the state of the country, having either withheld information or misrepresented it, or told his Majesty that it was not in the power of Parliament to afford relief; but if the House neglected to take into consideration the distressed state of the country, it would be neglecting its duty to the public. It might cause the country to think that the House was unable to legislate for the public good; he was sorry to say that he saw a spirit for forming associations springing up in different parts of the country, not for the purpose of laying the grievances of the people before the Parliament, but to propose remedies of their own, and to redress their own wrongs; and if their lordships neglected to inquire into the distress of the country, they would
47
Earl Stanhope
explained.—If the noble duke had done him the honour to attend to his Amendment, he would have found that it did not pledge the House to the introduction of the question which the noble duke imagined. It only went to this extent, to call upon the House to inquire into the cause of the distress—the existence of which was not disputed—and to administer speedy relief. If the House neglected its duty, and failed to inquire into the distresses of the country, feelings of contempt, on the part of the people, towards their lordships, would naturally arise.
Lord King
then rose.—He found it to be absolutely necessary to move an amendment of his own; [
a laugh
48
"Ye ruined squires and scathed nobility;
What boots it now to raise a loud lament
Of grinding taxes and of falling rent,
And fill our Senate with your senseless cry?
Time was, the coming mischief to prevent,
But then with flinty heart and tearless eye,
You saw your peasants droop—your soldiers die;
Hind paid with rags, and troops to Walcheren sent.
A sturdy swain deprived of his meed,
Even by your war made slavish, lean, and poor;
What reck'd ye—you but gain'd an ample store.
So now shall pity leave you in your need,
Unmov'd we hear you rant, and howl, and roar;
For none who taste of woe have e'er deserv'd it more."
49
hear, hear, hear
hear
50
51
52
Earl Darnley
said, he preferred the original motion of the noble Duke to the amendment of the noble Earl, or to that of his noble friend near him (Lord King). The Address did not preclude investigation; on the contrary, it invited it. It only exhorted their lordships—a recommendation in which he fully concurred—to proceed with caution and prudence; for if they held out to the people, suffering as they were, a pledge or prospect of immediate relief by any of the nostrums which were proposed, they would be doing mischief instead of good. He rose principally for the purpose of noticing an omission in the Speech of the Lords Commissioners. He observed that it contained no mention of Ireland. He admitted that much had been done for that part of the kingdom by his noble friend opposite (Wellington), but much remained still to be done. He should not, however, intrude upon their lordships with that subject at so late an hour, and the more particularly
53
The Duke of Wellington
explained.—He denied that allusion to Ireland was omitted on account of the absence of particular noble lords, and declared, that although the situation of that country did not require such a notice, its situation had not escaped the attention of his Majesty's government, who intended to introduce a measure connected with it in the course of the session.
Earl Stanhope
said, he wished, in explanation, to observe previously to the conclusion of the debate, that he had meant to represent that there was but one of two alternatives open; either to extend the currency, or to return, as had been wished by a large public meeting, to the expenditure of the country previously to the French revolutionary war.
The Marquis of Lansdowne
wished to state shortly his reasons why he should vote against the noble earl's Amendment. It appeared from the speech with which that Amendment was introduced, that it was the object of the noble earl to induce the House to do all in its power again to plunge the country into what he could not but consider one of the greatest evils that could await any nation—certainly one of the greatest evils this country had ever endured—an unlimited issue of paper circulation. If the first step were taken, it would lead to subsequent steps, against which he felt it his duty to guard this House and the public. He knew of no extension that was not in danger of amounting to an unlimited issue. He did not know, however, if he should not have supported the Amendment, had not the Speech admitted distress, and in terms which implied a promise that inquiry should take place upon the subject, and which the country had a right to expect. It existed unquestionably to a lamentable extent; but he concurred in the recommendation that it should receive the most cautious inquiry. He thought it necessary to make these few observations in explanation of
54
55
On the question whether the words proposed to be left out should stand part of the original motion, the numbers were— Content 71; Not Content 9; Majority against the Amendment 62.
List of the Minority against the Address.
Dukes.
Tankerville,
Cumberland,
Winchilsea,
Richmond,
Radnor.
Newcastle.
Lords.
Earls.
Rivers,
Stanhope,
Northwich.
LORD STANHOPE'S PROTEST.]
The following protest was entered in their Lordships Journal next day:
DISSENTIENT.—1. Because it is the bounden duty of parliament to examine the causes of public distress, and, as far as may be in its power, to administer speedy and effectual relief.
2. Because the grievous distress which now affects the country in many branches of productive industry, appears to be the result of legislative measures, and might, therefore, be relieved, if not altogether removed, by a different course of policy, particularly with respect to the currency, as the alteration in its value has greatly increased the weight of all the public burthens, and of all the private engagements which existed previously to that alteration.
3. Because the relief which ought to be administered cannot be delayed without injury and, injustice, and also without
56
STANHOPE,
RICHMOND (for the 1st and 3rd reasons.)
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Thursday, February 4, 1830.
MINUTES.] The House met at two o'clock; and after having been summoned to attend in the House of Lords, and previously to reading the Copy of the Lords Commissioners Speech, the Speaker acquainted the House, that he had issued warrants for new writs, for EYE, in the room of Sir Miles Nightingall, deceased: for SOUTHAMPTON, in the room of Wm. Chamberlayne, esq. deceased: LIMERICK COUNTY, in the room of Thomas Lloyd, esq. deceased.
The marq. of DOURO, for Aldeburgh: PHILIP CHARLES SIDNEY, esq. for Eye: DANIEL O'CONNELL,
*
ROWLAND STEPHENSON.—The Speaker then acquainted the House, that he had received a letter from Mr. James Bourdillon, solicitor to the estate of Rowland Stephenson, esq., a bankrupt, inclosing a certificate of the commissioners under the Commission issued against the said Rowland Stephenson; and the said letter was read; and is as follows:—
Bread Street, 19th Jan. 1850.
Sir;—As solicitor to the estate of Mr. Rowland Stephenson, a bankrupt, I am directed by the commissioners under the commission issued against him, to transmit to you their certificate of the issuing of such commission; and that Mr. Rowland Stephenson has not paid his creditors, although twelve calendar months have elapsed since the issuing of the said commission, and that the same has not been superseded. I have the honour to be, &c. J. BOURDILLON.
To the Speaker of the House of Commons.
Then the certificate was read; and is as follows;
To the Right Hon. the Speaker, &c. &c.
At the Court of Commissioners of Bankrupts, in Basinghall Street, London, the 19th day of Jan. 1830.
We whose names are hereunto subscribed, being the major part of the commissioners named and authorised in and by a commission of bankrupt awarded and issued against WILLIAM REMINGTON, ROWLAND STEPHENSON, DAVID ROBT. REMINGTON, and JOSEPH PETTY TOULMIN, of Lombard Street, in the city of London, bankers and copartners, do hereby certify, that a commission of bankrupt under the Great Seal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, grounded upon statute made and now in force concerning bankrupts, bearing date at Westminster the thirty-first day of December, one thousand eight hundred and twenty-eight, hath been awarded and issued against the said ROWLAND STEPHENSON, together with WILLIAM REMINGTON, DAVID ROBERT REMINGTON, and JOSEPH PETTY TOULMIN, directed to us, and also to John Beames and Henry John Shepherd, esqs., as commissioners, to execute the same; and that the said ROWLAND STEPHENSON, (together with the said WM.
*
57
REMINGTON, DAVID ROBERT REMINGTON, and JOSEPH PETTY TOULMIN), was found and declared a bankrupt under the same:
And we further certify that, although twelve calendar months have expired since the issuing of the said commission, the same hath not been superseded, nor have the creditors of the said ROWLAND STEPHENSON, or of him and his said partners, who have proved their debts under the said commission been paid or satisfied to the full amount of their debts under the said commission, according to the provisions in that behalf of an Act of Parliament made and passed in the fifty-second year of the reign of his late majesty King George the Third, intituled, "An Act to suspend and finally vacate the seats of members of the House of Commons who shall become bankrupts, and who shall not pay their debts in full within a limited time."
Witness,
H. HASKER, Clerk to Mr. Jas.
Bourdillon, Solicitor, Bread Street, Cheapside.
JOHN TURNER,
J. B. MACAULAY
G. F. HAMPSON,
Mr. PLANTA then moved, that the Act 52 Geo. 3, c. 144, to suspend and finally vacate the seats of members of the House of Commons who shall become bankrupts, and who shall not pay their debts in full within a limited time, might be read. The same having been read; it was ordered, that Mr. Speaker do issue his warrant to the clerk of the Crown, to make out a new Writ for the electing of a burgess to serve in this present parliament for the borough of Leominster, in the room of Rowland Stephenson, esq., whose seat has become vacant pursuant to the provisions of the said act.
New writs were ordered for WATERFORD COUNTY in the room of Henry Villiers Stuart, esq., Chiltern Hundreds: for Harwich, in the room of right hon. John Charles Henries, President of the Board of Trade: for WEST-LOOE, in the room of Charles Buller, esq., Chiltern Hundreds: for MEATH, in the room of Earl of Bective, now marquis of Headfort.
Mr. DAVENPORT gave notice that on the 16th inst. he should renew his motion relative to the state of the country, if forty members were present.
CLERGY, CHURCHES, AND CHAPELS.]
Mr. Hume
(in continuation of returns ordered last session) moved an Address for "Copies or Abstracts of the Returns made to his Majesty in council by each bishop in England and Wales on 25th March 1827 or 1828, as directed by the twenty-third section of 57 Geo. 3, c. 99:—Return of the number of parish churches and chapels, and chapels of ease, of the church of England, in each parish, and the total in England and Wales:—Abstract of the number of resident and licensed curates in England and Wales, with the amount of the salaries of curacies, according to the diocesan returns for the years 1827 and 1828:—Of the number of places of worship, not of the chinch of England, in each parish; distinguishing, as far as possible, of what sect or persuasion, and the total number of each sect in England and Wales."
Mr. William Smith
said, there was no proper officer to whom an order for such a return could be directed. If the returns could be had without expense to private
58
Mr. Hume
saw no such difficulty. Every bishop was aware of the number in his own diocese; and, no doubt, the Home Secretary would know to whom to send the order so as to ensure obedience to it.
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, it might be perfectly practicable to supply part of the information which the honourable member sought; but as to the number of persons attending, he really did not see whose business it could be to make returns upon that subject; certainly there were no official means of arriving at the information. As far as the motion could be, it should be complied with.—Motion agreed to.
ECCLESIASTICAL COURTS.]
Mr. Protheroe
(in continuation of orders for accounts presented last session) moved addresses for returns from all Courts, and other authorities in England and Wales, empowered to grant probate of wills and letters of administration, stating the date of the earliest wills in their respective registries, the period at which there commences a regular series of original wills and recorded copies of administration, bonds and inventories of act, books of probates and administrations, and of indexes to the said records:—Together with a statement of any occasional chasms, that may occur in, and an accurate detail of the state, and condition of, the said records:—Of the number of wills proved, and letters of administration granted, in the several jurisdictions respectively so empowered, 'in the years 1826, 1827, and 1828; and in cases where no wills have been proved, nor letters of administration granted, in any jurisdiction within the aforementioned period, the date of the last will proved, or letters of administration granted, to be stated:—Of the amount of fees, profits and emoluments of every description, which have been received by the judge, record-keeper, auditor of accounts, all deputies and assistant clerks, and all other persons in the Ecclesiastical and Manorial Courts in England (except the Prerogative Court of Canterbury), from 1825 to 1828, both inclusive:—And of the fees, profits, and emoluments of the registrars, deputy registrars, and proctors, on taking out probates and administrations, in the Ecclesiastical and Manorial Courts in England
59
ADDRESS ON THE KING'S SPEECH.]—
The Speaker
then read a copy of the Lords Commissioners Speech.
The Earl of Darlington
rose to move an Address. Having just heard, in common with the other members of this honourable House, his Majesty's most gracious Speech, it becomes my duty to move an Address thereon, and to advert to the topics which that Speech embraces. Before, however, I enter on these topics in detail, and in the order in which they are presented to me, I will, as concisely as I can, explain the reason which has urged me to undertake that duty, and to place me in a situation as novel to myself as it may be deemed peculiar by many who now hear me, inasmuch as I appear, after being a member of the House for seventeen years, this night, for the first time, at this side of it, and during that period having taken very little share in the debates. [
Spoke from behind the ministerial bench.
60
hear, hear
hear, hear
hear
61
loud cheers and some laughter
hear
cheers
hear
62
hear
hear
63
hear
hear
64
hear
65
66
Mr. Ward
—I rise for the purpose of seconding the motion of the noble lord. Recollecting that many of the ablest and best men whom this country ever claimed as her sons have stood upon the spot which I now occupy for the purpose of recommending by their eloquence the various motions for addresses from time to time proposed, I must say, in my own excuse, that it is the partiality of others, and not any presumption of mine, that has selected me for this task. [
hear
hear, hear
67
hear, hear
hear, hear
hear
68
hear
loud cheers
69
cheers
The Speaker
then read the Motion for an Address.
Sir Edward Knatchbull
.—If, Sir, on the present occasion, I could permit myself to be influenced by personal considerations, I should willingly have adopted the course pursued by me for several years, and suffer the Address to pass without observation. In applying myself to the subject it must be obvious, and I confess it, that I labour under extreme difficulty. It is a very short time since I have been informed of the topics it embraces, and therefore my difficulty becomes the greater still, either in the application of my argument, or in the preparation of an amendment. It is true I might have taken the course once recommended by an hon. member in this House; I might move the adjournment of the debate until to-morrow, so as to have time to form such an Address as I could more willingly offer to your consideration. But I do not think that such a course would be in accordance with the wish or the usage of the House, and I shall not adopt it. I shall follow the Speech as well as I can, and make such observations as suggest themselves. But, before I move the amendment with which I mean to conclude, I must make one or two observations upon what has fallen from the noble lord and the hon. member opposite, the mover and seconder of the Address. If the noble Lord has found it necessary to apologize for the part he has taken, I have no fault to find with him; but, if an apology were necessary, he has made it in the best way possible, and I leave the government the benefit of the explanation. I will also say
70
71
Mr. Ward
.—No, no.
Sir E. Knatchbull
.—Do I hear my hon. friend aright? Does my hon. friend mean to controvert a point which has been settled for now more than a century past, that his Majesty's Speech should be considered as that of his ministers?
Mr. Ward
.—I had no such intention: I misunderstood my hon. friend. I supposed that my hon. friend intended to consider my speech as that of ministers. Now ministers were not at all responsible for what I may have said, [
a laugh
Sir E. Knatchbull
.—All I say, and all I want the attention of the House to, is the simple fact, that the Speech says, in plain terms, that distress exists in "some" places. If I were in want of any explanation I need only refer to the speeches of the mover and seconder of the Address. They say that the distress is general and extraordinary. That is the sole point of difference; and since I heard the Speech I have marvelled how such language could have found its way into the Speech, or how they could make statements so very different from the Address proposed. If ministers said, they would do every thing that wisdom and sagacity and energy could suggest for the relief of the people, then I should agree with them; it would have been unnecessary for me to propose any amendment. If I am asked what evidence have I that distress exists, I will say that I see it and feel it in my own part of the country; and if I am asked for more, I will put the question to every hon. member in the House, and he will say the same of the district which he represents. I know that the distress is not so great in some places as in others, but the question is—is it not universal? We are asked on this important day—perhaps the most important we have ever witnessed—to approach his Majesty with a declaration containing something very like falsehood [
hear
72
hear
The Marquis of Blandford
seconded the amendment. He would not detain the House long; and he thought it would be well if hon. Members in their speeches bore in mind what Jefferson
*
*
ten minutes at a time,
Jefferson's Memoirs and Correspondence,
73
hear and a laugh
Sir John Brydges
.—He did not rise to detain the House by discussing in detail the various topics that had been introduced into the speech of the noble Lord who moved the Address, and of the hon. member who seconded it. He concurred in what had fallen from them, and he approved of the Address. At that time, however, he held it to be insufficient to concur in silence. The parliament was now assembled at a crisis when unexampled distress pervaded every interest of the country, whether it was agricultural, commercial, or trading, and every nerve must be strained to alleviate it. However insignificant his powers might be, his constituents had intrusted him with a seat in the great council of the nation, to uphold their rights, and to maintain the dearest interests of the country; and by the blessing of God he would do his best not to disappoint them. If this trust had not been confided to him, it would have been conferred on some one else, more able, perhaps, but, he was confident, not more willing to do his duty by them. He
74
Mr. Western
, was most astonished at that part of the Speech which described the distress to exist in some parts of the country only, and to be, in fact, merely partial and temporary. The noble duke and his Majesty's ministers must be very much misinformed with respect to the state of the country, and totally ignorant of the fact, that the people of every part of the country were placed in a condition such as they had never known before. The whole of the productive classes of the community, labourers as well as manufacturers, were now enduring a state of severe suffering and misery such as they had never experienced before, at any period of our history. It had been said the distress was partial and temporary. He denied that it could be called so. The people were engaged in a continuity of struggles, which they had supported with firmness for the last fourteen years; but their strength was now nearly exhausted, and
75
laugh and hear, hear
hear, hear, hear
76
Mr. Protheroe
said, he addressed the House, at that early stage of the debate, with unfeigned diffidence of his power to do justice to the subject. During the three sessions that he had enjoyed the honour to occupy a seat in the House, he had, on all occasions, preferred trusting to the language of others for the development of those measures, in the propriety of which he was willing to concur; but he thought the time was now arrived when the exertions of honesty and good intention were more requisite than the display of the greatest oratorical powers, and with that impression he ventured most humbly to offer himself thus early to their notice. That House had long been the subject of attack from men of a certain class and holding particular opinions; but it was now obvious that the opinions respecting its integrity and capacity were not confined to these persons, but that attacks the most violent, and urged in language the most vehement, were to be heard from quarters in which they had never before heard any thing but praise and approbation; from quarters which had been in the habit of lauding, indiscriminately, every act of authority and power, no matter in whose hands that power was reposed. The hollow murmur of discontent now approached the House from all quarters; and none had so accurately describe-
77
hear
78
*
hear
*
79
80
81
Mr. Ald. Waithman
said, he had never been better pleased with any speech than with that of the hon. member who had just sat down. He trusted that the hon. baronet who moved the first amendment would withdraw it in favour of that just proposed, which seemed more fully to express what he trusted was the sense of the House, because it was much nearer the truth. Feeling so strongly as he did on the present occasion, he would give his hearty concurrence to any and every amendment which had for its object an inquiry into the existing distress. He must confess that, looking to the extreme distress of the country, he expected more from the royal Speech on the present occasion than he usually did on similar ones; but looking at the distress of the country, knowing that it was not confined to any particular place, he was surprised at the paragraph in the King's Speech. The paragraph about economy might be taken from every King's Speech during the last four years. The year 1826 was one of great calamity, so was the following-year, yet we were always assured that a system of the greatest economy would be observed. As to the noble duke at the head of the government, he knew of no individual in whom he could sooner place confidence; but, after past experience, he felt it impossible to place confidence in any man. In the year 1817 we were assured of a plan of strict economy, afterwards our army was reduced, and in the next year an increase took place. After this, could the House place confidence in what was stated by ministers? He knew from experience that it was impossible for a member of that House to place confidence in any ministers without its interfering with the strict performance of his duty. The royal Speech stated, that our exports had increased. The same thing was stated last year, and
82
*
*
83
hear, hear
hear
hear
hear
Mr. E. Davenport
said, many very material amendments ought to be added to the Address proposed by the noble lord. The first amendment ought to be a declaration of the expediency of getting rid of that immense military force which, in times of peace, their ancestors considered as an unconstitutional incumbrance, and which only enabled ministers to hold out bribes for the support of members of Parliament. The second obvious amendment was one which the circumstances of the country naturally suggested—namely, that if they
84
laughter
85
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
86
hear
hear
"Order and sobriety,
Are the rules of his society,"
cheers and laughter
l.
Mr. Alderman Thompson
. — I should have contented myself by being silent this evening, if an hon. member had not adverted to a statement made which may go into society; and I feel that I owe it to my own character, and that it is due to the House, that I should give an explanation of the motives that actuate the class of the community to which I belong, as it will also serve to shew why I shall vote as I intend to do. If his majesty's ministers had simply announced that the distress did not affect one interest merely, but that
87
hear
88
hear, hear
hear, hear
laughter, and cries of hear!
hear, hear
Sir J. Sebright
said, he had no doubt that his majesty's ministers would do all in their power to relieve the distresses of the country; but at all events the House must do its duty; and with such feelings he should support the amendment, which more accurately described the distresses of the country.
The Chan. of the Exchequer
said, that for
89
hear, hear
hear
90
hear, hear
de novo,
loud cheers
hear, hear
hear
91
hear
hear
Mr. Maberly
said, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in the Speech which he had just concluded, appeared to think that the sole object of the hon. baronet, and of those who supported his amendment, was to alter the standard of value, or to return wholly to a paper currency. Such was by no means the fact; and he (Mr. Maberly) would, on a future occasion, tell the right hon. gentleman how a paper currency might be adopted without once touching the standard of value. For his part, he had not heard from the hon. baronet that he wanted either an alteration of the standard, or an equitable adjustment, or any such thing. The principle on which the hon. baronet had dealt with the Speech was, that he did not consider it sufficiently explicit of the intentions of his majesty's ministers. It was quite clear that ministers were bound to propose some remedy for the evils that prevailed. Did they not know that the alteration of the currency caused the distress? He maintained that a great deal both of distress and difficulty might have been avoided by more careful measures respect-
92
hear
laughter
l.
93
Mr. O'Connell
said, he did not presume to think that either redress to the people or instruction to the House could follow from the few observations which he should trespass on the House on the present occasion. The people had sent him thereto do their business, and in the discharge of his duty he felt that he was authorised to express his humble opinion as to the state of the country. In the discharge of that duty also, he might have to address them of tener than he could wish; and the only compensation that he could make was, to promise to be as brief as he possibly could. He had now to address himself to the Speech from the Throne, of which he felt himself bound to speak in as harsh terms as he might consistently with the respect to which it was entitled; it was entitled to respect as emanating from the king—and the king's name was a tower of strength; it was entitled to courtesy as proceeding from the noble duke at the head of state affairs and of the government; and, on these accounts, he should treat it with respect and courtesy; but when he looked at what the document was in itself, he felt warranted in saying that anything so unsatisfactory in its propositions, and so meagre in its details, could scarcely have been concocted or conceived, [
hear
hear
hear
hear
94
a laugh.
hear
hear
laughter and cries of hear, hear
laughter
l.
l.
hear
95
hear hear
hear
96
97
cheers and laughter
Mr. Huskisson
said, there had been already one amendment proposed, and notice given of no fewer than three others. He was far from censuring the practice of proposing amendments on such occasions as the present. He came down to the House altogether ignorant of the contents of his Majesty's Speech, and equally ignorant of the intention of the hon. baronet, or of any other gentleman, to propose an amendment; but an amendment having been moved, and a debate having arisen upon it, he felt called upon, without reference to the possibility of prospective arrangements, which might be for consideration hereafter, to express his opinion on the subject with reference to the simple matter of fact as to the state of the country, which was the real question in issue. If the question were as to any particular mode of relief, it would be equally unwise and unbecoming to go into it when assembled to thank his majesty for his gracious Speech; accordingly, from anything of that sort he should cautiously abstain. But, after what he had heard from the noble mover and hon. seconder of the proposed Address, after all that had fallen from those who had subsequently addressed the House, and from his own knowledge of facts, he felt bound to state his opinion that the real facts of the case, as regarded the public distress, were more correctly stated in the amendment moved by the hon. baronet than in the Address proposed by the noble lord. [
hear
98
hear
99
hear
hear and laughter.
100
hear and laughter
onus
hear
101
Mr. Sec. Peel
said, he certainly was not surprised to hear his right hon. friend say, that the chief recommendation of the hon. baronet's amendment in his eyes consisted in its being "a milk-and-water amendment," because when he recollected the votes uniformly given by his right hon. friend, and the doctrines which he had uniformly held, he must say, that the smallest possible infusion of milk in the
102
hear and laughter
hear
103
—"Paribus se legibus ambæ
"Invietæ gentes æterna in fœdera mittant."
104
hear, hear
hear
105
*
*
106
hear
cheers
hear
hear
107
108
l.,
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
109
hear
110
l.
hear
111
hear
hear
hear
112
hear, hear
Lord Althorp
said, he admitted that the present administration had done more good for the country than any other government that had preceded it; but having stated that as his opinion, he, at the same time, claimed his right generally to exercise his judgment in reference to any measures which they might introduce, and to object to, or oppose, any thing emanating from them as he might think proper. He had come down to the House that evening to hear the Speech from the throne, and he could not conceal his surprise at hearing the assertion contained in it, that distress existed "in some parts of the United Kingdom." His impression was, that the distress existed throughout the country. He should feel great satisfaction in hearing that he was mistaken in that opinion; he should feel still greater if that statement of the Speech were proved to be correct. [
hear
113
cries of "no, no," from Sir Edward Knatchbull and others,
Mr. W. Whitmore
.—Though he believed the distress to be general, and whatever reluctance he might have to adopt the statement in the address on that subject, yet as he was not prepared to go the length of those who proposed the amendment, he should vote against it.
Lord Howick
said, he conceived that the statement in the Speech and the Address undervalued the distress which he was convinced extended generally throughout the country. The facts which the right hon. gentleman opposite (Mr. Peel) had mentioned might be met by the statement, which he believed was the case, that many of the operations of our internal trade were carried on at a loss. But while he (lord Howick) regretted to see such a statement in the Speech, as he knew that the distress was general, he could not concur in the amendment proposed by the hon. baronet. He was anxious to wait to see what would be done or proposed by the government. He condemned the system of referring to a committee, consisting of twenty-three gentlemen of that House, the task of examining into every branch of our enormous establishments. It was in his opinion absurd, and likely to end as it had ended, in disappointment. The Address did not pledge hon. members.
Lord P. Leveson Gower
said, he must contend that the terms of his majesty's Speech had not been treated fairly in the amendment proposed by the hon. baronet. In his opinion the terms of his majesty's Speech, as far as they had reference to Ireland, were even more logically true than the terms of the hon. baronet's amendment. He thought too that unjust advantage had been taken of the speech of his right hon. friend the chancellor of the Exchequer. His right hon. friend had not said that there was no distress in Ireland. He should like to see the man who would venture to say that there ever had been a period from the time of bishop Boulter, down to the present, in which no distress existed in Ireland. [
hear
114
cheers
hear
hear, hear
Mr. W. Smith
said, it was his intention to support the original Address; though he was of opinion that the distress of the country was more general than any one would imagine from reading the words of the royal Speech which stated it to be confined to some parts of the United Kingdom. He opposed the amendment, because it found verbal fault with the Address, in order to displace an administration, for which the movers of the amendment wished to substitute another not near so advantageous to the country. [
hear, hear
115
hear
Mr. Mildmay
supported the Address, because he considered the amendment a mere quibble upon words. [
hear
hear
hear
Mr. Duncombe
said, it was his intention to support the amendment, because it painted the distress of the country correctly, which the Address did not. The right hon. Secretary for the Home Department had called upon the House not to support the amendment, until it had further evidence of the distress which pervaded all classes. He was at a loss to conceive what evidence the right hon. gentleman would have, if he were not content with that which he had got already. He had the evidence of the noble lord who moved the Address,
116
hear
hear
hear
Mr. Rice
said, if he could bring himself to believe that upon the issue of this debate the continuance of the present ministers in office was to depend, so grateful was he to them for the great benefit which
117
Lord Tullamore
said, he was satisfied, from personal observation and documentary evidence, that the representations regarding distress were exaggerated; he alluded
118
1825
57,000,000 of yards
1826
70,000,000
1827
96,000,000
1828
98,000,000
Mr. R. Palmer
said, his knowledge of the existence of very general distress compelled him with great regret to vote for the amendment.
Mr. Maurice Fitzgerald
.—If the support of the Address could imply that any inquiry into the existing state of distress were denied, or even not likely to be inquired into, by the government or that House, he would evince a readiness to entertain the Amendment; but when he thought the contrary was the fact, he could not bring himself to the same conclusion as his hon. friends near him. Respecting the omission of Ireland in the Address, he wished to give a hint to the hon. member for Clare, an old debater in public life elsewhere, though young in that House; and it was to caution him against affording his prompt assistance to the hon. members for whom he had this night tendered his vote. There was certainly great distress in Ireland, but nothing equal to the extent in which it pervaded England. Let his hon. friend therefore take care how he gave his support to men, under the notion that he was serving Ireland, who might hereafter turn round and object to the importation of Irish produce, which ought to have as free an admission into the English market as that of Scotland, or of the counties of England, and propose their measures of poor-laws, or others of a similar nature, for the sister kingdom.
Colonel Wood
said, he should vote in favour of the Address, which had described the prevailing distress, but had not encouraged exaggerated estimates of it, while it left every thing open for fair and distinct consideration. He entreated the House to consider what the impression would be of sending forth to the public
119
Mr. Brougham
.—I only rise to state in a few words my reasons for voting for the Amendment, and thereby to guard myself against misconstruction. I feel great regret, and I say it most unfeignedly, at the course I am obliged to take; and I may say with the hon. member for Northamptonshire (lord Althorp), that I never came into the House with less expectation of being driven to vote for an Amendment than this night. If I could persuade myself that the difference between the Address and the Amendment was only a matter of words and form, and not of important sense and substance, in the present state of the country I should unhesitatingly have supported the Address. I deplore extremely the expressions which ministers have thought fit to introduce into the king's Speech. Whether they were or were not aware of it at the time it was framed I know not; but I can only ask myself this question—In what sense will these words be taken by the suffering, the deeply suffering, people of this empire! [
hear
hear, hear
120
Question put, "That those words (sir E. Knatchbull's Amendment) be inserted." The House divided: the numbers were, Ayes 105; Noes 158: Majority against the Amendment 53.
List of the Minority.
Althorp, viscount
Howard, H.
Attwood, W.
Harvey, D. W.
Blandford, marquis of
Heathcote, sir W.
Beaumont, T. W.
Huskisson, rt. hon. W.
Baring, sir T.
Inglis, sir R. H.
Brownlow, C.
Knatchbull, sir E.
Bastard, E. P.
Kemp, T. R.
Burdett, sir F.
King, hon. gen.
Bankes, H.
Lamb, hon. G.
Bankes, W.
Lushington, Dr.
Bernal, R.
Labouchere, H.
Bright, H.
Lester, B.
Bentinck, lord G.
Langston, J. H.
Brougham, H.
Marjoribanks, S.
Baring, F.
Macdonald, sir J.
Cripps, J.
Morpeth, viscount
Calvert, N.
Mundy, F.
Calvert, C.
Mackintosh, rt. hn. sir J.
Cavendish, W.
Marshall, J.
Clinton, F.
Maberly, J.
Canning, rt. hn. sir S.
Normanby, viscount
Carter, J. Bonham
Norton, G.
Dawkins, H.
Osborne, lord F. W.
Duncombe, hon. W.
O'Connell, D.
Duncombe, T.
Ord, W.
Davenport, E.
Palmer, R.
Dick, Q.
Pallmer, C. N.
Denison, J. E.
Palmer, F.
Encombe, viscount
Palmerston, viscount
Fergusson, R. C.
Phillimore, Dr.
Fazakerley, J. N.
Peachy, general
Fyler, T. B.
Protheroe, E.
Fane, J.
Russell, lord J.
Grant, rt. hon. C.
Rice, S.
Grant, R.
Robarts, A. W.
Gascoyne, R. general
Rickford, W.
Gordon, K.
Robinson, G.
Guest, J. J.
Sefton, earl of
Graham, sir J. G. C.
Scott, hon. W.
121
Smith, S.
Wodehouse, E.
Smith, A.
Warrender, sir G.
Smith, hon. R.
Wall, C. B.
Stanley, hon. E. G.
Wyvill, M.
Seabright, sir J.
Wood, ald.
Sadler, M. T.
Wood, C.
Trant, W. H.
Wetherell, sir C.
Thomson, C. P.
Wells, J.
Trevor, hon. R.
Westenra, hon. R.
Tynte, C. K. K.
Whitbread, W. H.
Tennyson, C.
Western, C. C.
Uxbridge, earl of
Wilson, sir R. T.
Vivian, sir R. R.
Waithman, ald.
The main question was then put and agreed to, and the following Committee appointed "to draw up an Address to be presented to his Majesty upon the said Resolution:"—The Earl of Darlington, Mr. Ward, Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr. Secretary Peel, Mr. Courtenay, Lord Leveson Gower, Sir George Clerk, Mr. Attorney General, Mr. Solicitor General, Mr. Dawson, Mr. Planta, Sir Alexander Grant, or any five of them.
The ADDRESS upon the Lords Commissioners Speech.]
The following is an official copy of the Address referred to in page 7.
Die Jovis,
Most Gracious Sovereign;
WE, Your Majesty's most dutiful and loyal Subjects, the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, in Parliament assembled, beg leave to approach Your Majesty, to return to Your Majesty our most humble Thanks for the Gracious Speech which Your Majesty has directed the Lords Commissioners to deliver to both Houses of Parliament.
WE beg leave to express to Your Majesty our grateful Acknowledgment, of the Communication, that Your Majesty has received from all Foreign Powers the strongest Assurances of their Desire to maintain and cultivate the most friendly Relations with this Country.
WE assure Your Majesty that we participate in the Satisfaction with which Your Majesty has seen that the War between Russia and the Ottoman Porte has been brought to a Conclusion.
WE offer our humble Thanks to Your
122
WE humbly assure Your Majesty of the sincere Satisfaction with which we have learned that Your Majesty, having recently concerted with Your Allies Measures for the Pacification and final Settlement of Greece, trust that You shall be enabled, at an early Period, to communicate to Your Parliament the particulars of this Arrangement, with such Information as may explain the Course which Your Majesty has pursued thoughout the Progress of these important Transactions.
WE cannot but express our Concern that Your Majesty is unable to announce the Prospect of a Reconciliation between the Princes of the House of Braganza.
WE thank Your Majesty for the Communication, that You have not yet deemed it expedient to re-establish, upon their ancient Footing, Your Majesty's Diplomatic Relations with the Kingdom of Portugal; and to express our grateful Sense of the Assurance, that the numerous Embarrassments arising from the continued Interruption of those Relations increase Your Majesty's Desire to effect the termination of so serious an Evil.
WE offer to Your Majesty our humble Thanks for having acquainted us, that Your Majesty's Attention has been of late earnestly directed to the various important Considerations connected with Improvements in the general Administration of the Law; and for the Directions which Your Majesty has been graciously pleased to give, that measures shall be submitted to the Deliberation of Parliament, of which some are calculated, in the Opinion of Your Majesty, to facilitate and expedite the Course of Justice in different Parts of the United Kingdom, and others appear to be necessary Preliminaries to a Revision of the Practice and Proceedings of the Superior Courts.
WE assure Your Majesty that we are impressed with a due Sense of the Confi-
123
WE desire to express the Satisfaction with which we have received the Information which Your Majesty has commanded to be given to us, that the Export in the last Year of British Produce and Manufactures has exceeded that of any former Year; and to assure Your Majesty that we deeply lament that, notwithstanding this Indication of active Commerce, Distress should prevail among the Agricultural and Manufacturing Classes of some Parts of the United Kingdom.
WE assure Your Majesty of our sincere Belief that it would be highly gratifying to the paternal Feelings of Your Majesty to be enabled to propose for the Consideration of Parliament, Measures calculated to remove the Difficulties of any portion of Your Subjects, and at the same time compatible with the general and permanent Interests of Your People.
WE beg leave to offer to Your Majesty our humble Thanks for the deep Solicitude Your Majesty feels for those Interests, and to express our Conviction of the Necessity with which Your Majesty is impressed of acting with extreme Caution in reference to this important Subject.
WE assure Your Majesty that we shall concur with Your Majesty in assigning its due Weight to the Effect of unfavourable Seasons, and the Operation of other Causes which are beyond the Reach of Legislative Control or Remedy.
WE offer the Assurance of our Gratitude for the Conviction Your Majesty is graciously pleased to express, that no Pressure of temporary Difficulty will induce this House to relax the Determination it has constantly manifested to maintain Public Credit inviolate, and thus to uphold the high Character and the permanent Welfare of the Country.
124
On Monday following was presented His Majesty's most gracious Answer:—
My Lords; I thank you for your loyal and dutiful Address.—I rely with just Confidence on your zealous Co-operation in all Measures calculated to improve the Condition of My Subjects, and to maintain the Honour and high Character of the Country.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, February 5, 1830.
MINUTES.] JAMES BARLOW HAY, Esq. took the Oaths and his Seat for Southampton.—Mr. D. W. HARVEY gave notice, that on the 25th February he should move for a Committee on the Crown Revenues, and the means of rendering them most available to the exigencies of the country.—The Solicitor General moved for a return of the several persons who were "confined for contempt under process issuing out of the Courts of Chancery and Exchequer," on the 7th March 1827 (the date of the last return made by order of this House); and also, of those who have been committed since that period; stating what persons have died, or been discharged from their contempts, since the said 7th March 1827, and how many now remain in custody for contempt—ordered.
EAST INDIA CHARTER AND JUDICATURE—LORD ELLENBOROUGH'S LETTER.]
Mr. S. Rice
presented a petition from Mr. V. Hunt, Mayor of Limerick, and Chairman of a meeting of the Freemen, Freeholders, and Inhabitants of the County of the City of Limerick, against a renewal of the East India Charter.— Having stated the object of the petition, he said he would take that opportunity to put a question to his hon. and learned friend opposite (Mr. G. Bankes), who had, at least till a late period, been connected with the administration of the affairs of India. The subject to which he was about to allude was of such an important nature, that it was highly necessary that the public and parliament should know what answer his learned friend would give—if he were to give any answer—to the question which he was about to propose, relative to a matter that was certainly deserving of explanation. A letter had recently appeared in the public prints of this country,
*
*
"India Board, Feb. 21.
"Sir,—I had not intended to write to you until I could communicate to you the opinion of the law-officers of the Crown upon the difference which appears to have taken place between you and the Supreme Court of Bombay; but the Chairs have just informed me
125
that they wrote to you by a vessel which sails to-day, and I am unwilling that you should not receive a letter from me at the same time.
"I believe there is but one opinion in this country as to the conduct of the Supreme Court. Their law is considered bad law; but then errors in matters of law are nothing in comparison with those they have committed in the tenour of their speeches from the bench. Had sir C. Chambers lived, I think he must have been displaced. Sir J. Grant seems to have confined himself more strictly to a legal argument. He may have been led by his erring chief: still there is much to censure in his conduct, and although I think it will probably not be considered necessary to recall him, his case is by no means decided upon. I am to have some conversation upon it with the Chancellor in a few days. We are so much occupied with our Roman Catholic Relief-bill at present, that we have little time for other matters, however important: to this circumstance must be attributed the delay which has occurred on the part of the law-officers. There was none in sending the case to them. In the mean time the King has, on my recommendation, made your Advocate-general, Mr. Dewar, Chief Justice. I advised this appointment because that gentleman appears to have shown ability and discretion during the late conflict with the Supreme Court, and because he appears to take a right view of the law, and to be on terms of confidence with you.
"I thought the putting him over sir J. Grant's head would do more to notify public opinion than any other measure I could at once adopt; and you have him in action two months sooner than you could have any other sent from here. I hope this arrangement will be satisfactory to you.
"The Puisne Judge appointed in the room of sir C. Chambers, is Mr. William Seymour, of the Chancery bar. The Lord Chancellor has a very good opinion of him, and generally, I think, he appeared to have higher claims than any other candidate. He is a gentleman in his manners, and a man of cultivated mind. He seems to have right notions of his duty, and of the law which has been so strangely misinterpreted. He will rather support Government than use the authority of the Supreme Court as a means of raising opposition. At least, if he is not all this, I have been deceived in him. He will embark in less than two months. He will probably be knighted before he sails; and as it will not be right that the Chief Justice alone should not be knighted, we must consider in what manner that can be best effected. I believe it may be done by patent; but my present idea is to empower you, as Governor, to confer the honour of knighthood on Mr. Dewar. This will evidently place the Governor
126
above the Court. It will mark you out as the King's representative: you may make the ceremony as imposing as you please. I have written to the Heralds'-office to know if the thing could be done according to precedents.
"It is as yet undecided, the law-officers not having as yet given their opinion as to the law, whether a declaratory act will be required. Perhaps the opinions of the law-officers, and those which I may obtain of the Lord Chancellor and the Lord Chief Justice, may be sufficient to induce sir J. Grant to revise his notions of law. At any rate, no more mischief can happen, as he will be like a wild elephant led away between two tame ones.
"As we may not impossibly renew the Charter next year, we may take that opportunity of rectifying the expressions of the act of Parliament, should they require it. Many persons think it would be inexpedient to open a discussion on Indian matters this year, if it could be avoided. But, as I tell you, no decision is yet come to.
"You will see that there is no intention of deserting you. You have acted with much firmness and prudence. I entirely agree in the view you have expressed of the dangerous consequences which would result from the extension beyond the limits of the Precedency of the powers claimed by the Supreme Court. Orders have been given for expediting the patent of the Chief Judge.
"It is with deep regret that I have heard that the Company and the country are so soon to lose your services in India. I could not ask you to stay one hour to the danger of your valuable life: but I am confident you will stay till you have re-established the authority of Government in the opinion of the natives. I trust, indeed, that the unbending firmness you have displayed will have prevented much of the evil which might have been expected to flow from the conduct of the judges.
"I feel satisfied that you will act with the same firmness under all circumstances, and at the same time with moderation and discretion. You may thus depend upon the support of the Board of Control, which I have the honour of presiding over. I have, &c.
(Signed) "ELLENBOROUGH.
"Sir J. Malcolm, G.C.B.
"I am going to send you a very excellent new Bishop, whenever Dr. James resigns—Mr. J. M. Turner. The Archbishop of Canterbury, the Bishop of London, and indeed all the Bishops I have seen, are quite satisfied that Mr. Turner is as fit a man as could have been selected. He will be mild and firm. He is a very good and pious man, without worldly notions, and really devoted to his high calling.
"E."
127
Mr. G. Bankes
said, he felt no hesitation whatever in communicating all the information which it was in his power to give respecting the letter to which the hon. member for Limerick had directed attention. He begged to be allowed to say, that, owing to the circumstance of a melancholy occurrence in the family of the noble Lord (Ellenborough) alluded to, [the recent death of his lordship's son at Worthing,] he (Mr. Bankes) had not had an opportunity, these many days, of seeing him; but he understood from the noble Lord that the letter in question was written in the shape of a strictly private and confidential communication from him to the individual to whom it was addressed, and that it was never intended to meet the public eye. He could state, that while acting as Secretary to the India Board, he had never seen a copy of this letter, and he believed that it was not in the power of the noble lord himself to say whether or not the letter which had been published in the papers was a correct copy of the private letter he had written to sir John Malcolm. The fact was, that the noble lord had kept no copy of that letter, as it was a strictly private and confidential one, and one which was never intended to meet the public eye. Sir John Malcolm had since expressed his deepest regret that it should have come before the public, and had stated, that a deliberate and shameful breach of confidence was the only means by which such a document could have been brought before the public. He had already mentioned that his noble friend was not able to state whether or not it was a completely correct copy of his letter that had appeared in the papers of this country, as he had kept no copy whatever of that letter, it being intended as a mere private and confidential communication. He was ready to afford any other information he possessed, if the hon. member should wish to put any further questions on this subject.
Mr. Brougham
thought the appearance of
128
hear, hear
Mr. M. A. Taylor
.—If the letter were genuine, it was indeed a most extraordinary document, and he had read it with regret.
Mr. Bankes
said, he could only reiterate the statement he had already made as to the noble lord having no copy of the original letter in his possession, and his consequent inability to state whether or not the copy published in the papers was correct. It was transmitted as a private confidential communication, and it could only have been through a base violation of confidence that it was ever made public.
Mr. Trant
said, he could not but strongly condemn the practice of making documents of such a description public. It was calculated altogether to put an end to confidential correspondence between individuals in this country and their friends in India. He would give no opinion as to the letter itself, but he would enter his protest against founding any public proceeding upon a private letter written in confidence from one gentleman to another, and the publication of which could have occurred only through a gross violation of confidence.
Mr. S. Rice
said, he knew nothing of the manner in which this letter had been made public, but seeing it in the public prints, he took the liberty of putting the question to his hon. friend, and he did not think he could have asked him a kinder question, as it afforded him the opportunity for the explanation he had given, and which would have been more satisfactory if he could have denied altogether the genuineness of the letter. Let the disgrace of publishing the letter attach to the indivi-
129
hear
hear
Mr. Hume
said, if the doctrine of the hon. Secretary to the India Board were to be adopted, we should remain in total ignorance of the administration of affairs there, for a large portion of the business between this country and India was uniformly transacted in the way of private communications either from the heads of the Board of Control, or the directors of the East-India company, explaining the way in which the official individuals were to act. He had received a copy of this letter from Calcutta. He believed, it had been published in every newspaper in Bombay, and thus an opportunity was given to sir John Malcolm to triumph over the King's Court there, which no longer could be considered as affording that protection to the natives for which it had been, established. Mr. Dewar, it appeared, was considered fit to fill the office of judge there because he would truckle to the government. Thus the confidence of the natives was destroyed, and the letter of the noble lord had spread dismay throughout the whole of Bombay. The subserviency of two of the judges, it seems, could now be reckoned upon; and then, if sir J. Grant should be refractory, why, according to the noble lord, no mischief would accrue, for he "would be like a wild elephant, led away between two tame ones" [
loud laughter
hear
Mr. G. Bankes
explained.—He had laid down no doctrine but that to which every man of right feeling would assent; namely, that private and confidential letters should not be violated. The hon. member (Mr. Hume) had stated, that a copy of the letter had been forwarded to him from
130
Calcutta Journal,
Lord Ashley
would contend that the letter was a private communication, and that even supposing the copy published was a genuine one, it was rather hard that an individual should be judged according to what he had written in a hurry and in. private confidence to another. He knew that no man was more anxious than the noble lord in question to see a complete independence preserved to the court in Bombay, and he should not, therefore, be judged by a momentary effusion in a private letter.
Mr. Brougham
said, whether the letter was private and confidential or not, it had all the forms of an official despatch, although the substance of it was certainly contrary to all the official despatches he had ever seen, [
hear, and a laugh
131
Mr. Peel
.—Different versions had been circulated in India of this letter, which he understood were very different from the one published in this country. He had asked his noble friend respecting it when the letter was published here. The noble lord acknowledged that he had written a letter of that description, but he could not say whether that was a correct copy of it, and it was moreover a letter written hastily, and inadvertently. He did not mean to say, that a public officer had a right to write letters to public functionaries upon public subjects, and afterwards to screen himself from animadversion on the plea that his letters were private [
hear
hear
Lord J. Russell
said, no satisfactory explanation of this matter had been given. and that the House should consider whether the individual who could write such
132
Mr. Brougham
inquired whether the case of sir J. Grant, to which allusion was made in the letter, was yet decided?
Mr. Bankes
was not sure whether sir J. Grant's case was as yet decided upon.
Sir J. Mackintosh
said, he condemned in the strongest terms the sentiments contained in the letter to which the attention of the House had been directed. He could not look upon a letter from the President of the India Board to a governor in India, treating on public subjects, as a private letter. In writing this letter, the noble lord seemed to forget what was due to his situation. The secret opinions of those who administered the affairs of India were, when made known to the public, of the greatest importance to it, because they displayed the real opinions of those who governed the public both in England and in India. He would say that, if the noble lord should now come forward, and, in a manner which could not be mistaken, and which could not be concealed, disavow the sentiments of that letter, supposing it to be genuine, such a disavowal, so made and so published, would be, in his eyes, a great reparation of the original fault which he had committed. If he could understand that any thing of that kind was in contemplation, he should be glad to receive it; but it was treating a matter of first rate importance with far too much levity, to say merely, that the noble lord had forgotten what he might have said respecting it. Was the character of a judge such a trifle in any man's eyes, that he could easily forget what he had said respecting the mode of that judge's performing his high and important functions?—Was the administration of justice to be treated with such scornful negligence—was it, in short, to be matter of such utter indifference to the noble lord, that he could write about it with such inconsiderate haste, as not to be able, at the end of nine months, to recollect even the substance of what he had then written? Those stale jests which the letter contained, about employing a tame elephant as a decoy for the wild ones, were not likely to be forgotten soon by the reader,
133
Sir R. H. Inglis
.—As it appeared from the public newspapers that a terrible domestic calamity had been inflicted upon the noble lord within the last few days, some indulgence ought to be extended to him, if in the confusion of the moment he had stated that he did not recollect what he had written in a letter which he had sent to India nine months before, and of which he had kept no copy. He did not intend to enter at that moment into a consideration of the letter itself. If the document, consistently with the forms of parliament, could be laid upon the table of the House, he should be anxious to say a word or two upon it, when it came before them in a regular form. At present he would submit to his hon. and learned friend, whether the noble lord was not entitled to some indulgence for the reasons which he had just stated.
Mr. G. Bankes
said, as so much allusion had been made to the forgetfulness of the noble lord, he would only say that the friends of that noble lord would have ill-served him if they had rested his defence entirely upon that ground. His forgetfulness was intended to apply only to particular expressions in the letter; and really those expressions appeared to him to have been very much misinterpreted by the newspapers.
Mr. Rice
said, his reason for bringing this matter forward at this early period was, that the letter stated the intentions of government with regard to the East-India Company's charter. He had therefore thought it right to ascertain whether the statements of the letter were true or not.
Petition ordered to be printed.
WEST INDIES AXD THE UNITED STATES.]
Mr. Robinson
.—As I have a question to put to the right hon. Secretary
134
Mr. Peel
.—My answer is, that a communication upon that subject has been received by his majesty's government from, the minister of the United States, and that that communication is still under consideration.
MALT DUTIES.]
Lord F. Osborne
gave notice that on the 1st May, or as early as possible after the recess, he should move for a committee of the whole House, on the Beer and Malt Duties; at the same time he should be glad if some proceeding of the government rendered his motion unnecessary.
COMMONS GALLERY—ADMISSION OF STRANGERS.]
Mr. Planta
moved the usual sessional orders and resolutions.
On that relative to "Strangers," which is in the following words—"That the Serjeant at Arms attending this House do, from time to time, take into his custody any Stranger or Strangers that he shall see, or be informed of to be, in the House or Gallery, while the House, or any Committee of the whole House, is sitting; and that no person, so taken into custody, be discharged out of custody without the special order of the House,"
Mr. Hume
said, he wished to call the attention of the House to this particular order. It was an order of very old standing; indeed it was so ancient, that it was disregarded in practice; and he therefore put it to the House whether they had not now arrived at the time when they could avowedly admit the public to hear what passed within their walls, a privilege which it substantially possessed already, although liable to certain penalties for exercising it. It was well known that, if any member wished the gallery to be cleared, he had only to intimate that "Strangers" were present, and the gallery must, be cleared without any debate. Last year, as a gallant friend of his (colonel Davis), whom he had not the
135
Mr. Peel
; by no means acquiesced in the proposition which had just been made by the hon. member for Aberdeen. The proposal to abandon so important a privilege as the present, was one of those matters on which the House ought not to decide instantly and without due
136
hear
hear
Mr. Hume
.—"Perhaps the House will let this order stand over for a few days, in order to enable me to give the notice which the right hon. gentleman seems to think necessary. I should hope that the further consideration of this order may be postponed for a week." [
Cries of "no no"
Mr. Peel
could not consent to that proposal, because it would seem to call in question the propriety of the existing order. The passing of that order now would not prevent the hon. member for Aberdeen from calling the attention of the House to it on a future occasion. He hoped, however, that the House would pause before it parted with the power of clearing the gallery, [
hear
Mr. Hume
said, he would not press his objection to the resolution at present, but would take another opportunity of bringing it under consideration.—The order was then agreed to.
UNREPRESENTED TOWNS.]
Lord John Russell
gave notice that on the 23rd he should move for leave to bring in a bill to enable or allow Manchester, Leeds, and Birmingham, to send Members to Parliament, [
cheers
CORK CITY ELECTION.]
Mr. Speaker
acquainted the House, that he had received from the Deputy to the Clerk of the Crown in Ireland a petition of Daniel Meagher, and others, electors of the city of Cork, complaining of an undue election
137
See Appendix, Commons Votes, No.
PRIVATE BILLS.]
The following Resolutions were adopted as standing orders for the session;—That this House will not receive any petition for private bills, after Friday the 19th day of this instant February;—That no private bill be read the first time after Monday the 8th day of March next; and—That this House will not receive any report of such private bill, after Monday the 3rd day of May next.
REPORT OF THE ADDRESS ON THE SPEECH.]
The Earl of Darlington
appeared at the bar with the Report of the committee appointed to prepare the Address on the Lords Commissioners Speech. The Address being read a second time.
138
Lord Palmerston
rose.—He understood that some amendments were to be proposed, and he wished to make some observations before that stage arrived. He had voted for the Amendment of the preceding evening (sir E. Knatchbull's) because it appeared to him to embrace a fair statement of facts. But he wished not to be understood by his vote on that occasion as either despairing of the situation of the country, or binding himself to a concurrence in those measures with which some individuals might think it proper that the Amendment should be followed up. He did not look with despondency on the situation of the country; for when he saw twenty millions of active and industrious men enjoying the blessings of such a constitution as we possessed, placed on a fine and fertile soil, and having the power to avail themselves of all the local advantages of commerce, it was impossible but that ultimately the condition of the country would be improved. His opinion was, that the distress arose, in a great degree, from the measures taken with respect to the currency; and he thought, if any man who voted for these measures did not, at the same time, perceive that they must produce very considerable alterations, that he could not have understood the subject. It was clear, that the return to a metallic standard was likely to be attended with certain difficulties; but if they would contrast the difficulties of the present day with those scenes of distress and bankruptcy which were created by various panics, he thought it would be found that the pressure occasioned by the return to a sound currency was infinitely less than the mischief occasioned by the alterations incidental to the old system, [
hear
hear, hear
139
hear
140
de facto,
141
Mr. Peel
said, he agreed with his noble friend, that this was not the fit occasion for entering on so important a subject. In the first place, its importance entitled it to separate and serious consideration: and as his majesty had stated, that when the proper time arrived, the necessary documents would be laid before the House, he did not think it right, in the absence of such information, that any discussion should be provoked. By approving of the Address, no gentleman pledged him-
142
hear
hear
hear
143
144
145
hear
hear
146
hear
Lord Palmerston
explained. He denied that he counselled war, as the right hon. gentleman asserted. On that point he had been quite misconceived. All he wished to convey was, that by assuming a firmer and more decided tone, the country, without the slightest risk of war, might have secured advantages of which it has been deprived, and of which England's allies had been deprived.
Mr. C. Grant
said, he thought that the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Peel) had certainly, without intending it, very much misconstrued the nature of his noble friend's argument. His noble friend said, you profess neutrality to all parties, but I ask you, do you preserve it in the strict sense of the word,—he asks, is it true that when Spain threatened an attack on Mexico, and the Mexicans, in order to avert the consequences of that attack, threatened in their turn to make a descent on Cuba—he asks you, is it true that the government of this country interfered to protect Cuba and rescue it from the danger in which it was placed? His noble friend asked if that was the case; and he asks still further, if it be true that when the Spaniards at Cuba, rescued from the restraint and the shackles which the threats of this invasion had imposed on them, two years afterwards landed in Mexico, why it was that having interfered to protect Cuba from the Mexicans, you did not also interfere on the principle of reciprocal justice, and protect Mexico from the people of Cuba? The right hon. gentleman (Mr. Peel), however, assumes that there were certain circumstances connected with the interests and the welfare of England which placed the interference with respect to Cuba out of the ordinary principles. Now he would ask the right hon. gentleman, were there no circumstances connected with the prosperity or interests of England which called on the government to prevent, as far as was in its power, the return of Mexico or South America under the control of Spain? He confessed, that in the present situation of this country, he knew none whose prosperity in every point of view, whether commercial or political, ought to be viewed with greater anxiety than Mexico and South America; and
147
hear
148
a laugh
"—Illum ego lucidas
Inire sedes, ducere nectaris
Succos, et ascribi quietis
Ordinibus patiar Deorum."
Hear
hear
Lord John Russell
said, he rejoiced in the assertion that parliament was not pledged
149
de facto
150
Sir Jos. Yorke
said, he was so hoarse
151
hear! and a laugh
a laugh
a laugh
a laugh
152
hear! and laughter
a laugh
laughter and some murmurs
153
order, order
much laughter
Dr. Lushington
said, he deprecated war; but at the same time maintained that if the honour and policy of the country required us to commence it, we ought not to hesitate to engage in it. Adverting to Portugal, he wished that we had preserved a strict neutrality towards the different parties in that country. The fact was, however, that while the British government had in outward appearance conducted itself towards Donna Maria with civility and courtesy, on all great matters it had leant to the individual who now sat on the throne of Portugal. So far as he was possessed of information on the subject (for one of the extraordinary qualities of the present administration was the darkness in which its proceedings were shrouded), he was compelled to conclude that Don Miguel had been enabled to maintain his seat on the Portuguese throne by the countenance of this country, by which it seemed probable that he was about to be formally recognized. It was true that there was no passage to that express effect in his majesty's Speech, but the intimation appeared to him to be clearly conveyed in it. He strongly condemned the conduct of government in preventing Mexico from attacking Cuba, but allowing Spain to attack Mexico from Cuba. Indeed he never reflected on the course which this country had of late pursued towards the Spanish states of South America without pain. It was a course replete with inconsistencies and anomalies. About twenty years ago lord Castlereagh had held out to the Spanish provinces in
154
hear
Mr. Maberly
.—He felt obliged to advert to what had dropped from the hon. member for Ryegate (sir J. Yorke) with respect to himself, and must observe that it appeared to him to be scarcely consistent with common courtesy or the regulations of the House [
hear
Sir J. Yorke
.—If he had been unparliamentary in his expressions, he ought to have been called to order. He disclaimed
155
hear
Mr. Maberly
expressed himself perfectly satisfied with this explanation.
Mr. Sadler
begged now to be allowed to say a few words, as no opportunity had occurred last night for expressing his sentiments on the various topics which had been discussed. He should not, indeed, have now risen, had it not been for the levity with which the distresses of the country had been treated by a right. hon. gentleman. That was not the way in which they ought to be treated. He would not advert to the questions connected with our foreign policy. The Speech delivered in his majesty's name, dissatisfied him, however, on these points as well as on others, — on the points which had been omitted as well as on the points which had been introduced. But the overwhelming topic of interest, that which affected the heart of every thinking man in the country, was the universal distress which prevailed throughout the United Kingdom. The passage in the Speech which referred to that distress, was introduced by a declaration relative to the increase of our exports. This was supported by the comments of the right hon. Secretary of State for the Home Department, and he had argued, by some documents about canals, from an increase of activity, proof of prosperity in our home occupation. The Speech allowed that distress did certainly prevail in some parts of the United Kingdom; but the terms of the statement were evidently intended to imply that the distress was by no means extensive. Truth was told, but not the whole truth. It was the duty of those who advised the Crown to advise it to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. When the commercial policy of this country was unhappily changed, the alteration was accompanied by glowing predictions of the prosperity that would ensue. He did not wish to taunt those who had indulged in such expectations; but he would ask them whether any one of those expectations had been realized? On the contrary, had they not all been most cruelly disappointed? At the opening of the last session, the House had been solemnly assured that the state of the revenue was exceedingly satisfactory; and that the comforts and
156
157
ignis fatuus.
hear, hear
Mr. J. Wood
said, he had never known the country more impatient for relief; and the people had been taught to expect that the government would be prepared with some remedy; but how were their expectations to be gratified by the Speech or the Address? The Speech, in the first instance, doubted of the prevalence of distress, and it went to professions
158
hear
Mr. Attwood
said, the Speech had asserted the exports of 1829 to amount to more than those of any former year; but he would say, that when the commerce of a country was not prosperous, the greater its extent the greater was its evil. It was absurd at the present moment in ministers to congratulate the country on the extent of its commerce. The distress was deeply felt, and it had spread over the whole productive classes of the community, and he would be glad to hear from any member of that House that there was any one branch of industry that could be pronounced in a tolerably satisfactory state—he meant in such a state that any man would wish to embark his capital in it, or in such a state as these who had embarked their capital would not wish to withdraw it. The chancellor of the Exchequer had said, that prosperity prevailed in Ireland; but
159
cheers
hear
160
hear
161
hear
162
a laugh
163
hear
hear, hear
164
hear
165
hear
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
.—He thought, when he had yesterday stated that he considered the great object of those who moved the amendment was connected with an alteration of the standard of value, that he had been met, on their parts, with the disclaimer of any such intention.—He therefore thanked the right hon. member who had just resumed his seat, for the clear and explicit statement given of his objections to that system which, after a full consideration of the matter, parliament had thought proper to adopt. That hon. gentleman had drawn a fearful picture of what he considered would be the consequences of an adherence to that system; but if parliament had ever determined to have changed that system, he would indeed have had an opportunity of describing distresses, not only as dreadful, but more real, than those on which he had been recently dilating. Did the hon. Member forget that the system of which he complained had been ten years established? and could he be ignorant of the fact that in a community like this, distinguished, perhaps, above all others for the variety and extent of its engagements and pecuniary transactions, occurring from day to day—could he, in such a community, forbear to see how large a proportion of transactions must have taken place within that period, under the standard which he now proposed to get rid of? [
hear
hear
166
167
Mr. Trant
wished very briefly to state his opinion on this subject, and he could not but say that the distress called for a more decided expression of sympathy than that which was contained in the Address.—All the evil predictions of 1819, when the currency question was discussed, had been verified; that alone required immediate revision, independent of the great subject of the national debt. He was himself a public creditor, but for one, he did not wish to receive a farthing more than was just, with relation to the rest of the community. He did not pretend to be a philosopher, but he kept his eyes and ears open, and let him go where he would, he heard everybody complaining that the legislature had pursued a wrong course. He begged to ask, whether, since the year l819, the country had enjoyed anything like even an average state of prosperity? and the admitted great falling-off in the Excise showed that the people had not the means of buying the most ordinary luxuries. Nobody denied the amount of distress, and ministers themselves, when pressed, were obliged to admit it. If, then, for the last ten years, parliament had pursued an erroneous system, it was fit at once to avow it, and to set about the adoption of a remedy; for one, instead of opposing Government, he should be most happy to lend it every assistance, and to endeavour to re-establish this House in particular in the confidence of the country. [
hear
Mr. Alderman Waithman
.—He did not rise to answer the speech of the hon. member for Callington, which was one of the most powerful in argument and eloquence he had heard for many years. He wished merely to set the House right on a matter of fact, which would shew the fallacy of what was called 'the official value of exports.' He denied that the exports were increased, and he was astonished that the Chancellor of the Exchequer should this night have repeated so fallacious a statement. Looking at the real value, he could establish, that within the last twenty years the exports of the country had fallen off to a frightful amount, and in the last five years only they had been lessened on the average to the extent of nine millions sterling, without taking into account colonial and foreign produce. The principle he contended for had been adopted by Mr. Pitt,
168
The Report was then brought up and read. On the question that it be agreed to,
Mr. Hume
begged to state, that it had been his intention to move an amendment, to supply a great defect in the Address, and to direct the attention of his Majesty to the only real means of giving efficient relief,—a reduction of expenditure and a consequent diminution of taxation. As they could not raise prices, they ought to reduce taxes. After, however, the discussion the subject had undergone, and at that late hour, he was not disposed to press it, especially as he intended to give a notice for the 12th instant, for a humble Address to the Throne, praying that his Majesty would order such a reduction in the national expenditure as would enable the House to make a reduction of taxation proportioned to the alteration of the currency. It had been stated by Ministers, and in his opinion very wisely, that to alter the present standard of value would occasion greater evils than any benefits that could be anticipated from that alteration. [hear']
Mr. Maberly
.—He was desirous of taking this opportunity of redeeming the pledge he had given last session, and which had been adverted to by the gallant
169
hear, hear
170
The Marquis of Blandford
.—He should trespass but a few moments on the indulgence of the House, but would request their most serious attention to a topic of the greatest importance to the interests of the country, and one which could never be too earnestly impressed on the mind of their Sovereign, however unaccountably it had been neglected hitherto. He alluded to the present pernicious state of the popular representation. [
hear, hear
171
"That this House is at no loss to indicate the real cause of this most unnatural state of things, and, injustice to your Majesty and the whole nation, it can no longer hesitate to proclaim that cause to the world.
"It is a fact, already too notorious, that this House, which was intended by our ancient and admirable constitution to be the guardian of the nation's purse, has, from causes now unnecessary to be detailed, been nominated, for the greater part, by a few proprietors of close and decayed boroughs, and by a few other individuals, who, by the mere power of money employed in means absolutely and positively forbidden by the laws, have obtained a domination, also expressly forbidden by act of parliament, over certain other cities and boroughs in the United Kingdom.
"That in consequence of this departure from the wisdom of our ancestors, the nation has been deprived of its natural guardian, and has, in consequence, become so burthened with expensive establishments of all kinds, that, in a period much shorter than the life of man, the taxation has increased from nine millions to nearly sixty millions a-year; and the poor-rates, or parochial assessments during the same period, have augmented from one and a half millions to eight millions annually.
172
"That to render such a mass of taxation, so disproportionate to the whole wealth of the kingdom, in any degree supportable, recourse has been had, cither from ignorance or design, to the most monstrous schemes in tampering with the currency, or circulating money of the country; at one time by greatly diminishing the value of the same, and at another time by greatly augmenting such value; and at each and every of such changes, which have been but too often repeated, one class of the community after another has been plunged into poverty, misery, and ruin, while the sufferers, without any fault or folly of their own, have been hardly able to perceive from what hand these calamities have come upon them.
"That, under such circumstances, and with this knowledge before its eyes, this House would consider itself lost to every sense of duty towards your Majesty, and guilty of treason towards the people, if it did not seize this opportunity of declaring to your majesty its solemn conviction that the state is at this moment in the most imminent danger, and that no effectual measures of salvation will or can be adopted until the people shall be restored to their rightful share in the legislation of the country; that is, to their undoubted right, according to the true meaning of the constitution, of choosing the members of this House."
Mr. O'Connell
.—I beg leave to second the noble Lord's amendment.
Sir Francis
Burdett.—It must be unnecessary for him to say, that the sentiments of this amendment corresponded with those of his own mind; but it was a question of such magnitude, such general and paramount importance, that he found himself quite unable to do justice to it, brought forward as it was without sufficient time having been given adequately to consider it, and he hoped the noble lord would see that more effect would be given to his proposition, to which he (sir Francis Burdett) was most anxious to give his support, were he to bring it forward on some future occasion. He felt great hopes from the circumstance, when he saw gentlemen, in the situation of the noble lord, becoming sensible to the evils under which the country suffered, and coming forward boldly and manfully, as the noble lord had done, with the true spirit of an Englishman, and with a full understanding of the subject, to
173
cheers
hear, hear
hear, and a laugh
hear, hear
174
hear, and a laugh
hear, hear
hear, hear
175
hear, hear
hear, hear
id scitis, et quod vos scitis omnes sciunt
176
hear, hear
The Marquis of Blandford
.—He had the most unfeigned respect for the personal character of the hon. Baronet, and would yield the most willing deference to his experience in that House, particularly in
177
Mr. W. Smith
said, though he agreed fully in the importance of the measure, and was anxious that it should be considered, he could not support the noble Lord's motion. He wished the question to be brought fairly before the House; and if the motion were then pressed to a division he must vote against the noble Lord.
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, he did not rise to provoke discussion on a question of such importance. Differing entirely from the hon. Baronet in the view he took of the merits of the question, yet he cordially concurred with him in thinking that the time chosen for its discussion was most improper. Whatever might be the opinions of Members on the merits of the question, all agreed that it could not then be properly discussed. [
hear, hear
hear
hear
178
Mr. Protheroe
said, he should feel himself compelled to vote against the noble Lord's amendment if he then pressed it to a division, though he had himself proposed resolutions of the same tendency. Every man was partial to his own progeny; he therefore was not surprised at the noble Marquis's attachment to his; but as he (Mr. P.) had sacrificed his parental affection last evening, he thought the noble Marquis might make some little sacrifice on the present occasion.
Mr. Western
said, he would give the noble Marquis his best support on the 18th, the day on which he had given notice of his intention to bring the subject substantively before the House, but would vote against him that evening should he injudiciously press a division.
Mr. E. Davenport
said, he also must vote against the noble Marquis's motion, should he then take the sense of the House on it. He trusted, however, the noble Marquis would not injure the cause of which he had put himself forward as the advocate, by leaving it to the country to infer that there were but some half dozen members of that House who were friendly to a reform of the present system of Representation. He (Mr. E. Davenport) had for years urged the necessity of such a measure, and therefore should not like to see it injured through the indiscretion of the noble Marquis on the present occasion.
Question put, that those words (the Marquis of Blandford's Amendment) be added. The House divided: Ayes 11; Noes 96.—Majority 85.—Adjourned.
179
HOUSE OF LORDS,
Monday, February 8, 1830
MINUTES.] The LORD CHANCELLOR gave notice, that it was his intention to lay on their lordship's table, in a few days, a Bill respecting the Court of Chancery.—The EARL of SHAFTESBURY moved, that no Petition or Private Bill be received after Wednesday, March 25; and that no Report from the Judges be received after Monday, April 21.—Ordered.
GREECE.]
Lord Holland
, perceiving from his Majesty's Speech that the final settlement of the affairs of Greece was not yet accomplished, should take an early opportunity to call on their Lordships to express an opinion on the subject; and he then rose to give notice of his intention, and to move that their Lordships should be summoned for Friday next. If he consulted his own convenience he should fix a more distant day; but as he apprehended the settlement would soon be accomplished, to do justice to the motion it was necessary to submit it to their Lordships on an early day. He had not yet settled in his own mind what would be the words of his motion, but it would be in the form of a resolution to this effect:—"Resolved, That no plan for the pacification of Greece can be approved as advantageous, or as honourable to his Majesty's Crown, which does not give to that country a territory sufficient to maintain a national defence,
At the Court at Windsor, the 2nd of February,
PRESENT,
THE KING'S MOST EXCELLENT MAJESTY IN COUNCIL.
1. [
Recital and repeal of all the laws for improving the condition of slaves, made in the crown colonies since the Trinidad order in council of the 10th of March, 1824, including that order. The repeal not to bar prosecutions for past offences, nor to destroy any vested rights.
180
and such a system of Government as is consistent with the wishes of the people, and calculated to be secured against the control of foreign Governments."
ANSWER TO THE ADDRESS.]
The Duke of Montrose
presented his Majesty's Answer to their Lordships Address; it was as follows:—
"My Lords:—I thank your Lordships, for your loyal and dutiful Address; and I rely with great confidence upon your zealous co-operation in all measures calculated to improve the condition of my subjects, and to maintain the honour and high character of the country."
CONDITION OF THE SLAVES IN THE WEST INDIES.]
Earl Bathurst
, by command of his Majesty, presented the following ORDER of the KING IN COUNCIL for consolidating the several laws recently made for improving the condition of the Slaves in his Majesty's Colonies of Trinidad, Berbice, Demerara, St. Lucia, the Cape of Good Hope, and Mauritius.
181
order in council might issue, allowing the Slaves in Demerara, to purchase their freedom without the concurrence of their masters; and that so much of the order so passed as aforesaid by the lieutenant-governor and council in Berbice, as allows Slaves so to do in that colony, might be rescinded: And whereas, on the said 5th day of February, 1827, his majesty was pleased to refer the consideration of the said petitions to a committee of his privy council, and the said committee having proceeded to take the said petitions into their consideration, and having heard what was alleged on the behalf of the said petitioners, did, on the 18th day of March, 1829, report to his majesty in council their opinion that no sufficient cause had been shewn why his majesty should rescind so much of the said ordinance of the said lieutenant-governor of Berbice in council, as enables the Slaves within the said colony to effect the purchase of their freedom upon an appraisement in cases where the owners of any such Slaves might not be consenting, or by reason of some legal disability, might be unable to give any valid consent to such purchase, and that it might be expedient for his majesty in his privy council to issue an order confirming and giving effect to the said ordinance of the said lieutenant-governor in council, with such modifications with a view to the more effectual execution thereof, as might appear advisable, regard being had to the laws of the said colony, which laws his majesty had been graciously pleased to preserve and maintain: And whereas, on the 18th day of March, 1829, his majesty, with the advice of his privy council, was graciously pleased to confirm and approve the said report: And whereas, it is expedient that the laws for improving the condition of the Slaves within the said several colonies should be uniform, so far as may be practicable, due regard being had to the local circumstances and peculiar laws of the said colonies respectively; and it is therefore expedient to revoke the said order of Ins majesty in council of the 10th day of March, 1824, and the several laws, ordinances, and proclamations so passed and enacted as aforesaid in the said several colonies, and to consolidate and bring into one law applicable to all the said colonies, such provisions as it is necessary to make for improving the condition of the Slaves therein: it is therefore hereby ordered by the king's most excellent majesty, by and with the advice of his privy council, that the said order of his majesty in council of the 10th day of March, 1824, and the said ordinance of the lieutenant-governor and court of policy of Demerara of the 7th day of September 1825, and the said ordinance of the lieutenant-governor and council of the colony of Berbice of the 25th clay of September 1826, and the said ordinance of the governor in council of Saint Lucia of the 8th day of February 1826, and the said ordinance of the lieutenant-governor of the colony of the Cape of Good Hope of the 19th day of June 1826, and the said ordinance of the governor in council of Mauritius of the 7th day of February 1829, together with all laws, ordinances, and proclamations, passed, enacted, or promulgated within the said several colonies, or any of them, for the explanation or amendment of the said order in council of the 10th day of March, 1824, and of the said several ordinances, or any of them, shall be, and the same are hereby respectively revoked, repealed, and annulled: Provided nevertheless, that the said repeal shall not take effect within any of the said colonies until this present order shall in manner hereinafter mentioned, have been duly promulgated and made known in such colony: Provided also, that notwithstanding the repeal of the said order in council of the 10th of March, 1824, and of the several ordinances, laws, and proclamations, aforesaid, all crimes or offences committed against the same, or any of them, and all fines, penalties, and forfeitures incurred under the same, or any of them, shall continue liable to be punished, sued for, recovered and applied in such and the same manner as if this present order had not been made; and that all rights of what nature or kind soever, which under and by virtue of the said order in council of the 10th of March, 1824, and of the said several ordinances, laws, and proclamations, or any of them, had actually accrued to, and become invested in, any Slave or Slaves, or other person or persons, before or at the time of such repeal as aforesaid, shall be preserved to and continue vested in such Slaveor Slaves, or other person or persons, as fully and effectually in all respects as though this present order had not been made.
II. [
The appointment of a protector of slaves in each of the crown colonies, saving existing offices.
III. [
The salary of protectors of slaves, and the oaths to be taken by them.
182
183
IV. [
The protectors to keep offices, the hours of their attendance, and the custody of their records.
V. [
The protectors not to be owners or managers of slaves on paying of a forfeiture of office. Until that forfeiture is publicly declared, all intermediate acts are to be valid. The protector may hire slaves for his domestic service if unable to hire free servants.
de facto,
VI [
The protectors to be constantly resident except by the licence of the secretary of state. In case of sickness the governor may grant a leave of absence for a limited time.
VII [
On the death of protectors or other avoidance of office, temporary assistants to be appointed with salaries, and to be qualified (if possible) in the same manner as the principals.
VIII. [
Assistant protectors to be appointed to execute all lawful instructions of the protector.
184
185
IX. [
In cases of complaints by or against slaves, the protector or assistant protector cannot act us a magistrate.
X. [
The protector or assistant protector is to have notice of all prosecutions against slaves in capital or transportable cases, and of suits affecting their freedom and property, and of prosecutions for offences against their persons, and is to attention behalf of the slave.
XI. [
The protector or assistant protector on receiving notice of an injury done to a slave is to inquire into the case, and, if necessary, is to sue or prosecute the wrong-doer.
XII. [
Sunday markets absolutely prohibited.
XIII [
Proceedings to be had for the dispersion of markets holden on the Sunday.
XIV [
The prohibition of the public sale of goods on Sunday in shops or elsewhere
XV. [
The sale of certain perishable articles permitted, except during divine service.
XVI. [
The governor is to appoint one market day in each week.
186
187
XVII. [
Prohibition of labour on Sunday.
XVIII. [
Penalty on persons working their slaves on Sunday.
XIX. [
Exception of the labour of domestic servants.
XX. [
Slaves may be employed on Sunday in works of necessity. The governor, by proclamation, to define what works are necessary. Notice to be given to the protector of every such employment of slaves.
XXI. [
The whip may not be carried in the field as a stimulus to labour, nor as an emblem of authority, nor used except for the punishment of a fault previously committed.
XXII. [
Females may not be punished by whipping. Males may not receive more than twenty-five stripes for one offence, nor more than twenty-five lashes in one day, nor any whipping so long as any unhealed sears remain on the body, nor unless one free witness, or six slaves, be present.
188
189
XXIII [
Exception of judicial punishment.
XXIV [
Punishments of female slave children excepted, if not mure severe than punishments legally inflicted in schools on children of free condition.
XXV. [
The governors authorized to prescribe the modes of punishment which in the case of female slaves are to be substituted for punishment by the whip.
XXVI. [
The protector in each colony is to deliver to every manager of slaves, annually a book for keeping a record of all punishments inflicted on plantation slaves.
XXVII. [
The manager is to insert in the books an account of every punishment, the age and sex of the slave, the offence, the time, and place where committed, the extent of punishment, by whom authorized and inflicted, and the witnesses present.
XXVIII. [
Penalties on omitting to make entries and on false or fraudulent entries, erasures, &c.
190
191
XXIX. [
Half-yearly returns to be made of the entries in these books, on the oath of the manager.
"I,
A. B.
XXX. [
In cases where the manager cannot write, he may employ another person to keep the record, and is to be sworn in a different form.
"I,
A. B.
C. D.,
XXXI. [
In cases where no punishments have been inflicted during the half-year, a special return on oath to be made of that fact.
"I,
A. B.,
XXXII. [
The protector is to supply all managers with blank forms of returns, and to publish the time and place when he will attend to receive them. In case of sickness the manager to be attended at his own home.
XXXIII. [
Penalties on persons omitting to make their Returns.
192
193
XXXIV. [
The assistant protectors are to transmit their returns to the protector, with a list of defaulters, and the assistant protectors are to make their own returns to the protector himself
XXXV. [
The protector may send back for correction returns improperly or irregularly made.
XXXVI. [
The protector is to enrol in books all the returns which he may receive.
XXXVII. [
Slaves are declared competent to marry.
XXXVIII. [
A slave desiring to marry must apply for a licence to the protector, and produce the owner's consent. If the owner refuses, he is to be summoned before the protector; and if the protector is not satisfied that the marriage would be injurious to the slave, he is to grant a licence to any English, Scotch, or Roman Catholic clergyman, or Dissenting minister, to celebrate it.
XXXIX. [
Marriages among slaves are not to be valid in cases prohibited by law among free persons.
194
195
XL. [
Slaves are not, by marrying, to acquire rights inconsistent with the legal rights of the owner.
XLI. [
Registries to be kept of the marriages of slaves.
XLII. [
Slaves may acquire property of any amount, and bring and defend actions for it.
XLIII. [
Slaves may not be proprietors of boats, ammunition, &c.
XLIV. [
Slaves may not be proprietors of slaves.
XLV. [
Slaves may not be taken in execution in satisfaction of debts contracted by themselves.
XLVI. [
Slaves not to be separated wider legal process if bearing to each other any of the relations herein-mentioned.
XLVII. [
Separation of families are not to take place on the death of their owners intestate.
XLVIII. [
Husbands and wives, parents and children, may not be separated from each other by conveyance, contract or will.
196
197
XLIX. [
In cases where, it is unknown or doubtful whether a slave has any such relations, the protector is to inquire into and certify the fact.
L. [
If Slaves standing in the prescribed relations to each other shall signify to the protector their willingness to be separated, and if the protectors should consider the separation neither injurious to the slaves, nor improper in itself, he may authorize the separation, except in the cases of husbands and wives.
LI. [
Slave children above the age of
may be separated from their parents.
LII. [
All fees of office and duties on manumissions abolished.
l.
l.
LIII. [
All persons may manumit slaves, belonging to them, with the concurrence of all the joint-owners.
LIV. [
If the slave is manumitted gratuitously, bond must be given for his maintenance if he be
198
199
less than six or more than fifty years old, or in a state of disease.
l.
LV. [
The bond not necessary in case of testamentary manumissions, but the estate of the testator to remain liable as though such bond had been given.
LVI. [
With the concurrence of the protector, slaves may contract with their owners for the purchase of their freedom.
LVII. [
Slaves may effect the purchase of their freedom by a compulsory process. If the owner be unwilling-or unable to effect the manumission, or labour under any incapacity, or if an excessive price be demanded, the chief judge is to cite all persons having an interest in the slave to attend him.
200
201
LVIII. [
On proof made to the judge of such incapacity, &c he is to require the protector and owner each to name an appraiser, and is himself to name an umpire. The judge when necessary is to nominate the appraiser also.
LIX. [
The appraisers to make a valuation in seven days, failing which the umpire is to make the valuation.
LX. [
On proof to the judge of fraud or injustice in making the valuation, he may set it aside, and so on till an unobjectionable valuation is made.
LXI. [
lf the amount is not paid in three months, the proceedings cancelled, and no new valuation can be made for twelve months.
202
203
LXII. [
In making the valuation the appraises are to take into account all the qualities of the slave and other facts which they may think material.
LXIII. [
If it is proved to the satisfaction of the judge that the money to be paid by the slave has been acquired by a donation?
made with the intent of enabling the slave to purchase his freedom, the proceedings are to be stayed.
inter vivos,
inter vivos,
LXIV. [
If it be proved that within five years the slave has committed any robbery, the proceedings are to be stayed till the end of that term.
LXV. [
The protector may pay to the colonial treasurer the price of the slave in three months from the valuation, and enroll the receipt in the supreme court, after which the slave to be free.
LXVI. [
The governor is to establish a table of fees to be taken on this process.
LVXII. [
In what manner the expence of the proceedings is to le borne.
204
205
LXVIII. [
How the purchase money is to be invested when necessary.
LXIX. [
The judge is to make all necessary rules for the conduct of the proceedings on compulsory manumissions.
LXX. [
The evidence of slaves to be admitted.
LXXI. [
Forfeiture of slaves on conviction of the owner for cruelty.
LXXII. [
The punishment of slaves making calumnious accusations.
206
207
LXXIII. [
Penalties for falsifying records.
LXXIV. [
Punishment of misdemeanors.
l.,
l.,
LXXV. [
Punishment of perjury.
LXXVI. [
The protector authorized to sue for penalties.
LXXVII. [
Recovery and application of fines.
LXXVIII. [
All fines to be recovered in British sterling money, and between the limits fixed in the order, the court in its discretion to determine the amount of the fine.
LXXIX. [
The governor's proclamation to be transmitted for confirmation.
LXXX. [
The protectors are to make half yearly reports, as the condition of receiving their salaries.
208
209
LXXXI. [
Explanation of particular terms.
LXXXII. [
The publication of this order in the different colonies.
And the right honourable sir George Murray, one of his majesty's principal Secretaries of State, is to give the necessary directions herein accordingly.
(Signed) JAS. BULLER.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Monday, February 8, 1830.
MINUTES.] GERARD CALLAGHAN, Esq. took the Oath and his Seat for Cork City.—Sir J. MACDONALD moved for a new writ for Calne in the room of the Right Hon. James Abercrombie, Lord Chief Baron of the Exchequer, Scotland; Sir C. COOTE moved for a new writ for Clonmell, in the room of James Hewitt Massey Dawson, Esq. Chiltern Hundreds; and Mr. G. LAMB moved for a now writ for Knaresborough in the room of the Right Hon. Geo. Tierney deceased.
Lord F. Osborne
presented a petition from Cambridge for the repeal of the Malt and Beer duties, and several other petitions from places in Cambridgeshire with like prayer, and praying for measures to alleviate the distressed state of agriculture.
Sir J. Graham
presented a petition from the County of Cumberland, complaining of the distress of the Agricultural and Mining population, praying the House to inquire whether those distresses were not brought on by the return to small payments in gold and silver, without a corresponding decrease at the same time in taxation. He did not intend to go into the whole of the important questions which the petition embraced until they came to be singly discussed. With regard, however, to the question whether the additional increase of the value of the currency is not an additional increase of taxation, he should take an early opportunity of moving that the amount of salary of all persons employed in the civil and military service of the country should be reduced to the scale of 1797, as far as was consistent with a strict regard to engagement and the effici-
210
Mr. Hume
observed, in reply, that the motion the hon. member had given notice of would probably occupy some time; and, as he (Mr. Hume) did not wish to bring his own on late in the evening, he would postpone his own motion till Monday next; besides, it would take natural precedence of his motion: if there were to be reduction of expenditure the House would be more strongly justified in demanding diminution of taxation.
Mr. Alderman Wood
moved for accounts of the total number of Barrels of Beer exported from England and Scotland to Ireland, and from Ireland to England and Scotland; distinguishing the number of barrels so exported to each kingdom, as likewise the number of barrels exported from each kingdom to foreign countries, with the amount of drawback paid thereon from 5th January 1829 to 5th January 1830: of the quantity of all the different sorts of beer, stated by barrels, made in each year, from 5th January 1825 to 5th January 1830; the rates of duty per barrel in each year, and total amount thereof in each year in each kingdom; showing,
211
212
Mr. O'Connell
presented a petition on the subject of Negro Slavery. He said that by right of law, no man could be a slave; that if the law were to extend to the colonies, the case would be as it was here, the moment alleged slaves came within the reach of the remedy, of the lord chief justice's power, they were free. He should in the course of the session move a bill on this subject. The petition was from Cork.
ANSWER TO THE ADDRESS.]
Mr. Secretary Peel
appeared at the bar with, and presented His Majesty's Answer to, the Address on the Lords Commissioners Speech: it was as follows.—
I thank you for this loyal and dutiful Address.
I rely with confidence on your attachment and support, and you may depend upon my unwearied endeavours to main-
213
tain the National Honour, and upon my constant and anxious disposition to watch with equal care over the interests of all classes of my subjects.
Ordered to be entered on the Journal.
SLAVES.]
Mr. W. Peel
then presented the Order in Council for consolidating the several laws for improving the condition of Slaves in his majesty's colonies. [For which paper see the preceding report of the Lords.]
CORK CITY ELECTION.]
Mr. O'Connell
presented a petition from Francis Lyons and others, complaining of the undue return of G. Callaghan, esq.—ordered to be taken into consideration upon Thursday the 25th day of this instant February, at the same time that the petition of Daniel Meagher, and others, electors, is ordered to be taken into consideration; and Mr. Speaker to issue his warrants for persons papers and records.
WEXFORD TOWS ELECTION.]
A petition of Charles Roper, esq., and others, complaining of that election [presented 24th June 1829] was read:—ordered to be taken into consideration upon Tuesday the 2nd day of March next, at three of the clock in the afternoon; and Mr. Speaker to issue his warrants for persons papers and records.
MALT AND BEER.]
Mr. Denison
presented a petition from the Corn Market in London, praying—first, for the repeal of the Malttax;—secondly, that the trade in Beer should be free;—thirdly, that there should be a reduction in the army, navy, and civil list; and fourthly, that the interest on a debt contracted in one currency should not be paid in another. The hon. member for Essex (Mr. Western) had, on the first night of the session, called on members to state the condition in which they had left their constituents; and he, in obedience to that call, had, with sorrow, to declare that the farmers of Surrey were in the most distressing condition; most of them living upon their capital rather than their profits, and many of them worse off than the very labourers. And as to the agricultural labourers, their distress was extreme. He was as much disposed as any one to do full credit to the obligations which the country owed to the duke of
214
Mr. Brougham
said, though agreeing in the greater part of what had fallen from his hon. friend, yet he could not but deplore one observation which he had made and which certainly must have escaped him in the hurry of speaking. No one felt more strongly than he did the gratitude the country owed to the Duke of Wellington for a great portion of his public services, and more especially for the carrying of the great question of Catholic Emancipation. But with respect to the repeal of the Test and Corporation acts, the credit of that measure was due to his noble friend (lord J. Russell); and he (Mr. Brougham), therefore, could not sit still and suffer it to be said that the country had to thank the noble Duke for that measure. When the measure was brought forward by his noble friend, government opposed it; but after a majority of about forty in favour of it, the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Peel) withdrew his opposition, and certainly furthered the bill through its subsequent stages; and without the support of the Duke of Wellington in the other House, it was possible that the bill might have been there thrown out. These things were not immaterial, for in taking away the credit of carrying a measure, when it had been carried contrary to the fate which usually attended such measures, one motive that tended to induce public men to act was taken away.
Mr. Huskisson
said, he had to complain of the mistake which had been made in attributing to Mr. Canning a determined opposition to the repeal of the Test and Corporation acts: all that his right hon. friend had contended against was, the passing of this measure by itself, to the detriment of the Roman Catholic question, which was the more important one.
Mr. W. Smith
.—In private conversations which he had held with Mr. Canning, that gentleman declared that he would not oppose the repeal of the Test and Corporation acts when the proper opportunity for removing them arrived.
Sir R. Wilson
said, when Mr. Canning was asked whether he would assist in car-
215
Mr. O'Connell
said, the hon. member for Surrey had proposed the abolishment of the Lord-lieutenancy of Ireland. To this he (Mr. O'Connell) objected. There were seven thousand persons in Dublin living on the charity of three-halfpence a day; and if the duke of Northumberland did not spend his thirty thousand pounds a-year (which he drew from this country) among them, there would be many more in the same condition, or those seven thousand would be still worse off. If the hon. gentleman wanted reduction, let him begin with the lords of the bed-chamber, the lords of the Admiralty, or the lords of the Treasury, and he should have his most cordial assistance.
Mr. Hume
said, if the hon. member for Clare was right in his principle, every sinecurist would have a right to say, "continue my income, and I will spend it for the good of the country." [
hear, hear
Petition ordered to be printed.
Mr. Wodehouse
gave notice of his intention to bring in a bill, on Tuesday the 2nd of March, to alter the act of the 59th of the late king, entitled "An Act to amend the Laws for the Relief of the Poor"—as it regards the rating of the owners of lodging houses, and to extend it to all houses, &c. let under ten pounds a year.
Mr. Wodehouse
also gave notice of his intention, after Easter, to move for a committee to inquire into the duties and regulations respecting sea-borne coals.
MEXICO—CUBA—SPAIN.]
Sir Robert Wilson
wished to put some questions to the right hon. gentleman opposite (Mr. Peel) which he considered of a very serious character as regarded the due exercise of our power as a nation, and a just respect on our part for national good faith: he alluded to the subject of our conduct between Spain and the states of Colombia and Mexico [
hear
216
there being much noise in the House at the time
hear
hear
217
218
219
220
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, he could assure the hon. gentleman that on this, as upon every other occasion, it was his desire to answer any question put to his Majesty's Government in that House respecting the foreign policy of the country, as frankly and as clearly as was consistent with the general interests of the State. But he felt the questions now put to involve a point of such deep importance, that the House would excuse him if he did not content himself with giving a simple answer to the questions of the hon. Gentleman, but enter into a short explanation of the facts, and of the intentions and policy of the Government. When a noble friend of his on a former night put a question to him upon the same subject, he answered it upon the strength of his recollection; and if he then fell into any mistake as to the occurrences which had been referred to, he was sure the House would readily pardon him when they considered that seven or eight years had intervened since they took place, and since any circumstances had very particularly required him
221
222
hear
223
point d'appui
224
hear
The conversation here dropped.
LORDS COMMISSIONERS SPEECH.].
Mr. G. Lamb
[on the motion that the Lords Commissioners Speech be taken into consideration], rose.—He said, he wished briefly to state his reasons for having voted for the Amendment to the Address on the first night of the session, not having had a previous opportunity of addressing the House, and finding himself compelled to differ from most of those with whom he generally acted, he felt bound to state shortly the grounds on which he gave that vote for the Amendment on the first day of the session. Some friends of his, upon that (the Opposition) side of the House, had stated that they voted for the Amendment through the delicate fear, not generally entertained in that quarter, of turning the ministers out. The hon. member for Norwich (Mr. W. Smith) vaunted his experience; though
225
hear
hear, hear
226
hear, hear
227
hear
228
hear
hear and a laugh
hear
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, he trusted the House would indulge him for a very few moments, while he endeavoured to explain one or two points of his former observations, which had been very much misconstrued by the hon. Member for Dungarvon (Mr. Lamb). That hon. Member had assumed that he (Mr. Peel) argued for the necessity and propriety of non-interference, on the ground, that they could not depart from that course, through the fear of being called on to engage in war. Now, so cautious had he been against any misconstruction of his language with regard to war, that throughout the whole of the observations he addressed to the House on the subject of the foreign policy of the country, he most studiously avoided the
229
hear
hear, hear
Lord Mandeville
said, he could not lose the opportunity of expressing his approbation of that part of his Majesty's Speech which promised a reform of the Court of Chancery; and observed, that although it must be admitted there was considerable distress at present, he hoped the day was not far distant when the country would again enjoy prosperity.
Mr. Alderman Waithman
said, he thought it necessary to observe, that although his Majesty's Speech declared the distress to be temporary, and confined to the agricul-
230
hear
hear
Mr. Robinson
begged to state that he had voted for the Amendment the other night merely because it stated more truth than the Address. At the same time, he approved of the pacific policy recommended in the Speech, and enforced by the Ministers, and he was not one of those who desired any alteration in the currency. He meant to vote for all inquiries that should be proposed this session, and in that spirit he voted for the Amendment. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had warned them against voting for the Amendment, on the supposition that the hon. Baronet (Sir Edward Knatchbull) was actuated by some sinister motive in pro-
231
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, the hon. Member who had just sat down had somewhat irregularly charged him with having imputed sinister motives to the hon. Member for Kent. Now he was too old a Member of Parliament not to know that it was improper to impute any motives to hon. Members, and as far as the hon. Member for Kent was concerned, he was the last man to whom he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) should be inclined to impute sinister motives.
Lord Normanby
only begged to say one word upon a subject to which so many gentlemen had adverted,—he meant our foreign policy, and the estimation in which we were held on the Continent. Certainly, in the eyes of foreigners, the whole tenour of our foreign policy was changed. They believed it to be the very reverse of that upon which we had acted two years ago. How we should recover the character we had thus lost he did not know; we could not do better than to act honestly and profess sincerely, but he feared it would be a long time first, though he was convinced that the declaration, which he had heard with so much pleasure from the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Peel) that night, would be sincerely acted on.
Mr. H. Davis
said, he had heard one or two circumstances within the last few days, which went far to illustrate the partial nature of the distress. He had conversed with a gentleman connected with a great manufacturing house in Gloucestershire, who told him that their business was so good that the house had written to him to take no more orders, as they could not in six months comply with all they had already received, and that every hand which they had ever employed was in full work. He had also dined the other day with a gentleman who had been lately in Dublin, in Ireland, [
a laugh
l.
232
Mr. Sadler
said, it was quite unfair to urge the prosperous condition of some districts, or the thriving trade carried on by certain overgrown capitalists engaged in manufactures, as proofs of the general prosperity of the country. Such statements were calculated only to mislead the public mind, if, indeed, it did not already too severely feel the general pressure to be misled by any statements to the contrary. The hon. Member had stated, that a great number of hands were employed by the manufacturers; but the fact was, that in many cases those hands were retained in order that they might have the means of existence. He also differed entirely from some hon. Members in attributing the distress which existed in the agricultural districts to a bad harvest. He had never asserted that the distress in the country was so universal that there was no instance to be found of a single class of persons by whom it was not felt. He admitted that there were some exceptions to the universality; but, as in other cases, the exceptions only established the general rule. The members of the Stock Exchange, the great capitalists, for example, were probably among those exceptions. But the industrious and productive classes of the people, those by whom the greater number of the Members of that House were sent thither, were suffering severe distress. Attempts had been made by various hon. Members to understate the real condition of the country's affairs; but there were sources of information which, if they would apply to them, would show them the fact. If they wished to know the state of the commercial interest, let them look at the bankrupt list; if they wished to know the state of the lower classes, let them look at the amount of the poor-rates: those were the best criteria by which they could judge of the general state of the country. He had that morning seen a document, the result of a meeting in a populous district near Manchester. This document was signed by the Chairman; and it stated that the distress was overwhelming. He would abstain from saying anything on the state of the currency, because that was a subject which would probably soon be brought under the consideration of the
233
Sir J. Stewart
said, he had supported the Address, because he could not concur with those members who drew so melancholy a picture of the state of the country. He had recently returned from Scotland, and certainly he had not seen any thing of the agricultural distress which some gentlemen talked of. There might, it was true, be some delay in the collection of rents as compared with former years, but there was nothing of that overwhelming distress of which he had heard. Whatever of distress was felt, and he did not deny that some existed, arose from the state of the seasons, and from other causes which human foresight could not have prevented He denied the accuracy of the statement that the distress in Scotland was severe, and unprecedented. The harvest of 1828 had exceeded in Scotland the general average in England; so that the Scotch had been enabled to export corn to supply the markets of England. He was satisfied that the distress in England arose from circumstances over which it was impossible that either his Majesty's Ministers or any other persons could have any control.
Mr. O'Council
rose merely for the purpose of adverting to what had fallen from the hon. Member for Bristol with respect to the state of Ireland, and he must observe that he had that morning received letters in which the distress existing in that country was painted in the strongest colours. He was sure that nothing would strike the Irish people with more astonishment than to hear that any doubt was entertained in this country of the distress under which they were labouring.
Mr. Fyler
said, he could bear testimony to the existence of extreme distress in those parts of the country with which he was acquainted. In the city and county of the city of Coventry, and in many parts of Warwickshire, and in other places, there were thousands in such a state of distress as not to be able to support themselves. He could also state from information received from the directors of the poor, that many persons who were formerly in comfortable circumstances were in that state, that they were withheld solely by feelings of shame from receiving parochial aid. In one district of the county of Warwick, there was a parish containing
234
Mr. A. Baring
said, he did not rise on this endless subject to follow any of the several hon. Members who had preceded him into the theories which each raised as
235
hear
some' at.
236
hear
hear
237
hear
238
hear
239
tables d'hâte,
hear
240
hear
241
de facto
de facto
hear
argumentum ad hominem
hear
hear, hear
Mr. Attwood
said, he by no means agreed with the opinions of the hon. Gentleman, who seemed to think that all the measures of the existing Ministry had tended to promote the general interest of the country, and had been the result of deliberate wis-
242
hear
Mr. Trant
said, he wished to know what was to become of the farmer, or how he was to gain a livelihood, when told by a high parliamentary authority that overproduction was the cause of all his distress? When the loaf was 1
s.
d
243
Mr. Maberly
said, he was of opinion that it would be highly impolitic for the Legislature to extend a remunerative protection to the agricultural interest any more than to those who were concerned in cotton, iron, or linen. Agriculture ought to be protected only in the same ratio with whatever else paid a duty; for example— in the same proportion with glass. The profits of agriculture were abated by the payment of tithes, which so far entitled the parties interested to be placed on a footing-similar with those rated in another form. He attributed the distress of such numbers of the people to the want of a local circulation; and in practical proof of the correctness of such reasoning he could demonstrate that money was scarce broughout the whole of the kingdom, while on the other hand articles of consumption were plentiful. It was very possible that the real privations of the people were, in a great degree, to be ascribed to the affluence and strength of the national resources. In his elaborate treatise on political economy, Mr. Ricardo, if he remembered rightly, had explained the principle by stating that when great and opulent nations had a redundancy of wealth, capital naturally competed with capital, and in the end produced low profits to the working classes: yet that low profits were proofs not of poverty but of wealth. Thus, although the wealth of the country might continue the same, public distress would nevertheless arise. To this state of things, in his opinion, we had now come. He apprehended that the people would for a long time suffer from low prices; and yet perhaps, high prices were the greater evil of the two. If labour were remunerated at high wages, we could not exchange it profitably in other parts of the world, and so bad would become worse. As to steam machinery, he considered it a principal source of our prosperity. In fact, it was to that we were chiefly indebted for our ability to pay taxes. [
hear
244
Mr. Hume
said, he hoped, that before the House should be called on to vote the supplies, Ministers would lay before them a statement of the promised reductions in public expenditure. The custom had been too much neglected of late years, but he expected that a complete preliminary view of ways and means would on this occasion be submitted. Indeed, in the event of any reluctance to do so being manifested, the House would be wanting to itself if it proved backward to enforce it; he for one should use his utmost endeavour to enforce such preliminary explanation.
The motion,
pro forma,
COMPOSITIONS FOR TITHES.]
Mr. Greene
rose to move for leave to bring in a bill to enable incumbents of livings in England and Wales to enter into renewable Compositions for their Tithes, by agreement with the owners of land in their respective parishes. He conceived it to be needless to detain the House at any length, in moving for leave to bring-in the bill. Addressing landowners, he need not inform them of the inconveniences they sustained from the present system of tithes; and an extensive correspondence in which he had been engaged with parochial clergy, satisfied him that they were as anxious as the landholders for some change in the mode of collecting tithe. He felt the importance of not approaching such a subject rashly and inconsiderately; and he was therefore glad to avail himself of the precedent, which had been set in the numerous private acts passed on this subject. To each of these the consents of the bishop, the patron, the incumbent, and the landowners, had been given, and he therefore felt assured, that from a measure following strictly the course that had been adopted in them, no injury could accrue to any party. The present bill was of a permissive nature. It only went to authorise the appointment of commissioners at once, instead of requiring a private act in every instance. Those commissioners being necessarily men of education—men placed beyond, the suspicion of countenancing anything unfair—justice might reasonably be expected to be done to all parties. They would be judges of the reports of the tithe valuers, by whom the, value of the tithes
245
Mr. Hume
said, he was not sorry to see this subject again brought under the consideration of the House. He, however, must deprecate a clause which it was proposed to introduce; namely, that enabling the clergy to enjoy the effects of capital expended in the improvement of land, and so far discouraging the honest industry employed in its cultivation. The peculiar feature of—thence the peculiar objection to—a tithe-tax was, that it was a tax upon industry, increasing with the application of labour to agriculture, and as a consequence tending to restrict that application. When it was first levied, it was paid in kind, solely because there existed no other mode of payment equally convenient; but since commerce and the change
246
hear, and a laugh
bona fide
247
hear
Mr. Trant
said, he thought that a measure of such extensive interference would be neither more nor less than a positive spoliation of property. When gentlemen purchased land, and farmers took it on lease, they did so having made calculations of the amount to be mutually deducted from the purchase-money or the rent, as tithes. He was sure the country gentlemen of England would never suffer the vested rights of the clergy to be thus invaded. He never wished to see the clergy made the subject of spoliation.
Mr. Hume
begged, in reply to any such language, to be permitted to deny that he contemplated anything in the way of what was termed "spoliation;" he wished every thing to be done on the principle of fair and equitable compensation, and he disclaimed any intention or desire to deprive the clergy of their just claims to public support.
Mr. Greene
replied.—His great object was, to put an end to those litigations which so much disturbed the harmony between clergymen and their parishioners.
Leave was given to bring in the bill.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Tuesday, February 9, 1830
MINUTES.] The Earl of GLENGALL took his Seat as Representative Peer for Ireland, in the place of the Marquis of Headford, deceased.
The Earl of Lauderdale
presented a petition from the nobility, gentry, clergy, and freeholders of the county of Cumberland, complaining of distress, and praying for relief. The noble Lord stated, that the petition had been agreed upon at a county meeting, the high sheriff in the chair; that it was signed by two hundred and fifty respectable gentry and yeomanry; and that it earnestly prayed their Lordships to take
248
EAST-INDIA COMPANY AND TRADE.]
Lord Ellenborough
said, he rose to move for a Select Committee to inquire into the present state of the affairs of the East-India Company, and into the trade between Great Britain, the East-Indies, and China. He begged in the outset to assure their Lordships that his Majesty's Government were as entirely free from all preconceived opinions or impressions on this subject as Parliament itself; that they approached this important inquiry with minds perfectly unbiassed; that there was no desire to hold back or conceal any thing on their part, but, on the contrary, the utmost anxiety to produce to their Lordships all the information in their possession. There were produced towards the close of the last session of Parliament, a number of documents illustrative of the various details connected with this subject, and he had himself presented this evening to their Lordships additional papers, calculated to throw light upon the state of the finances of India, and of the trade to that country; and if it should appear that further information would be necessary for the elucidation of the subject, or would be required for the satisfaction of their Lordships, it would be most readily afforded by his Majesty's Government. It was the wish of the Government that there should be no concealment. All that was desired by his Majesty's Government was, that Parliament and the country should have every opportunity afforded to form a correct judgment upon this important subject. As the papers presented last Session illustrative of it had now been for some time in their Lordships hands, it would be unnecessary for him to draw their attention more particularly to the results to be arrived at from a careful inspection of these documents, as he was confident that their Lordships had given to them that
249
250
251
hear
252
hear
253
The Marquis of Lansdowne
said, it was not his intention to offer any opposition to the motion, but he was, on the contrary, anxious to express his gratification, that so early an opportunity had been taken for the appointment of the Committee. At the same time he was sorry that the course which he had recommended last Session, in reference to this important subject, had not been adopted. He then recommended his Majesty's Government to adopt the plan which was pursued on a former occasion, when the affairs of the East-India Company were before Parliament, on the last consideration of their Charter,—namely, that his Majesty's Government, who, of course. possessed the fullest and most correct information with respect to the affairs of India, and who must particularly of late years have had their attention peculiarly directed to that subject, should in the first instance bring forward their views in some tangible shape; the subject would afterwards be discussed in the course of inquiry which
254
hear
255
hear
Lord Durham
said, he fully agreed in the importance of this question, and concurred in what had fallen from his noble friend who had just sat down. He should not have thought it necessary to trespass upon this occasion upon the attention of the House were it not that he was anxious to afford to the noble Lord opposite (Ellenborough) an opportunity to give to the House and the country, an explanation regarding a document which had not only been circulated in the country, but which had been made the subject of animadversion in the other House of Parliament. The document to which he alluded had affixed to it the signature of the noble Lord, it was addressed to a functionary in India, and contained sentiments certainly of an extraordinary nature. He trusted the noble Lord would be enabled to deny its authenticity; and he now, therefore, called upon the noble Lord to state whether or not the letter addressed to Sir J. Malcolm, as printed in the public papers
*
Lord Ellenborough
said, he was anxious to allude, in the first instance, to what had fallen from the noble Marquis (Lansdowne). He fully concurred with the noble Marquis, as to the great importance of the question which was now about to be brought under the consideration of Parliament, and it was upon account of its importance that it had been thought fit that Parliament should apply itself to the investigation of the subject before any determinate course should be adopted by his Majesty's Ministers in respect to it. He could not help thinking that such a mode of previous inquiry was the best way of arriving at a just conclusion both on the part of Parliament and his Majesty's Ministers. He could assure the noble Marquis, that for his own part he was anxious to obtain fuller information on the subject before he came to a decision upon it, and that could only be accomplished by means of the proposed mode of inquiry. With regard to the question asked by the
*
256
Lord Durham
said, it appeared, that the noble Lord substantially avowed the sentiments contained in the letter alluded to. He was not certainly prepared for such an acknowledgment, and he was sure the House and the country would participate in the sincere regret which he experienced at an avowal of such sentiments being entertained in such a quarter. It was the more to be regretted, as the feeling prevailed throughout the country, and was particularly impressed upon the minds of persons who interested themselves in the affairs of India, that in this letter one of the Ministers of the Crown, to whose charge was intrusted the government of India, had expressed sentiments unfavourable to the independence of the Judges in that country. It was a matter of sincere regret that such an impression should go forth in India. He would not enter further upon the consideration of that letter now, as he understood that the noble Lord was not prepared for the discussion of it at present. It was to be regretted that the rest of his Majesty's Government had not disavowed the sentiments in that letter—sentiments which had excited general
257
The Duke of Wellington
said, his noble friend had stated that the letter was in substance the letter which he had written to Sir J. Malcolm, but though his noble friend had bound himself to the terms of the letter, he was not at all bound to it, as understood by the interpretation which others thought proper to affix. For his part, he did not see a word in the letter directly derogatory to the independence of the Judges in the east. It was stated in the letter, that a certain Judge in the East Indies had not conducted himself with discretion, and if his noble friend had known at the time of writing that letter the decision of the Privy Council (the highest authority in this country) on the subject, he would not have altered the expression; for the Privy Council decided that he had not conducted himself according to law. His noble friend had said in this private letter, which had in some manner found its way to the public, that the law of the learned Judge in question was considered bad law, and bad law it was afterwards decided to be by the Privy Council, and it was held that the Judge had no power to act as as he had done, and that his acting so had been indiscreet. His noble friend in his letter went on to say that two new Judges had been appointed who would restrain the other Judge should he happen to be indiscreet. [
a laugh, and hear
258
Lord Durham
.—I have stated that it is the general opinion that the sentiments expressed in the letter indicated a disposition on the part of the writer to attack the independence of the Judges. I must confess that I entertained the sentiments which I have already named, relating to the appointment of the Judges, and that I am confirmed in those sentiments by what has occurred out of the House. Perhaps the noble Duke has not read the letter?
The Duke of Wellington
.—Yes, I have.
Lord Durham
.—Then what is the first fact contained in the letter? The Judge here spoken of is said "to have right notions of his duty, and of the law, which has been so strangely misrepresented; and that he will rather support Government"—
The Duke of Wellington
.—Read on.
Lord Durham (smiling)
—Not the whole of the letter.
Lord Ellenborough
—No, but the whole of the sentiment.
Lord Durham
—The noble Lord may, if he pleases, read the whole of the letter. The sentence is this:—"He (Sir William Seymour) will rather support Government than use the authority of the Supreme Court as a means of raising opposition." [
Hear, from the Ministerial benches
Lord Melville
said, he entertained opi-
259
260
habeas corpus
261
Lord Holland
said, when the noble Viscount opposite (Melville) rose, he was afraid that that noble Lord was about to read his noble friend (Lord Ellenborough) a severe lecture upon the style and tenor of the letter in question, seeing that the noble Viscount at the outset deprecated any flippancy upon a subject so grave and important; but instead of so turning round upon his friend, the noble Viscount had pursued a course altogether the reverse, and endeavoured to bear out the noble writer of that letter in the assertion that the question of law was one of comparative insignificance. That was the very sentiment of the letter, upon which those who objected to it might lay no inconsiderable stress. The noble Lord, in his letter, declared that the question of law was one of comparative insignificance, and that what he chiefly objected to was the tone and temper of the Judges—the tenor of the language which they delivered from the bench—the law was quite a secondary matter. However, it was scarcely fair to come to any conclusion upon matters turning upon the mere language of the letter, as the noble Lord had not thought proper to inform the House what parts of the letter were authentic, and what were not so; but thus much he (Lord Holland) could not help saying, that the effect of the letter had been to produce a considerable sensation in that country, and it was calculated to produce a considerable sensation here, that any member of His Majesty's Government should be found writing to a public functionary in India that errors in matters of law were comparatively of little importance, and that the speeches from the Judges on the bench—the tone and temper of those speeches—constituted the whole ground of offence. That it was much worse to touch the supreme Government than to be guilty of illegal proceedings. [
hear, hear
262
hear
Lord Ellenborough
said, he should have thought himself almost the last person in this country who could have been considered as wishing to trench on the independence of Judges. He had too strong a recollection of the qualities that distinguished his noble and learned Father in the administration of law, not to respect and maintain the independence of the Judge: and had he entertained the slightest idea of destroying, injuring, or weakening the independence of Judges in India, he should have deserved the reprobation which the noble Baron had been pleased to cast on him. He did not, however, oppose himself to the independence of Judges, yet he would resist their usurpation of powers not given them, but expressly taken away from them, by law—powers, which if the official information he had received were to be relied upon, or that which he had obtained from persons well acquainted with the state of affairs in India, could not be exercised by the Judges there with-
263
hear
264
Motion for the Committee put and agreed to; and the Lords following were named of the Committee: Lord President; Lord Privy Seal; Duke of Wellington; Duke of Buckingham and Chandos. Marquis of Lansdowne; Marquis of Salisbury; Marquis of Camden; Marquis of Cleveland; E. De Lawarr; E. Amherst; Viscount Strathallan; Viscount Melville; Viscount Sidmouth; Viscount Goderich; Lord Auckland; Lord Calthorpe; Lord Fitz Gibbon; Lord Ellenborough; Lord Bexley; Lord Wharncliffe; Lord Durham; Lord Wallace.
POOR-RATE RETURNS.]
Lord Teynham
said, in moving for various important Returns, he could not but press on their Lordships the necessity of considering the present distressed state of the agricultural class, and the great obligation which lay upon Parliament to take measures for their immediate relief. He concluded with moving for a return of the amount of money levied and expended for the relief of the poor in each parish in England and Wales, for the year ending 25th March 1830; specifying the amount paid for other purposes than the actual relief of the poor.
The Duke of Wellington
said, he had not the slightest objection to afford the House or the noble Lord all the information which could possibly be required, but the last time that similar information had been applied for, a year and a half elapsed before the Returns could be procured—
265
The Duke of Richmond
said, he was quite sure that the Returns already before the House would prove amply sufficient to establish any degree of agricultural distress arising from the unequal pressure of burthens for which the noble Lord might be disposed to contend. If his object were to prove that the land was unduly burthened, turn where he might he need be at no loss for evidence in support of that position; but it would be infinitely better if the noble Lord, instead of moving for those Returns, would give his vote against the measures of the noble Duke's Government. If the noble Lord, on the first night of the session, had voted in the minority instead of swelling the ranks of the noble Duke, it would have been a much greater public service than moving for returns of this description. To do real service to the state, noble Peers ought to support a general parliamentary inquiry into the state of the country, and there they would learn quite enough to supersede the necessity of moving for any further returns. Let the noble Lord only withdraw his support from the Government of the noble Duke, and to that extent at least he will do a public service; not but that he (the Duke of Richmond) regretted as much as any noble Peer could do, the necessity under which he felt himself of opposing the measures of the noble Duke, especially on subjects connected with the state of the landed interests.
Lord Teynham
said, after the remarks of the noble Duke he would consent to withdraw this motion; but accompanied that withdrawal with a notice, that on Tuesday, the 20th of April, he should move for a Committee to inquire into the state of the Poor-laws, and the administration thereof—previous to which, he should move certain resolutions declaratory of his views upon that subject, allowing sufficient time for noble Lords to make up their minds as to the most expedient measures
266
hear
Motion, by leave of the House, withdrawn.
HOUSE OF COMMONS,
Tuesday, February 9, 1830.
MINUTES.]—LORD VISCOUNT CASTLEREAGH took the Oath, and his Seat for the County of Down.—MR. PLANTA moved for a new writ for WINCHELSEA in the room of HENRY BROUGHAM, Esq. Chiltern Hundreds.—Mr. D. W. HARVEY moved for Accounts of the total number of persons to whom a half year's dividend on three per cent Consols became due on 5th January last; specifying the number respectively of those whose dividend for the half year did not exceed 5
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
NOTICES OF MOTIONS.]—
Mr. O'Connell
presented petitions from parishes in Cork, complaining of the Vestry and Subletting Acts. And after referring to the cases of the petitioners for the purpose of showing the great abuses practised on the levying of vestry rates in parishes where a very small number of the inhabitants are Protestants, gave notice of his intention to move for the repeal of a portion of the Act of George the 2nd, in order to enlarge the power of the King's Bench in granting a
mandamus
Lord Palmerston
gave notice of his intention to submit a motion to the House relative to our relations with Portugal, on Thursday, the 18th instant.
LUNATIC ASYLUMS.]
Mr. R. Gordon
said, he observed that the Act of the 9 Geo. 4. had, by some mistake, omitted to point out the method by which the sum arising from licensing Lunatic Asylums was to be disposed of; he now moved for leave to
267
l
Mr. Lyttleton
seconded the motion, and leave being given, Mr. Gordon brought in the bill; it was read a first time.
SMALL DEBTS.]
Mr. Hume
said, he had moved for returns of the number of persons committed to the various prisons of the metropolis in the year 1829,; upon arrest for debts under
mesne process
mesne process
d
mesne process
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, he thought that the hon. Member was scarcely warranted in assuming that nothing had been done to improve the law on these subjects for some years, when it was recollected that his honourable friend the then Solicitor General (Sir C. Tindall) brought in, and carried through Parliament a bill, only two
268
mesne process
l
hear
Mr. D. W. Harvey
said, it was worthy of notice, that out of twenty thousand arrests, seventeen thousand were for sums under 100
l
Mr. Hume
said, he wished to know how soon the commissioners would prosecute this part of their inquiry? He understood that which they were now engaged upon would take two or three years.
Mr. Peel
said, he could give the hon. Gentleman no assurance upon that point.
269
Mr. Hume
said, the principle of the division of labour would be of service. He hoped that the right hon. Secretary would think of some other mode of giving-relief to the public on this subject than by that of the protracted labours of this Commission. No Committee of the House was necessary. His Majesty's Attorney General—he said it without meaning the slightest disrespect to that gentleman— ought to be prepared to bring forward measures of relief for the subject in such cases. He would wait for two months longer; if nothing were done in that time by his Majesty's Government, he would himself bring the matter forward.
Mr. O'Connell
said, he knew of a case where one man arrested another for 60,000
l
Mr. Hume
said, he would, in the mean time, move for Returns of the number of' prisoners for debt committed to the custody of the keepers of the King's-bench, the Fleet, Whitecross-street, the Marshalsca, and Horsemonger-lane prisons, in the year 1829; distinguishing those in custody under
mesne process
l
l
l
l
l
l
mesne process
270
mesne process
l
l
l
l
l
l
COURT OF CHANCERY.]
Mr. D. W. Harvey
moved for an abstract or return of the number of causes and matters pending in the high Court of Chancery, to the credit of which any sum of money is vested in the Bank Annuities or in cash (presented 4th June 1829), to be prepared, and laid before the House.—He said they showed that forty millions were ingulphed in that court; and that upwards of eight hundred causes concerned property under 200
l
hear
SILVER STANDARD.]
Mr. Wodehouse
moved an Address to his Majesty for a Copy of the Minutes of the Evidence of Alexander Baring, before the Privy Council, on 26th April, 1828, touching the adoption of a Silver Standard, &c. He would withdraw the motion if the Government would produce the evidence.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
replied, that he had no objection to produce the evidence; but it ought to be accompanied with the evidence of other individuals taken on the same occasion. [
hear
Motion withdrawn for the present.
COURT OF CHANCERY.]
Mr. M. A. Taylor
said, he understood it was the in-
271
EAST INDIA COMPANY'S CHARTER.]
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, his Majesty's Government had felt it to be their duty to avail themselves of the very earliest opportunity to redeem the pledge which they gave at the close of the last session of Parliament, that as soon as possible after the commencement of the present session, they would themselves propose a Committee of Inquiry, for the purpose of investigating the state of the commerce between this country and our Indian possessions. And if, in proposing that Committee, his statement should appear disproportionate to the vast importance of the subject, or if he forbore from entering on the present occasion, into the manifold and most interesting details which were necessarily mixed up with it, he begged it to be understood, that he took that course, not from any insensibility to the paramount greatness of the question, but from a recollection of the peculiar position in
272
hear
hear
273
hear
hear
hear
hear
274
hear
hear
hear
275
hear
hear
276
hear
hear
"That a Select Committee be appointed to inquire into the present state of the Affairs of the East India Company, and into the Trade between Great Britain, the East Indies, and China; and to report their observations thereupon to the House."
Mr. W. Whitmore
said, he felt that the line which the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Peel) had adopted in his address to the House was the most proper. He thought that the course he (Mr. Peel) had pursued, in declining to enter upon the examination of details connected with the question, and in avoiding bringing forward any points which might give rise to opposition, was, under all the circumstances of the case, decidedly the most prudent that could have been adopted. He thought the same course should be followed by all the other hon. Members who proposed to speak upon the question. They were then on the eve of an inquiry, the magnitude and importance of which certainly had not been over-stated, and perhaps could not be over-stated by the right hon. Secretary; for all men must agree that this question was one involving more extensive interests and more important considerations than any other that could now be possibly brought before the legislature of this country. But though not in the least desirous to provoke that discussion which the right hon. Gentleman so strongly deprecated, there was one observation which occurred to him, and which he
277
hear
hear
hear
hear
278
Sir J. Macdonald
.—If the right hon. Gentleman has, as I suppose he has, prepared a list of the proposed Committee, will he object to read the names to the House? The House may then judge how far the professed impartiality is to be carried. [
hear
Mr. Secretary Peel
hoped to be able to give the honourable Member a satisfactory answer. The Committee would be sufficiently extensive to ensure on all occasions a full attendance for the despatch of business; and it would also be numerous enough to subdivide itself for financial purposes. He would now read the list he had drawn up to the House. It would be seen that it was an ample one, and he hoped it would be observed that he had attempted to give the commercial and landed interests a fair representation therein. There were of necessity the names of many hon. Members left out whose services would undoubtedly be of advantage to the Committee; but he begged those Gentlemen to believe, that the omission had not proceeded from disrespect, or from anything like disregard for the zeal and talent they could bring with them to the inquiry. Hon. Members would be pleased to bear in mind that his duty had been to make a selection. He had done so to the best of his ability, and he hoped it would meet the approbation of the House. He would read the list.— The right hon. Gentleman then read the following list:—
279
Sir James Macdonald
agreed with the right hon. Secretary as to the inexpediency of entering upon any detailed discussion upon the present occasion. He trusted, however, that all possible facility would be afforded the Committee to acquire information upon all such subjects as they may consider deserving of inquiry. [
hear
280
we
I
renew
hear, and laughter
281
hear
hear
hear
282
hear
Mr. Hume
wished to know whether the Committee were to be confined to an inquiry into the present state of the government and commerce of India? He trusted this would not be the case, as much benefit might result from an inquiry into the effects which these improvements and institutions which had been made on the occasion of the last Charter had produced upon the country.
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, there was no idea of imposing any thing like a close restriction upon the Committee, whose decision would, of course, be founded upon the evidence adduced before them. With respect to the word 'present,' he had found it in the motion for the Committee of 1813, and he thought himself safer in taking the very words used with respect to that Committee than he could be with any other. Now as to the representation of the different interests in the Committee, he had laboured to make it as full and impartial as possible, and he did really think the commercial interests were sufficiently represented in having introduced the Members for Liverpool, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Preston, Lancashire, Staffordshire, Dublin, Limerick, and Yorkshire; and surely there was no want of the names of eminent advocates of their interests. He found the names of Mr. Baring, Mr. Irving, and Mr. Poulett Thomson, than whom none were more highly looked up to
283
Sir James Macdonald
begged to suggest whether there were not many gentlemen on the list who were too deeply interested in the question to come to its consideration without some bias. He thought, therefore, the list might be advantageously reduced, by blotting out the three East India directors.
Mr. Hume
thought that more men of business should be added to the list. He recommended Mr. Stewart,
*
a laugh
Mr. G. Bankes
said, he was very anxious to address the House upon the subject of some reflections which had been cast upon a noble friend (Lord Ellenborough). He certainly had been embarrassed on a former evening, when the subject was suddenly introduced, and at a time when his noble friend was labouring under severe domestic affliction, which had prevented him (Mr. B.) from seeing him for a long time previous, or from speaking to him upon the subject of the letter which had been attributed to him. [Lord E. had recently lost his son]. He (Mr. B.) also felt embarrassed on other grounds. He then thought there would have been a necessity of alluding to circumstances affecting another person, and circumstances for which he would be, in all probability, put upon trial. The person he alluded to was Sir John Grant, and he was, of course, anxious to avoid saying any thing which might tend to raise a prejudice against one who was shortly to be put upon his trial.— He had since, however, ascertained that the charges preferred against Sir J. Grant, were in consequence of circumstances which had taken place before his noble friend had written the letter, and therefore the difficulty was removed. He had also
*
284
Cheers, laughter
285
hear
286
287
cry of no, no
hear
288
289
290
Mr. Stewart
said, he was of opinion that an immediate and extensive inquiry ought to be instituted into the administration of justice in India. He especially reprobated the practice of appointing local Judges in the provinces by the Government, without due inquiry into their qualifications. Those Judges were dependent on the Government, and were removable at the pleasure of Government, which gave the Government an influence over them utterly inconsistent with the impartial administration of justice. In support of this statement, he would read an opinion which was given two years ago by the Master of the Rolls, Sir John Leach, in delivering his judgment on an appeal brought before him from the decision of one of those local Indian courts. It stated, that he had before had occasion to deplore the constitution of those Courts, as giving rise to a partial and disgraceful mode of administering justice; and that on that occasion he had represented the matter to the Board of Control, with a view to the correction of the evil, recommending that those Judges should be appointed at home: but the President expressed his opinion that the jealousies existing between the King's servants and the Company were so great, that it would be impossible to interfere. The present case had been decided in the Court of Surat, contrary to every principle of law and justice. He had forwarded copies of the proceedings to the President of the Council, as evidence of the mode in which justice had been administered in this Court; and he had taken the opportunity of requesting the President to re-consider
291
an exclamation of no, no
hear
292
Mr. Bankes
said, he had been misunderstood. All he meant to say was, that he did not know from whom Sir J. Grant received the letter. It was marked "private."
Mr. Hume
.—How does the hon. Member know that that is correct?
Mr. G. Bankes
said, he must add that he had not stated that a copy of the letter
293
Mr. Hume
.—How do you know that is correct?
Mr. Bankes
.—All that I have stated, Sir, is, that the manuscript copy varies from the printed copy. I do not carry it further. I do not pretend that it is correct.
Mr. Stewart
explained.—He had only inferred that Sir J. Malcolm had sent the letter.
Mr. Littleton
said, he should not approve of the Committee reporting its opinion too early to the House upon this important question. The report of a Committee did not bind the House, but it went far towards prejudicing public opinion, and was certainly an instrument in the hands of Government to effect a corresponding feeling in the House, In the year 1813, when the renewal of the Charter was under consideration, the course taken was, the House required from the Government its views in the shape of a resolution, and then, evidence was taken preparatory to the House expressing its own views. That course was erroneous, and the result proved that it was so. All that the country had a right to expect was, that the truth should be fully and fairly investigated, and he therefore approved of the method now proposed to be pursued.
Mr. Peel
said, in the course of the observation she had made, he had expressly stated that his hope was, that the House would reserve to itself a judgment on these important matters, and he had no difficulty in assuring his hon. friend that he, for one, should be content that, on so important an occasion, the Committee should only report the evidence, and abstain from making observations with a view to bind the judgment of the House. There might be great inconvenience in the Committee presenting a summary of the evidence. Questions might arise connected with the administration of justice; to which the Committee might think it. important to call the attention of the House. If they were precluded from making observations, they would have no such power. In the case of the Committee on the state of Ireland, they had power to report observations, and they presented a general summary of their inquiries, but abstained
294
Mr. Littleton
said, the answer of the right hon. Secretary was perfectly satisfactory to him.
Mr. Huskisson
said, the question now before the House was not the transactions which had occurred at Bombay, or the letter of the right hon. the President of the Board of Control; but the question was, exclusively the state of affairs between this country and India. As, however, reference had been made to the letter, he must, for one, enter his protest against its being considered a mere private letter. He could not admit that the letter of any adviser of the Crown, addressed to another public servant, in a very distinguished situation, and treating exclusively of matters of the very highest importance, was not fit to come under the cognizance of Parliament. Were it made the matter of a substantive motion, he should rind it difficult to reconcile to his feelings the character given of it by an hon. Member, that it tended in no degree to lower the dignity or independence of the Judges. The letter was a matter of great public importance. Nothing was less compatible with the dignity of a Judge than to be in the unfortunate situation of being obliged to undergo the discipline to which a wild elephant was submitted. As to the question itself, he had heard with the greatest satisfaction the proposal of his right hon. friend, thereby redeeming the pledge given last session by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, that a Committee should be appointed, and that the Committee should have all the necessary powers for going into a comprehensive, general, and effective inquiry into the interests which connected this country with British India. After the explanation which had been given, no one could doubt that this would embrace every necessary inquiry. That Committee, he had no doubt, would inquire into the administration of criminal and civil justice; and if they did not do this, they would find it difficult to enter upon the improvement of the civil condition of the natives of India. In like manner, when finances were inquired into, he trusted that the Committee would not
295
a laugh
hear, hear
296
Mr. J. Stewart
could not but defend the general conduct of the East India Directors, and of the official men who conducted their Government in India. He felt disposed to complain that persons were to be on the Committee who were not qualified for the task.
Mr. Huskisson
explained.—He had not intended to cast any imputations upon the Court of Directors.
General Gascoyne
said, he differed from his right hon. Colleague with respect to the formation of this Committee. He was not satisfied with the appointment, nor with the mode of appointing the Committee. The appointment had evidently been made merely for purposes which Ministers had already settled. Where, in this Committee, were the Members for the various commercial towns? There were none but for Bristol and Liverpool, and only one of the Members was taken from each of these towns. It appeared, therefore, to him that the selection of this Committee was one of which the House could not approve, especially with reference to what was intended in the consideration of this question. Among the rest of the names he saw that of Mr. W. O'Brien, the Member for Ennis. When he saw that name he naturally asked what it was which made that hon. Member the object of selection? and he was answered, "Oh'. He has written a pamphlet infavour of the East India Company." Now that was, or it was not, a reason for naming him on the Committee; and as the hon. Member did not seem to have any particular interest in the question, he might not be very objectionable; but if there were opportunity, he (Gen. Gascoyne) thought he knew different individuals whom he might recommend, and who were at least full as well calculated to be members of the Committee as the hon. Member for Ennis, although they had not been named upon it. From this and other circumstances, he did verily believe that Ministers had already come to some con-
297
Mr. Peel
said, he did not complain of the hon. Member for finding fault with him in the appointment of the Committee, but for making his objection in that respect the ground of a suspicion that the Government intended to renew the Charter. He had stated, in the few observations with which he had introduced this subject to the House, that he did not propose that Committee with a view of ratifying any engagement of any kind, or of sanctioning any previous arrangements made by the Government with respect to any commercial or trading speculation. [
hear
Mr. Astell
said, as he was a Director of the East-India Company, he had not intended to make any remarks on this question beyond that of stating that the Directors wished for nothing more than a very full inquiry on this subject. All he had to complain of, and in that complaint he was supported by his brother Directors, was, that the inquiry had been so long delayed. Inquiry would be most useful, and would remove the mist of
298
299
Mr. Huskisson
said, he could not allow the observations just made to pass without notice. He had not been the individual who originated the objection to Directors of the Company being members of the Committee. At the same time, if he were asked his opinion on the subject, he must state that there was a difference between them and persons who had not the same degree of interest in the concerns of the Company. When the hon. Member spoke of ignorance among the people, and charged it as having been made the means of misleading them, he claimed on his part, as that hon. Member had done on his own, full credit for having in the opinions he had maintained, no other object in view but the interest of the country.
Mr. Baring
said, as the Bank Charter had been alluded to, he trusted that as little delay as possible would be interposed between inquiry, because it was a matter of importance to the public. With respect to the present Committee, the subject was of such importance and extent, that if the inquiry was to be directed to one particular point, the members of the Committee ought to be informed of it at once. One word on the subject which had been started by the hon. Member opposite (Mr. Astell). If it were not that the Committee really wanted the information which gentlemen connected with the East India Company were best able to afford for the purpose of explaining the subject they were appointed to consider, he should not notice it. The necessity for obtaining information from these gentlemen was very great; but he must say that,
prima facie
300
301
302
valeant quantum
Mr. Bright
said, it appeared to him that the Government ought to have determined on some definite line of conduct, and to have brought a measure down to that House, and called on them to confirm it; and then, if doubt had been expressed, to request to refer it to a Committee. That would have been a more agreeable mode of proceeding. He agreed with the hon. Member for Callington, (Mr. Baring) that the question, by the present mode of proceeding, might be thrown over to another Session. He only rose to claim, on his own part, the fullest right to investigate the evidence laid before the Committee, when it should come under the notice of the House; and he could almost venture to propose that it should be an instruction to the Committee to report the evidence, and not their opinions; for in what situation would the House be when influenced by the weight and authority of the opinion of the Committee, without having equal time to gain a knowledge of the evidence on which it was founded? Under these circumstances, and reserving to every Member of the House the right of examine-
303
Mr. P. Thompson
wished to make a few observations on what had fallen from the hon. Member who had just sat down. During the whole of the last Session that hon. Member was loud in calling for a Committee of that House, yet now he reproached the Ministers for not coming to the House prepared with a measure, and then asking concurrence in it. He had often said, that it was not for Ministers to bring forward measures affecting the interests of large bodies of people, and he called for Committees of Inquiry on subjects with which the welfare of thousands was connected. Now he called on the Ministers to propose legislative measures, and seemed to think inquiry useless. Surely this was a little inconsistent, for was not this a question involving the interests of thousands, nay, indeed, of ninety millions of people? As far as his opportunity of judging went, he would take on himself to say that there was nothing more unfounded than the observation, that the people of this country and of India would not be satisfied with this inquiry. Had Gentlemen who made such assertions read what was constantly passing here, and had they not observed an universal call for inquiry? 'Let us be heard,' was the language pf all who had met to deliberate on this
304
Mr. Bright
, in explanation, said, he was a friend to inquiry, but he thought the Ministers might have prepared their own plans on the subject, and submitted them to the House, and thence to the Committee, for consideration. He remained of that opinion still.
The motion for the appointment of the Committee was then put and agreed to.
Mr. Secretary Peel
would now propose the names of the Committee (
see page
Mr. Huskisson
admitted that he was well aware of the difficulty of making a selection; and that, at all events, many hon. Members must be omitted who would be capable of giving valuable assistance. He thought, however, that in the list of names, many had been included who
305
Mr. Peel
said, he was not aware that the hon. Member for Sussex (Mr. W. Burrell) would be unable to attend. He had been selected as a representative of a county mainly interested in the growth of Wool. Sir R. Vyvian might be considered as a country gentleman, but he was one of the representatives for a very important county. Admitting most freely the right of Yorkshire to have a voice on the Committee, it would be observed that on this account the name of Lord Milton would be found in the list.—Between England, Ireland, Scotland, and the Government, great difficulty had been experienced in choosing Members properly to represent all interests.
General Gascoyne
begged to give notice that on an early day he would move an instruction to the Committee, to take into consideration the trade with China, and the propriety of removing impediments in the way of a free trade with India.
The names of the Committee were then read.
Mr. Hume
suggested that Mr. Stewart from his extensive and local knowledge, would be a most valuable addition to the number.
Mr. Peel
consented immediately to that hon. Member's appointment.
List of names agreed to, with the addition of that of Mr. Stewart.
EXPORTS, REAL AND OFFICIAL VALUE.]
Mr. Alderman Waithman
said, he brought forward his present motion, in pursuance of the pledge he had given on the subject, to call for papers that would
306
l
l
l
l
307
l
l
l
*
*
308
s
s
s
s
s
309
s
d
s
d
s
s
s
s
s
d
s
s
d
s
s
d
310
hear
l
"He who hangs, or beats out's brains,
The Devil's in him if he feigns."
311
See page
1
l
Account exhibiting the Official Value of IMPORTS into, and RE-EXPORTS from Great Britain for Eleven Years, viz. 1814 to 1825; together with the Nett Payments of DUTY, and the RATES of VALUATION of the stated Articles.
Species of Merchandize.
Official Value of
Excess of
Nett Payment to the Exchequer of
Rate of Valuation in England by Parliamentary Paper of 1826 (No. 385)
Imports.
Re-exports.
Imports.
Re-exports.
Customs Duty.
Excise Duty.
Valuation of Imports.
Valuation on Re-export.
Difference of Value.
Cassia Lignea
309,617
360,272
50,655
38,052
1/6
per lb.
2/0
per lb.
0/6
Cinnamon
917,928
1,085,785
l67,857
22,788
4/0
5/0
1/0
cloves
658,780
859,839
201,059
46,886
5/0
7/6
2/6
Cocoa
539,308
670,612
131,304
19,418
2,688,435
50/0
per cwt
80/0
per cwt
30/0
Coffee
38,089,469
40,155,828
2,066,359
907,877
140/0
140/0
Cod-fish
340,630
347,622
6,992
10/0
20/0
10/0
Cortex Peruvian
136,780
272,901
136,121
65,688
3/6
per lb.
3/0
per lb.
0/6
Mace
363,955
485,749
121,794
30,791
12/6
19/0
6/6
Nutmegs
464,937
474,095
9,158
163,060
4/0
6/6
2/6
pepper
1,163,426
3,064,762
1,901,336
528,830
787,978
0/4
1/1
0/9
Piece Goods of India
7,351,107
13,646,219
6,295,112
735,744
10/0 per piece
19/6 pr. piece
9/6
Pimento
564,754
627,617
62,863
112,655
0/6 per lb.
0/7 per lb.
Spirits, Foreign
8,215,168
11,651,132
3,435,964
2,765,183
26,461,566
B 2/4½
per gallon.
B. 5/0
per gallon.
10/11½
R 1/8
R. 6/0
G 1/0
G. 5/0
5/0½
16/0
Total £
59,115,859
73,702,433
—
14,586,574
5,436,972
29,937,979
312
years, as compared with those of the six years preceding 1820, to the amount of 9,035,025
l
See infra
(
pass over to folio
313
An Account of the Value of the MANUFACTURES and PRODUCE exported from the United Kingdom from 1798 to 1813, inclusive; and from 1814 to 1828, inclusive: showing the INCREASE of, and DECREASE of, REAL, as compared with OFFICIAL Value.
No. 1
Official Value.
Real Value.
Incr. of Real over Official.
No. 2
Official Value
Real Value.
Incr. of Real over Official.
Deer. of Real from Official.
£
£
£
£
£
£
£
1798
19,672,503
33,148,682
13,476,579
1814
36,120,723
47,859,386
11,738,663
1799
24,084,213
38,942,498
14,858,285
1815
44,084,701
53,209,809
9,161,108
1800
24,304,284
39,471,203
15,166,919
1816
136,697,610
42,955,256
6,256,646
1801
25,719,980
41,770,354
16,050,374
1817
41,590,516
43,614,136
2,023,620
1802
27,012,108
48,500,683
21,488,575
1818
44,564,044
48,903,760
4,339,716
1803
22,252,102
40,100,870
17,848,768
1819
35,634,415
37,939,506
2,305,091
1804
23,934,292
40,340,642
16,415,350
1820
48,735,551
38,619,897
1,620,380
1805
25,003,308
41,068,942
16,065,631
1821
40,831,744
36,659,631
4,172,113
1806
27,403,653
43,242,176
15,838,523
1822
44,236,533
36,968,964
7,267,569
1807
25,090,762
40,479,865
14,389,103
1823
43,804,372
35,458,048
8,346,324
1808
26,662,288
40,881,672
14,219,583
1824
148,735,551
38,396,300
10,350,062
1809
35,107,439
50,242,761
15,135,322
1825
47,150,687
38,870,945
8,279,244
1810
34,940,550
49,975,634
15,035,084
1826
40,965,735
31,536,723
9,429,012
1811
24,109,931
34,917,281
10,807,350
1827
52,219,280
37,182,857
15,036,423
1812
31,243,362
43,657,864
12,414,504
1828
52,797,455
36,814,176
15,983,279
1813
32,000,580
43,000,000
11,000,000
Total
35,825,844
80,484,406
Gross amount of real over official value
240,210,732
35,825,250
Gross amount of depreciation
116,310,250
Average increase per annum of real value over official for sixteen years
15,013,170
*
*
*
£
The annual value of our Exports in real value upon an average of six years, 1814 to 1819 inclusive
45,746,975
The annual value of our Exports in real value upon average of the last nine years, 1820 to 1828 inclusive
36,711,949
Yearly decrease in real value for the last nine years, as compared with six preceding years
9,035,026
The Exports of Colonial and Foreign Produce is not included; if that were added, and the increase that ought to have been in proportion to increased population was calculated, it would probably be double.
Average Price of THREE PER CENTS; and of WHEAT; and of WAGES of WEAVING a piece of twelve yards of CAMBRICK; and of COMMITTALS for CRIME,—for the last Thirty Years.
years.
Three per Cents.
Price of Wheat.
Wages for Weaving.
Committals for Crime.
s
s
d
Average 1800 to 1810
62
83
10
6
4000
per 12 yds.
1810 to 1820
65
88
6
9
5435
1820 to 1829
81
57
3
6
15000
1829
94
50
1
10
16564
314
BANK return of HALF-YEARLY DIVIDENDS from various Stocks and Annuities.
Not exceeding.
Number of persons.
Gross Number.
5
85,154
10
42,167
50
97,673
100
25,822
—
250,816
250
15,046
300
4,812
—
19,858
500
3,076
1000
1,501
2000
436
Exceed. 2000
152
—
5,165
Total number
275,833
From which it appears that all the Dividends exceeding £300 the half-year are received by 5,165 persons, who receive the gross amount of £8,110,182, and the whole are received by only 275,839 persons.
315
lonial and Foreign Produce:—Account of the Exports from Ireland:—Account of the Imports for the same periods:— Account of the Exports of Cotton Goods, from the year 1814, inclusive, to 5th January 1830; specifying each year the Increase and Decrease of Real as compared with Official Value:—Account of the Exports of Printed Cotton Goods, with the amount of Duties received, and Drawbacks allowed, upon the same."
Mr. Hume
begged leave to second the motion; but he must at the same time take leave to show that his hon. friend was completely mistaken in the conclusions he attempted to draw from the apparent decrease of the real over the official value since the year 1814. The Tables from which his hon. friend had taken his statements were drawn up by Mr. Marshall, a gentleman with whom he had long been acquainted; his (Mr. M.'s) object was, to show that the active industry of the country had, within such period, doubled, and nearly trebled, as compared with preceding years. Of the merits of those Tables there was but one opinion; but it was a complete mistake to take the returns of official values of goods passing through the Customs as a criterion of any thing except the mere quantities. In fact they were not so intended, and they very imperfectly, as it was well known, represented values; in so much so that these accounts, in 1798, took the official values at about nineteen millions; whereas it was ascertained that the real value of our exports was in that year full thirty-three millions. The same might be said of the return of the last year's official values, taken as at sixteen millions. It was certainly true that prices had gone down; but it should be recollected that there was a very great depreciation in the cost of the imports. He admitted all that his hon. friend had stated with respect to the decrease in the official value at one period, and its increase at another; but he was prepared at the same time to show that the decrease and increase proved a state of things the very reverse of that supposed by the hon. Member.
316
hear from Mr. Waithman
317
hear
laughter
d
d
d
318
Mr. Robinson
said, that notwithstanding the hard terms dealt out by the hon. Member for Aberdeen against those who did not agree with him in their notions of commercial policy, he could not avoid offering a few observations to the House. The hon. Gentleman appeared to have mistaken the object of the hon. Alderman's motion, which went no further than to show that the accounts of the official value of Exports, as they were made up, could not be fairly considered as a proof of the prosperity of the country. The hon. Gentleman appeared to him also to have mistaken the argument of the hon. Alderman as to the decreased value of the Exports. In fact, the hon. Gentleman had gone so far as to infer an increase of prosperity from the decreased value of the Exports. In what did the value of the Exports consist? It consisted of two elements— the capital, and the labour employed. If then, as unfortunately was the case in this country at the present moment, the price of labour was too low to afford a fair remuneration, could it be considered in any other light than as a proof that the commerce of the country was on the decline? But no, said the hon. Member for Aberdeen, it is a proof that your commerce is increasing, and consequently is in a state of prosperity. It had been said that those who were opposed to the principle of Free Trade did not sufficiently estimate the importance of foreign commerce. But when the hon. Gentleman contemplated making other nations tributary to this country, he should remember that it was not in our power, by any measure of internal legislation, to effect so desirable a purpose. We must first get other nations to agree with us, and he was sure that a right hon. Gentleman opposite—for whose profound theoretical knowledge on such subjects he had the highest respect—he was sure that right hon. Gentleman would not say that we had yet succeeded in bringing other nations to our opinions.—The only point on which he differed from the right hon. Gentleman was this—he understood him to wish that the whole commerce of the world should be thrown open, and conducted as if mankind were all one great and friendly family, exchanging with
319
320
321
bona fide
Mr. Courtenay
said, he was willing to admit, that the system of determining the value of our Exports by that called the "official average value," was not altogether as perfect as might be desired; but it was the most perfect that he knew of, or, he would affirm, that any Member of that House had as yet devised. He had tried one or two other modes of arriving at a value of our Exports and Imports, but found them not so successful; and he should be obliged to any hon. Member who would suggest a mode less liable to error than that of the official value. Some artificial standard was necessary, for the difference of kind and size, &c, of commodities rendered mere quantity an inefficient representative of real value. He would not then enter into an analysis of the hon. Alderman's statements, as a more fitting occasion would shortly present itself; but would content himself with contending that increase of Exports proved so far an increased activity of commerce. How could these Exports be made, without an increased amount of shipping, and of the employment of machinery and labour? Hon. Members said that because the price or rate of profit of those Exports was low, that therefore they were of no national benefit; but they forgot that the extent of the market was as the lowness of profits—that if they wished for high prices, they must count on small sales, and
vice versâ
322
Mr. Attwood
said, he was not surprised that the hon. Member for Aberdeen should be hailed as a great authority on the state of the nation by hon. Members opposite (on the Treasury bench) since his statements went to bear out their ill-founded assertions. But the hon. Member had a condition of his own, which went, if examined, to upset the very doctrines which he meant to uphold. The hon. Member had, on various occasions, contended that the present Free Trade system gave to us the market of the world; and yet strangely argued that there should be a reduction of 20,000,000
l
l
323
l
hear
Mr. P. Thomson
said, if the hon. Member had brought a just accusation against his Majesty's Ministers, a much juster accusation could be brought against him. He believed the distress of the country to be great, though not universal; but however great it might be, he could not believe that a remedy for it existed in the use of language that must inflame, or that it could answer any useful purpose to proclaim any part of the House to be indifferent to the distress of the people. The hon. Member having described on a former evening his object as to the depreciation of the standard, the House now knew how to meet him, and gentlemen must beware how they aided a plan which was calculated to be a fraud on the country.
324
Mr. Attwood
said, he must protest against personal motives being attributed.
Mr. Thomson
said, he did not intend to impute personal motives.
Mr. Attwood
.—If any hon. Member imputes to me any measure of dishonesty or fraud it is perfectly false. [
hear, and order
The Speaker
requested the hon. Member to abstain from such observations. He felt persuaded that the hon. Member for Dover had used the observations only in the way of argument.
Mr. Thomson
said, in reference to the opinion the hon. Member was known to hold, he must repeat what he said; that he could not but conceive that a measure which would reduce the standard of the country was one calculated to effect a fraud; and he was glad of an opportunity to speak of the measure, that the House might not be led to adopt schemes of that kind. The distress occasioned by overproduction was not remediable by legislative enactments, nor could any retrenchment cut off a very great sum from the expenditure of the country. A remedy might be found in a mutation of taxation. A large proportion of the taxes pressed on the industrious classes, whilst those who were better able to bear them were exempt. The hon. Member (Mr. Attwood) had said, that any one who asserted, as the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Courtenay) had, that we could receive Imports from a country which prohibited our Exports, asserted what was absurd and dangerous. He (Mr. Thomson) considered, that it was equally absurd and dangerous to assert the contrary. The Imports must have been purchased either by our Exports or those of some other country. He wished the system of official values not to be abandoned, because it showed quantity more conveniently than any other mode.— He would not say more on this subject now, as many opportunities would occur when it might be more advantageously discussed.
Mr. Fyler
said, he felt himself called upon to answer the observation of the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Courtenay) which implied that Trade was getting better, and that the experiment as to the Silk Trade had succeeded; by asserting that there was now the greatest distress in the Silk Trade, and that principally occasioned by the measures of last Session. Many large Manufacturers were now insolvent. He quite agreed with those who
325
Mr. Huskisson
said, he would not enter into the discussion at that late hour, though, if any thing could move him, it would be the quantity of unnecessary and incorrect matter which had been lavished on the subject.
Mr. Trant
said, he must complain of the use of the word 'fraud' in the speech of an hon. Gentleman, and said it was unfair to attribute improper motives to those Members who stood up in their places honestly to discharge their duty. He noticed this because what was said in that House went forth to the country, and he repeated that such assertions ought not to be made. He would say why his attention was called to the question of the currency. He had listened with attention to the debates, and when he found it stated that the money was accumulating in a few hands, and the general condition of the people was falling off, he thought it time for independent men to [speak out. It was a lamentable state, and it was, in the political body, what would be called in the physical a determination of blood to the head. [
hear and a laugh
Mr. Thomson
explained: when he used the term fraud, he meant not to apply it to individuals, but merely to represent that any act to depreciate the currency would be a fraud on the country.
Mr. Attwood
said, he thought all persons who were paid in a depreciated currency, had a fraud committed on them.
Motion agreed to: Accounts ordered.
SUPPLY.]
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
moved the preliminary Resolution on the Lords Commissioners Speech— "That a Supply be granted."
The Marquis of Blandford
regretted that some Member more conversant with the forms of the House did not rise to oppose the Speaker's leaving the Chair. The distresses of the country were so great, the cries of the people for relief were so loud, and the promises of his Majesty's Ministers were so vague and unsatisfactory, that he felt himself called upon in duty to oppose
in limine
326
Mr. Hume
.—The motion is regular—it requires only a verbal alteration; and its principle I approve:—Before I grant a supply (said the noble Marquis) let there be a redress of grievances.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, he did not come to the House prepared for any such amendment as the present. He understood, certainly, that an amendment was to be moved in the Committee of Supply on Friday, to which the present motion was a mere formal preparation. He hoped the noble Lord would withdraw his motion, or, if he were determined to press it to a division, he thought the better way would be to postpone the Committee, as, in the present state of the House, [twenty-eight Members only were present], no division could take place, the calling for a division would be to have the House counted out. The noble Lord had certainly adopted a novel course towards the House, and which was not likely to make a very favourable impression on the public generally; but he had the power, and he must use it as he pleased.
The Marquis of Blandford
.— I am no party to any understanding as to any motion on Friday. If hon. Members are not present to do their duty to the people, it is no fault of mine; here am I to do my duty; I shall divide.
327
Of the twenty-eight Members who were present, there were as follows:—
For the Motion 24. For the Amendment 4.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Thursday, February 11, 1830.
WRITS FOR EAST RETFORD.]
Mr. S. Lumley
presented a petition from the Burgesses of East Retford, praying for new writs for the election of two Members for that Borough to be issued forthwith.
328
Mr. Duncombe
presented a petition from certain owners and occupiers of lands in the town and neighbourhood of Boroughbridge, complaining of the pressure of general distress, and praying for the enforcement of strict economy in the national expenditure, a repeal of the Malt duties, and an alteration of the present system of licensing Public-houses.
LAW REFORM.]
Mr. O'Connell
presented a petition from several individuals, praying for such a Reform in the Law as would make it what it was not at present—cheap, intelligible, and expeditious. The petition also prayed the House to call upon intelligent persons, to draw up draughts of an "all-comprehensive code of law" for this country. He would read some extracts from it, because the subject was of great importance, and because he might hereafter call further attention to it. The petitioners said, that in so far as the respective consciences of the petitioners will allow, they entertain the sincerest disposition to conform themselves in all things to the good pleasure of those who are set in authority over them; that when by any of them a wish is expressed to know what that pleasure is, he is bid to look to the law of the Land; that when a
329
330
ex post facto
331
332
IRISH NEWSPAPERS.]
Mr. O'Connell
moved for Returns of the number of Stamps issued to each Newspaper in Ireland for one year, ending 5th January, 1830; and of the sums paid to Newspapers in Ireland, from 5th Jan. 1829 to 5th Jan. 1830, for printing Proclamations; distinguishing the sums paid to each Newspaper by title, and place of publication." Ordered.
SMUGGLING.]
Lord G. Lennox
obtained leave to bring in a bill for the relief of parishes from the expenses of maintaining the wives and families of men convicted under the laws for the prevention of Smuggling, and sentenced to serve in his Majesty's navy.
Mr. F. Baring
(such bill having been ordered) said, he rose to call for an explanation from the Admiralty, respecting their treatment of a man of the name of Millar, who had been sentenced in December, 1824, to serve on board one of his Majesty's ships for the space of five years, in consequence of his participation in some smuggling transactions. On the 23rd of December of last year, the term of his imprisonment expired, and he then applied, but in vain, for his release. He repeated
333
Sir G. Clerk
said, that Acts of Parliament, by which smugglers were permitted to serve on board of his Majesty's ships in lieu of being imprisoned for the pecuniary-penalties to which they had rendered themselves liable by transgressing the law, had warranted the term of Millar's service; and he must contend, from a review of these Acts, that there was not one of them which limited the time of service to five years. The first question, therefore, to be considered in Millar's case was this—had he a right to claim his discharge at the end of five years? And then, supposing for the sake of argument, that he had such right, was he, having been offered full pay on board, authorized to disobey the orders of his commanding officer? He (Sir G. Clerk) contended that on both those points the decision must be clearly against Millar.
334
LORD ELLEN BOROUGH'S LETTER.]
Dr. Phillimore
wished to ask the right hon. Gentleman opposite, whether any order had been sent out by his Majesty's Government for the recall of Sir John Peter Grant from his situation of Judge in the Supreme Court of Bombay?
Mr. Peel
said, no steps had been taken for the removal of the learned gentleman, the matter was under the consideration of the Privy Council.
FEES IN CRIMINAL COURTS.]
Mr. Peel
gave notice that he would, on the 17th February, move for leave to bring in a bill for the abolition of all Fees required from individuals when acquitted on their discharge from any Criminal Court.
EAST RETFORD.]
Mr. N. Culvert
said, that as the case of the Borough of East Retford had been well known for several years, he did not mean, in bringing forward his motion, to trouble the House at any length. He had no personal feeling in this question; and he thought it very hard that any such motive should be attributed to him. His object was one of strict justice and fairness. Under all the circumstances, he should say no more at present, except to claim his right to reply to any argument or objection that might be raised against his motion, "That leave be given to bring in a bill to prevent Bribery and Corruption in the Borough of East Retford."
Mr. Tennyson
hoped, that he should not be accused of pertinacity, if, alter so many
335
336
Mr. Marshall
begged leave to second the motion. In his opinion, the franchise ought to be extended to Birmingham, instead of being given to strengthen an interest which already possessed an overwhelming influence.
Mr. Batley
said, he thought it was contrary to the principle of the constitution that such towns as Leeds, Birmingham, and Sheffield, should not be properly represented; and whenever a specific motion was brought forward for imparting to them the right to return Members to serve in Parliament, he should give it his strongest support. But he certainly would not benefit those towns by disfranchising other places:—he would not agree to that which would be a bill of Pains and Penalties on East Retford.
Viscount Howick
said, in consequence of this question having been introduced so soon, he was precluded from making the motion of which he had given notice. He meant, however, to vote for the proposition of the hon. Member for Bletchingley; and if it were not carried, it would then be open to him to move his own resolution as an amendment to the original motion. The hon. Member for Hertfordshire had moved for leave to bring in a bill to prevent Bribery and Corruption in the Borough of East Retford; but the motion which he had meant to propose, if he had come down in time, would go to declare, "that the abuses which were alleged to exist in East Retford, were not confined to that town, but were notorious in many cities and boroughs in the United Kingdom." Such was his opinion; and therefore he thought it was much better to propose a general remedy for a general evil, instead of applying particular remedies to particular places—a course which experience showed did not serve any good purpose, and was positively bad in practice. He originally voted for the motion to disfranchise this borough, not to punish the electors for the crime laid, to
337
ex post facto
338
339
Mr. O'Connell
said, he could not content himself with giving a silent vote on this occasion. Being himself a Radical Reformer, and desiring a complete and thorough Reform in every thing corrupt in the country, he was anxious to make an example in every particular case of corruption that came within the general rule. He thought an hon. Member was mistaken when he stated that the House was now called upon to act in a judicial capacity, and decide whether the electors of East Retford had been guilty of bribery and corruption, and that the fact was not proved against the borough on the occasion of the last election. If the fact were not proved, then certainly the hon. Gentleman ought to oppose the bill of the hon. Member for Hertfordshire, which proceeded on the supposition that bribery and corruption existed. The hon. Gent. argued that bribery was not proved. He (Mr. O'Connell) had read the evidence in the case, and was convinced that East Retford continued a sink of bribery and corruption up to the present moment. It was quite true that the existence of bribery, on a recent occasion had not been proved, because the time of payment had not arrived; the bribes were due, but had not been paid. The voters sent Members into the House, and gave credit for the bribes, putting faith in the parties for the forty guineas a-piece. The noble Lord (Howick) seemed to think that as all the voters of East Retford had not been proved guilty, all should not be punished; and argued, that though there might be a guilty majority, yet there was an innocent minority, whom it would be wrong to visit with punishment for the faults of others. But let it be recollected that boroughs acted by majorities—that majorities, and not minorities, sent Members to Parliament; so that, supposing a few voters to be free from corruption, yet was the borough corrupt for all purposes of representation; consequently, the majority ought to be punished, and the borough prevented from ever again sending Members to that House. His opinion was, that the right of representation ought not to belong to any pri-
340
laughter
Lord Normanby
fully agreed with the noble Lord (Howick) that the voters of East Retford were not singly or peculiarly guilty, but he was of opinion, that as their case had been brought forward, and their guilt proved, an example should be made of them. He wished to take advantage of their delinquency, for the purpose of making a beneficial change in the representation, and transferring the elec-
341
Mr. Huskisson
said, he could not give a silent vote on this question. Still, recollecting that only a few months had passed since, at an advanced period of the last Session of Parliament, he had had an opportunity of stating fully (as he did) his views of the subject now under consideration, he did not think it necessary to go again over the ground which he had then traversed. But he must be allowed to say, that every tiling which had occurred within the last few months—every thing which was now passing—every thing in the condition of the country, which even those who ran could read—every thing that occurred in every quarter—pointed out to him as it did to every dispassionate observer, the great and increasing importance and a thorough conviction of the necessity of dealing with a corrupt and rotten borough, like East. Retford, not by extending the franchise to the adjoining hundred of Bassetlaw, the inhabitants of which had already votes for Nottinghamshire, but by disfranchising it altogether, and transferring the elective privilege to the great and populous town of Birmingham, which was altogether unrepresented. He felt the increasing and urgent importance of this in reference to the general question of Reform; and he was not afraid to avow his feeling, as he row did, that it was of the utmost importance we should deal with the matter under consideration so as best to guard ourselves against the growing danger of sweeping Reform on principles too abstract and general. He avowed that to be his feeling, and called upon others who thought with him upon the subject to take up this defensive position against the dangers which pressed upon us from every quarter. If by the influence of his Majesty's Government in this House he should be driven from the position which he now occupied,—if the present proposition for a moderate and
342
343
344
hear
345
346
347
laughter
hear, and laughter
hear, and a laugh
348
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, he could assure the House that he was by no means unwilling to give an opinion on the present question. His silence hitherto had arisen from deference to his right hon. friend who had just sat down; and who, having been referred to in the discussion, he supposed would wish to avail himself of the earliest opportunity of replying to the allusions that had been made. He had also another reason for his silence. This was not the first occasion on which this question had come before them. The House had, seven or eight times, declared that the franchise of East. Retford should be extended to the hundred of Bassetlaw, and he thought, therefore, that there could be no doubt on the mind of any man that he should adhere to his former conduct, and to the former conduct of the House, in shaping his course on the present occasion. He certainly should vote for the motion of the hon. Member for Hertfordshire, because that motion was, in his opinion, most consonant with his views of correcting an established abuse. His right hon. friend had said that he was no Reformer. He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) begged to claim for himself the privilege of disclaiming that title also. His right hon. friend, however, thought by the course he proposed to adopt, he should oppose the wilder schemes of Reform, and take up a defensive position against all attempts to carry such schemes into effect. But he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) on the other hand, thought his course was most consistent with the Constitution of that House. He thought that there was great danger in going even one step towards general Reform,—and such a step he thought this to be. His right hon. friend had told them how important it was that Birmingham, and Leeds, and Manchester, and other great towns should send representatives to that House; and, by what
349
350
Mr. C. Grant
said, it was with great regret that he had heard the speech of his light hon. friend who had just sat down. His right hon. friend, in a very lofty tone, commenced an attack on his right hon. friend (Mr. Huskisson), who sat near him. Now what had his right hon. friend (Mr. Huskisson) said? Why merely that he had taken up a defensive position against the wilder schemes of Reform; that he thought it the duty of the House to watch the
351
hear
352
353
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
wished to explain. There was one point on which his right hon. friend had misunderstood him. He knew and stated that he acted on this question according to precedents; the result of which was, that the franchise should be extended to the hundred, unless the hundred were so small, or so full of other boroughs, that such transfer became unadvisable. In this case the hundred did afford a sufficient number of voters in other boroughs.
Sir F. Blake
said, though nominally it might be an extension of representation to transfer the franchise to the hundred, yet as he did not know under whose influence the hundred of Bassetlaw was, he thought it would be better to disfranchise the borough altogether. [
Cries of Question became very loud and general
Mr. Peel
said, he was not surprised at the anxiety of the House to come to a decision on a subject which had already been so frequently and so fully discussed, and he could assure hon. Gentlemen that for this reason it was not his intention to trespass long on their patience. He rose from a wish to disembarrass the question of the extraneous political and personal allusions of his right hon. friend the Member for Liverpool. His right hon. friend argued, that because the Government had selected the same gentleman as Attorney-General who had filled that office under the administration of Mr. Canning, they therefore should adopt the same course in respect to the franchise of a corrupt borough as had been adopted by
354
355
356
A laugh, in which the right hon. Gentleman joined.
357
hear
358
Mr. N. Calvert
rose amidst cries of 'question.'—He said, he was anxious to state, that he had no personal acquaintance with the Duke of Newcastle, and was not influenced in this motion by any considerations for the influence of that noble Lord. He did not believe, indeed, that the noble Duke would obtain any increase of influence by the extension of the franchise from East Retford to the hundred. There was a Duke of Newcastle, who, when Minister in the reign of Geo. II., had very great influence in the borough, and it was said gave places under Government to most of the electors, but he believed the present Duke possessed very little if any influence there, and certainly no leading influence in the hundred.
Mr. Huskisson
in explanation, begged to observe that his right hon. friend (Mr. Peel) had mistaken his argument about the appointment of Sir J. Scarlett as Attorney-General. What he said was, that seeing a Tory Ministry acting on Whig principles, he thought they would not object to the course which the hon. Member (Mr. Tennyson) had proposed. As to the objection which his right hon. friend
359
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, as his right hon. friend, in his explanation, had thought proper to amend his argument, he (Mr. Peel) felt it also necessary to explain. In the first instance his right hon. friend's argument certainly was, that in consequence of the appointments already alluded to, and in consequence of the Government having adopted one great principle, they ought also to adopt the Other principles of Mr. Canning.
Mr. Huskisson
begged to repeat, that, considering this Administration to be a Tory Government, supported by Whig principles, he had contended they might have adopted this one Whig principle with the rest.
Mr. C. Grant
explained. He did not mean to throw out any insinuation against the Government, or attribute motives to them which they had disclaimed.
Mr. Lumley
hoped if it were thought to be impracticable to come to a decision this session, it would be considered best to let the question fall to the ground, and issue new writs for East Retford.
Lord Darlington
said, whatever might have fallen from him the other night (on moving the Address) as to the ground on which he would support Ministers, he
360
The House divided: For the original Motion 120; For the Amendment 99: Majority 27.
List of the Majority.
Arkwright, R.
Fane, Sip H.
Apsley, Lord
Goulburn, rt. hon. H.
Arbuthnot, rt. hon. C.
Gordon, Sir W.
Arbuthnot, Col.
Gower, Lord L.
Ashurst, W. H.
Graham, Marquis of
Ashley, Hon. W.
Grant, Sir A.
Alexander, J.
Grosvenor, Gen.
Alexander, H.
Gye, F.
Baker, E.
Hardynge, rt. hn. Sir H.
Bankes, H.
Hill, Sir R. Bart.
Bankes, G.
Hill, rt. hon. Sir. G.
Bankes, W.
Hastings, Sir C. A. Bt.
Beresford, Sir J. P. bart.
Holmesdale, Viscount
Beresford, Marcus
Ingilby, Sir W. A. Bt.
Benson, Ralph
Irving, J.
Brydges, Sir J.
Knox, Hon. T.
Brecknock, Lord
Knatchbull, Sir E. Bt.
Becket, rt. hon. Sir J.
King, hon. Gen.
Batley, C. H.
Lowther, Lord
Barrard, G.
Lennox, Lord G.
Balfour, J.
Lowther, Col.
Bell, M.
Lushington, Col.
Bastard, E. P.
Leake, W.
Cholmeley, M.
Lewis, rt. hon. F.
Chichester, Major A.
Lygon, Hon. Col. H. P.
Carrington, Sir E. C.
Marryatt, J.
Campbell, A. of Blythewood.
Murray, rt. hon. Sir G.
Mundy, F.
Cust, Hon. P.
Mundy, G.
Cust, Hon. E.
Manners, Lord C.
Calcraft, rt. hon. J.
Manners, Lord R.
Courtenay, rt. hon. T. P.
M'Leod, J. N.
Castlereagh, Lord
Moore, G.
Clark, Sir G.
Martin, Sir T. B.
Croker, rt. hon. J. W.
Manning, W.
Cockburn, rt. hn. Sr. G.
Northcote, H. S.
Cartwright, W. B.
North, J. H.
Clive, H.
O'Brien, W. S.
Cox, J.
Osborne, Lord F.
Cooper, R. B.
Paul, Sir H. St.
Cockerell, Sir C. Bart.
Pitt, J.
Corry, Hon. H. T. L.
Peel, rt. hon. R.
Dundas, R. A.
Peel, W.
Dawson, G. R.
Peachy, Lieut-Gen.
Davis, Hart
Perceval, S.
Darlington, Lord
Peach, N. W.
Dotting A. R.
Planta, J.
Dawkins, Col. H.
Prendergast, G.
Doherty, J.
Robinson, G. R.
Duncombe, Hon. W.
Strathaven, Lord
Downes, Lord
Sugden, Sir E. B.
East, Sir E. Hyde
Stopford, Lord
Forrester, Hon. J. G. W.
Smith, Ald.
Fitzgibbon, Hon. R.
Somerset, Lord G.
Farquhar, J.
Somerset, Lord E.
Freemantle, Sir T.
Sanderson, R.
361
Sotheron, Adm. F.
Ure, Masterton
Stewart, J.
Valletort, Lord
Spottiswoode, A.
Van Homrigh, P.
Sadler, M. T.
Willoughby, H.
Seymour, H. B.
Williams, Owen
Thompson, L.
Wetherell, Sir C.
Talmash, Hon. F.
Walpole, Hon. Col. J.
Trench, Col. F. W.
—
Townshend, Hon. J. R.
TELLERS.
Thynne, Lord H.
Ross, Charles
Vivian, Sir H.
Calvert, Nicholson
List of the Minority.
Attwood, M.
Milbank, M.
Althorpe, Lord
Marshall, J.
Barclay, C.
Marshall, W.
Barclay, D.
Martin, J.
Blandford, Lord
M'Donald, Sir J.
Bentinck, Lord G.
Morpeth, Lord
Bernal, R.
Nugent, Lord
Brownlow, C.
O'Connell, D.
Burdett, Sir F.
Pendarvis, E. W.
Blake, Sir F.
Parnell, Sir H.
Beaumont, T. W.
Palmer, C. F.
Baring, A.
Phillimore, Dr.
Baring, F.
Palmerston, Lord
Callaghan, G.
Protheroe, E.
Cavendish, Hon. H.
Ponsonby, Hon. G.
Cavendish, W.
Robarts, A. W.
Carter, J. Bonham
Robinson, Sir G.
Craddock, Col.
Rumbold, C. E.
Calvert, C.
Rickford, W.
Duncombe, T.
Russell, W.
Davis, Col.
Russell, Lord J.
Davenport, E.
Rice, T. S.
Dawson, A.
Scarlett, Sir J.
Denison, J. J.
Slaney, R. A.
Denison, J. W.
Smith, V.
Ewart, W.
Smith, W.
Ellis, Hon. A.
Stuart, Lord J.
Easthope, J.
Stewart, Sir W.S.
Ferguson, Sir R.
Thompson, Ald.
Fortescue, Hon. G.
Taylor, M. A.
Fergusson, Cutlar
Thomson, Poulett
Fazakerly, T. N.
Wells, J.
Ferguson, Sir T.
Westenra, Hon. H. R.
Fyler, T. B.
Warrender, Sir G.
Gascoyne, Gen.
Wodehouse, E.
Guest, J. S.
Wood, Ald.
Grant, rt. hon. C.
Wood, C.
Grant, R.
Wood, J.
Graham, Sir J.
Wilbraham, G.
Gordon, R.
Wall, Baring
Hoye—(of Southamp.)
Warburton, H.
Huskisson, rt. hon. W.
Whitmore, W. W.
Hume, J.
Wilson, Sir R.
Howick, Lord
Waithman, Ald.
Hobhouse, J. C.
Wyvill, Marmaduke
Hutchinson, H.
—
Jephson, C. D.
TELLERS.
Labouchere, H.
Tennyson, Charles
Langston, J.
Normanby, Lord
Littleton, E. J.
—
Lester, B. L.
Paired off.
Lamb, Hon. G.
W. J. Denison.
362
Lord Howick
, on the question being put, that the Bill be now brought in, said, it was his opinion that it was extremely unfair to fasten on one single case of political delinquency, like that of East Retford, while it was so notorious that the borough thus stigmatized formed only a component part of a widely prevailing system, deserving of reprobation and reform. He would have punishment inflicted indiscriminately on all culprits of every class, high or low, where soever they might be found. It was an incontrovertible fact, that undue influence, whether in the shape of money or otherwise, had been long exercised in every election throughout the United Kingdom. To cause this undoubted truth to be openly declared by the House of Commons was the object of his resolution. It had been already fully admitted by a noble Lord who filled, a prominent part in the administration several years ago (Lord Castlereagh), and the correctness of the statement was too generally established to be questioned from that day to the present. It was suggested by aright hon. Gentleman opposite, that he ought to be prepared to bring in a bill for the prevention of bribery, grounded on his proposed resolution. Now the course which he intended to adopt was this:—after the passing of the declaratory resolution, he might move for the appointment of a Committee, which Committee should be empowered to draw up a scheme for Parliamentary Reform. But were he presented with the alternative of stopping short in his career, or supporting the hon. Member for Hertfordshire, he would not hesitate a moment in his choice. It was his determination to oppose that hon. Gentleman, because he thought his bill an imposition on the country. He considered it a mere mockery to disfranchise a single borough in the existing circumstances of the country, when no person was blind to the means by which numbers procured seats in that Mouse. Perhaps it might be said that by opposing this bill he was virtually encouraging bribery. In reply, however, he could only say, that while abuse at its full growth walked boldly through the land, he would never be brought, at sight of a solitary instance of corruption, to feign a horror and indignation which he did not feel.
The House again divided: Ayes 154; Noes 55—Majority 99.
363
List of the Minority on Lord Howick's Motion.
Baring, Alexander
M'Donald, Sir James
Batley, Charles H.
Martin, John
Bernal, Ralph
Marshall, Wm.
Brownlow, Charles
Nugent, Lord
Barclay, Charles
O'Connell, Daniel
Barclay, David
Philips, George
Blandford, Marquis of
Pendarvis, Edw. W. W.
Blake, Sir F.
Ponsonby, Hon. G.
Burdett, Sir F.
Pallmer, N.
Cavendish, Henry
Protheroe, Edw.
Cavendish, Wm.
Russell, W.
Cholmeley, Montague
Rice, Thomas Spring
Davies, Colonel
Smith Vernon
Davenport, Edw.
Stewart, J. (Bevevley)
Dawson, Alexander
Tennyson, Charles
Easthope, J.
Thompson, Ald. W.
Fazakerley, John N.
Thomson, Poulett
Fortescue, Hon. G.
Warburton, Henry
Ferguson, Sir R. C.
Waithman, Ald.
Gordon, Robert
Wilbraham, George
Howard, Henry
Whitmore, W. W.
Hume, Joseph
Wells, John
Hoye—(of Southampton)
Wood, Ald.
Wood, Charles
Hobhouse, J. C.
Wood, John
Ingilby, Sir W. A. Bt.
—
Lamb, Hon. G.
TELLERS.
Labouchere, Henry
Howick, Lord
Lumley, John S.
Normanby, Lord
Morpeth, Lord
Mr. N. Calvert
then brought in a Bill to prevent Bribery and Corruption in the Election of Burgesses to serve in Parliament for the Borough of East Retford; which was read a first time, and ordered to be read a second time on Friday, 26th of February.
COURT OF CHANCERY.]
The Solicitor General (Sir E. B. Sugden)
said, he rose for the purpose of introducing to the notice of the House his amendments of the law relating to certain matters which had been the subject of particular decisions in the Court of Chancery. It was his intention to introduce five different Bills to alter the law which those decisions had established. The first Bill related to Illusory Appointments. The law of England was favourable to every latitude in the disposition of property. To that liberal principle was owing the introduction of powers of appointment; thus, for instance, if a father were desirous of reserving to himself on his son's marriage a power of appointment, he might do so. There were two sorts of powers of this kind in the law. The one was an exclusive power, by which the father had the power to give the property
364
l
l
l
365
Mr. O'Connell
said, it would be very great presumption in so humble an individual as himself to differ on a legal subject with the hon. and learned Gentleman. In the Bill alluded to, however, he conceived that a slight mistake had been made which would require amendment, notwithstanding the general propriety of the measure, which he was quite ready to admit. The existing system was indeed one which much needed reformation, and he would be the last to oppose the progress of what must prove in the main an improvement; he therefore concurred entirely with the honourable and learned Gentleman, that the Law, as it was now administered in Equity, upon the subject of Illusory Appointments in particular, absolutely required amendment. There was, in fact, no rule in Equity, but a question in Equity, as to the Appointment, or as it might be more truly and conveniently described, the apportionment of property. In every case of distribution of this particular kind, the Court entered upon the inquiry with a view to see whether a substantive share had or had not been given to the various objects of the power of appointment. This raised a question, but gave no rule whatever. The object of this Bill was to correct that evil which was most enormous, and which was made more enormous, inasmuch as the Equity Judges differ-
366
367
The Solicitor General
replied.—He could not accede to the suggestion of the hon. Member for Clare. He could not consent to take away from the father his legitimate and reasonable power of apportioning to his children as he might think proper, acting on the impulse of his affections and the dictates of his judgment. It was for this very reason that he admired the excellence of the English Law, although the hon. and learned Gentleman would have him depart from it to follow the questionable example of France. His Bill would trench neither on the rights of parents nor children. Why ought they to divest a father of so important a right, the exercise of which might prove so serviceable in the exigencies of his family? The French Law gave the father the smallest quantity of power over his own property; but he thought such a system ought not to be introduced here. If bargains of the nature described were at any time made, a Court of Equity, on being applied to, would immediately set them aside for the benefit of the children. The rule he should recommend would break in upon nothing—it would work no mischief, but must amend many real practical tangible grievances, which could not be terminated too soon. The bill now proposed would leave any one at full liberty to declare the portions into which he wished his property to be divided, and he believed it would be found to operate as a general benefit, It would not only be a great
368
Motion agreed to.
LIABILITY OF REAL PROPERTY, &C.]
The Solicitor General
moved for leave to bring in a Bill to facilitate the Payment of Debts out of Real Estates. A few words would suffice to explain its object. He proposed to extend to Covenants the Act of William and Mary, which at present only related to Bonds; for, by the Statute of William, the Bond Debts of an Estate, even in the case of the heir being an infant, were recoverable in Equity, but not Covenants, which were held liable in Common Law. He proposed to extend the power of the Courts of Equity to Covenants, and to enable them to give a title to the estates of the infant which were sold under their jurisdiction. At present, by a strange anomaly, the Court of Chancery possessed and exercised the power of selling the infant's estate, but could not give a title; so that a purchaser was obliged to wait till the infant became twenty-one years of age. He proposed to remedy that defect, and also to grant the Court of Chancery the power of giving a title in the case of devised property. The next object on which he begged leave to say he had expended many weeks' consideration was, to extend the 6th of his present Majesty, which was itself an extension of the Statute of Anne, so as to make the contracts of heirs liable out of their real estates, and to invest the Court of Chancery with the power of giving a title. The giving the Great Seal the power of granting a title, in cases of sales effected under its jurisdiction, of the property of infants, femes covert and lunatics, was the next object of his Bill. He also proposed to give it the same power in the cases of infant and lunatic trustees and mortgagees. At present lunatics were liable for all contracts entered into when in a state of
369
COMMITMENTS FOR. CONTEMPT.]
The Solicitor General
moved for leave to bring in a Bill, the object of which was, to amend the Law relating to Process of Contempt, and Commitments for Contempt, by Courts of Equity. The House would be aware that Courts of Equity acted ad
personam,
ad rem,
370
371
l
l
l
l
372
373
cheers, and cries of order, order, order
would
should
374
Mr. Hume
said, he was far from undervaluing the labours of the hon. and learned Gentleman who had just sat down, on the contrary, he appreciated them highly; but he must be allowed to say that many of the returns upon which the hon. and learned Gentleman had founded his observations were laid upon the table of that House at his (Mr. H.'s) instance. Neither could he
375
376
The Solicitor-General
said, he could not but feel the praises of the hon. Member for Montrose as most painful, seeing that they were only given to him in the form of censures pronounced upon the conduct of his predecessors. It was by no means,
377
Mr. Hume
said, he should be extremely sorry to damp the laudable efforts of any public functionary, but he would put it to him whether the conduct of his predecessors, if like his, would not have led to similar results?
Lord Althorp
said, that when in former Sessions his hon. friend the Member for Montrose had addressed the House upon the abuses of the Court of Chancery, he had naturally and justly expressed his disapprobation of the conduct of those by whom the abuses in that Court were allowed to exist; and it was perfectly natural and just that when complaints of that nature were at length rendered groundless by the conduct of public officers, that the same hon. Gentleman, the Member for Montrose, should contrast the conduct of the present law officers of the Crown with that of their predecessors.
Sir Charles Wetherell
complained of the sweeping anathema which the Member for Montrose had pronounced against all who had filled legal offices under the Crown. The hon. Member had taken them severely to task, and he (Sir Charles Wetherell) would take him to task. He would ask that hon. Member where he was all the time the Chancery Commission was sitting? It was well known to all who sat upon that Commission that the noble Lord whose conduct had been so severely censured, uniformly attended that Commission; and though a lawyer of the highest eminence, and a magistrate of the highest order, yet he attended that Commission, and communicated with the youngest tyro of the law amongst its members upon the most perfect terms of equality. The other members of that Commission, consisting as it did of great
378
in petto
379
l
l
380
381
Mr. O'Connell
said, he thought the several Bills which the Solicitor-General proposed to introduce gave every promise of being highly useful, and as such they claimed his support. It seemed to him that his honourable friend (Mr. Hume) had not been quite fairly dealt with; he had been attacked because he had not previously joined in the complaints which had been preferred against Lord Eldon; but after ail, on the showing of his own eulogists, what had that learned Lord done for the country? He had received more than half a million of its money, and in return, introduced two measures into Parliament. In his opinion, his hon. friend (Mr. Hume) had just grounds for blaming the learned Lord, from the fact of his having been so many years in power, and not having, during all that period, found time to do what the Solicitor-General had done in one year.—Leave was given to bring in the Bill.
CURRENCY.]
Mr. Attwood
moved for accounts of the amount of Sovereigns and Half Sovereigns issued by the Governor and Company of the Bank of England, from 2nd May 1828 to 31st December 1829, both inclusive:—Also, of the same received by them during the same period; distinguishing the amount paid, the amount received, and the balance:—Also, of all Sovereigns and Half Sovereigns coined at the Mint for other persons than the Bank of England, from 2nd May 1828 to 31st December 1829, both inclusive.—In submitting this motion, he must say, it frequently happened that Ministers, in the course of their observations to Parliament, alluded to and quoted from documents which were not before the public, from which circumstance a considerable degree of embarrassment took place. It was a practice, therefore, which it was extremely desirous to have obviated; and to him the best way of obviating it appeared to be to have all such documents previously laid before both Houses of Parliament. A remarkable instance of this kind resulting from the want of this sort of information, occurred the other night in the other
382
monnoie forte,
monnoie foible;
383
384
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, although the hon. Member had accused the Members of his Majesty's Government with supporting their views by fallacious statements respecting the currency, he believed he should be able to show that the hon. Member had formed erroneous conclusions upon the nature of those statements, and that he had himself been guilty of errors not less material than those which he imputed to the Government. The foundation of the principal argument of the hon. Member rested upon the view which he took of certain statements made in another House by the noble Duke at the head of his Majesty's Government, and by him (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) in the House of Commons, for the purpose of drawing comparisons between the circulation of the country at one period and another, and from these comparisons endeavouring to arrive at some conclusion on the question, of whether or not the distress was produced by the state of that circulation. Now, these comparisons were formed on data of precisely the same character—the calculations were made on foundations precisely similar; and if they were erroneous, as the hon. Gentleman seemed to suppose, at one time, they were equally erroneous at another, and therefore the errors, as far as the mere question of comparison went, were calculated to produce very little effect. All that the noble Duke contended for, and all that he himself desired to be drawn from them, was to find some corresponding data, approximating in period and circumstances to each other, through which they could form a comparison as accurate as the subject would admit. The hon. Gentleman says, that the noble Duke urged these comparisons, so formed on erroneous foundations, as a reason for believing that
385
386
387
l
l
5th of April, 1827
£382,000
5th of July,—
244,000
10th of Oct.—
285,000
5th of Jan. 1828
317,000
5th of April,—
318,000
5th of July,—
258,000
10th of Oct.—
458,000
5th of Jan. 1829, to be
£876,000
5th of April,—
737,000
388
Mr. A. Baring
said, he confessed, that although these discussions did not produce much at present, they tended, in his opinion, to elicit information, and to make the House better acquainted with a very complicated subject. He thought, too, that the statements put forth by the noble Duke in another place were made much too positively and confidently, when the nature of the question was fairly considered; for, although the grounds of the calculations were very clearly explained by the right hon. Gentleman, yet he conceived it to be quite impossible from those calculations, or from, indeed, any other, to come to an accurate conclusion with respect to the real amount of gold remaining in the country. The amount of small notes, and the stamps issued for those of five pounds, depended on accidental circumstances; and he must contend that a great quantity of gold had,
389
a laugh, and loud cries of hear, hear
Mr. Attwood
repeated, that he had heard nothing which induced him to change his opinions; he re-asserted his original propositions; and maintained, that both the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the noble Duke at the head of his Majesty's Government, had greatly overstated the amount of gold that had been, and that was, in circulation.
Motion agreed to: papers ordered.
SUPPLY.]
The order of the day being read for the House to resolve itself into a Committee, The Chancellor of the Exchequer moved, "That a Supply be granted to his Majesty."
390
Mr. R. Gordon
said, he wished to put a question to the right hon. Gentleman with respect to the salaries of public officers. It was well known that half-pay officers, before they received that pay, were obliged to make an affidavit that they possessed no civil employment whatever. What he wanted to know was, whether, in point of fact, officers holding their military rank, and at the same time holding civil offices under the Crown, did or did not receive their military as well as their civil pay? He was aware that it might be said, that the regulation to which he alluded only extended to half-pay. There was also what was called the unattached pay of general officers. There were one hundred and twenty or one hundred and thirty general officers by whom this was received; so that if all the Ministry were composed of such officers, they would receive their military as well as their civil emoluments. He wished also to know what general officers received as colonels; he believed, from six to seven or eight hundred a year. The particular question, however, which he wished to ask was, whether, in point of fact, naval and military servants of the Crown did, while they received civil allowances, also receive military or naval allowances?
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, the best mode of obtaining accurate information on the subject would be by moving for a return of the individuals in question, and of the nature and amount of their receipts. As far as he was able to answer the hon. Gentleman, he could state that general officers, who had regiments, did not forfeit the advantages arising there from when they accepted civil situations under the Crown. The regiments were the rewards of military services, and of those rewards they were not deprived. As to half-pay general officers, he was not aware that there were any who held civil appointments under the Crown, With respect to naval officers, the only one who received half pay and held civil appointments, were a few of the Lords of the Admiralty. These were always considered as being employed in their profession, and received their half-pay, together with their civil emoluments.
The Speaker having put the question,
Mr. Ald. Waithman
objected, at that late hour (it being past twelve o'clock) to any proceeding for voting away the public
391
Mr. Hume
supported the Amendment, and hoped that the wholesome practice which prevailed a few years ago of never voting a shilling of the public money after twelve o'clock, would be renewed. He trusted the right hon. Gentleman would postpone his Motion and bring it on at an earlier period of the evening.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, the only Motion to be made in the Committee, if the Motion now before the House were adopted, was the very general one—"that a Supply be granted to his Majesty." Till that Motion was carried the hands of Government were tied, and they were unable even to lay the estimates on the Table.
Mr. Alderman Waithman
said, he had no wish to embarrass his Majesty's Government, but he must discharge his duty conscientiously. He objected to granting any supply until he knew what Ministers meant to do in the way of reduction and expenditure; and what was the exposition which they were prepared to make on the financial condition of the country.
Mr. Secretary Peel
observed, the only way to hasten an exposition of the financial state of the country, was to agree to his right hon. friend's Motion; for unless the House went into a Committee of Supply,
pro forma,
Lord Althorp
allowed that he thought the Motion might be acceded to; for it was merely that some supply should be granted to his Majesty. If any hon. Member thought that no supply whatever should be granted, then an Amendment, such as that proposed by the hon. Alderman, was justifiable. Conceiving, however, that such was not the hon. Alderman's wish, though he felt the indispensable necessity of a great reduction of taxation, he implored the hon. Alderman not to persevere in an Amendment which would prevent the production of those estimates, which alone would give the means of ascertaining what reduction might be made.
Mr. Alderman Waithman
said, he had misunderstood the matter and would withdraw his Amendment.
The Marquis of Blandford
said, he was regardless of the taunts to which he knew he should expose him self by opposing the Motion, but he felt it his duty to take
392
For the Adjournment 9; Against it 105; Majority 96.
Mr. Hume
afterwards urged the expediency of bringing on public business at an earlier period of the evening.
SMUGGLERS.]
Lord G. Lennox
obtained leave to bring in a Bill for the relief of Parishes from the Expenses of maintaining the Wives and Families of men convicted under the laws for the Prevention of Smuggling, and sentenced to serve his Majesty in his naval service, which was accordingly read a first time.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Friday, February 12, 1830.
MINUTES.] The EARL OF HUNTINGDON took the Oaths and his Scat.—Mr. Sneyd, from the Bank, presented an account of all Exchequer bills and other Government securities purchased by the Bank, or advanced for the public service, in the year ending 5th January 1850: an annual account of Commissioners for the reduction of the National Debt; And also; copy of all applications made to the Bank of England for advances to Government, for the year ending 5th of January 1830, with a copy of the minutes of the Court of Directors thereon:
COAL TRADE.]
The Marquis of Londonderry
presented a petition of Peers and Commoners, proprietors and lessees of coal mines near the rivers Tyne and Wear, praying for the renewal of the inquiry on the subject of the Coal Trade, which was read, and ordered to be on the Table. His Lordship then moved that the Committee appointed in the last Session, to take into consideration the state of the Coal Trade in the United Kingdom, together with the duties of all descriptions and charges affecting the same, as well in the port of London as in the several other ports of the United Kingdom, and to report to the House, be revived.—In making this Motion, he said, he should not have taken that opportunity to address their Lordships on the subject, had he not been honoured by
393
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
394
The Duke of Wellington
said, he had no objection to the re-appointment of that Committee, and that it should continue its inquiries, and carry them forward to a conclusion. He would give every attention to the subject; but as his noble friend knew that he had another Committee to attend, that on the East-India affairs, he hoped care would be taken to call the Committee together on days when the
395
Motion agreed to.
SETTLEMENT OF GREECE.]
The order of the day being read,
Lord Holland
said— I was, I confess, my Lords, disappointed and surprised on the first day of the Session, to learn from the Lords Commissioners Speech that the pacification and final settlement of Greece was not yet in such a state as to enable his Majesty's Ministers to lay the papers connected with this subject before Parliament. If I were at first disappointed, a very little reflection, in my own mind, allayed my disappointment; and this disappointment was more allayed when I further reflected—considering, as I do, that the proceedings, in this case, were anomalous; that the delay might be considered as an auspicious circumstance, tending to make the final settlement of Greece more advantageous to Europe in general and to this country, and more honourable to his Majesty's Crown. And why, my Lords? For this reason. The unexpected delay occurring in the completion of these arrangements just at the meeting of Parliament, enabled and invited Parliament to express its opinion, as no explanation has been afforded it of the state of the negociation, as to the principles on which it will consider the settlement of Greece advantageous to this country, and honourable to his Majesty's Crown; and I now call on you, my Lords, to seize this opportunity of declaring your sentiments and recording your opinions. The Motion with which I shall conclude, will be to call on your Lordships to admit those principles which I stated on a former evening; and they are so true, that in them all your Lordships must concur. At least, they are so obvious to my mind, that there is no Peer, I believe—and, indeed, no man of sound mind—who will not acquiesce in them; and it will not be necessary for me to take up much of your Lordships' time in bringing you to agree to the sound principles contained in my resolution. But it is not enough to show that these principles are true—your
396
397
398
laughter
399
400
401
"Ex illo fluere ac retro sublapsa referri
Spes Danaûm."
402
No, no! from the Duke of Wellington
403
404
405
406
407
408
Quid prudentis opus? cui possis nolle nocere.
Quid stulti proprium est? non posse et velle nocere.
409
410
Infert se septus nebulâ, mirabile dictu
Per medios, miscetque viris: neque cernitur ulli.
411
The Earl of Aberdeen
rose and said,—I had hoped that the declaration in his Majesty's Speech, by which Parliament was informed that the King had concerted measures with his Allies for the pacification and final settlement of Greece, and the expression of a confident hope on the part of his Majesty that it would be in his power speedily to lay before Parliament the particulars of that arrangement, would have been sufficient to repress, for a time at least, the impatience of noble Lords to enter into a discussion of this subject. But the noble Baron having been unable to resist the temptation of such an inviting topic, has, in my opinion brought it before the House in a manner certainly most unusual, and which can only be justified by a well-founded suspicion of those whose duty it is more immediately to advise the Crown. To warrant such a proceeding, the noble Baron must suppose, with apparent reason, that we are either indifferent to the honour of the Crown, or unwilling to carry into effect the stipulations of Treaties by which we profess to be bound.
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
The Marquis of Clanricarde
said, he could not but contrast the professions of Ministers with their acts in relation to the invasion of Turkey by the Russians; upon the one hand they professed to avoid war, while upon the other they held out a positive threat, when the Russians were at Adrianople, that if they advanced to Constantinople they would sail up the Dardanelles. This step was hazardous, and exposed them to all the consequences of a war. He should support the Motion.
Lord Melbourne
said, in his opinion, the great question on the Turkish war was, whether the integrity of that Empire was worth preserving at the risk of a war with Russia? If, upon that question, Ministers had made up their minds in the affirmative, they ought to have pursued their object at all events. Such, he believed, was the view which the noble Duke took of the question.—But, if Government had decided not to abide the risk, they ought not, in any case, to have given the least encouragement to the Turks to resist, as, unfortunately, some expressions in the speech of the noble Duke, at the begining of the Session, had the effect of doing. He should not now discuss the question; but he wished to call the attention of the House to one important fact. Turkey had been represented as playing the most blind and stupid part throughout this war; but was this the fact? Towards Russia only was she undoubtedly blind; for immediately after
419
Lord Goderich
begged to congratulate the Government upon the declaration which they had made of neutrality, as concerned the internal affairs of the new Government of Greece. He hoped, however, that our legitimate influence would be used to prevent any other power from shackling that people in the choice of their institutions. We ought to persuade them to adopt our own institutions, if it were only to show the world that we bear with them less as grievances than cherish them as blessings. Such a gift to the new State would be consistent with our national greatness and the public interest. He should support the Motion.
The Duke of Wellington
said,—My Lords, although perfectly satisfied with the defence of the Government which the speech of my noble friend has afforded, yet, as some things have been stated since he sat down, more particularly by
420
421
Holland.
422
423
424
Lord Holland
replied.—He was not disposed to press his Motion to a division. All that he should do would be to enter his Resolution on their Lordships' Journals, as a record of his opinions on a subject which he had much at heart. He wished to say one or two words in explanation of what had fallen from the noble Secretary for Foreign Affairs respecting the sentiments of a distinguished relation of his on the policy of maintaining the integrity of the European dominions of the Grand Seignior. The noble Lord had quoted a passage from a speech of Mr. Fox as a proof of that great man having entertained the same views of policy with respect to Turkey with those at present acted upon by Ministers. Now, he believed he might say that no man was better, or so well, acquainted with the opinions, political and general, of that great statesman and lover of his country than he was; and from that knowledge he would take it upon him to assert, that so far from Mr. Fox wishing to protect the Porte against the aggressions of his neighbours, it was an earnest object of his to drive the Turks entirely out of Europe. He repeated that Mr. Fox had more than once expressed this his invariable opinion on the subject. [The Earl of Aberdeen here gave a sign of dissent] What, the noble Earl holds up his hand in dissent! Did the noble Earl pretend to know as much of Mr. Fox's opinion as he did? If his opinion be derived from a newspaper speech of Mr. Fox he would tell him unhesitatingly, from his knowledge of that stateman's opinions, that it was ill reported, and did not faithfully state his relative's sentiments. He knew of no speech of Mr. Fox, in which such a doctrine was even alluded to; and he knew of those in which a very different one was distinctly asserted. He could not be mistaken on this point. He had a perfect recollection of Mr. Fox's opinions on the Ottoman institutions. He remembered them particularly well, for he was familiar with them from his entrance into public life. At the time of the landing of the French troops under Buonaparte in Egypt, he remembered Mr. Fox observing that though England might be
425
426
pro tanto
427
428
The Earl of Aberdeen
said, that what he had quoted as the sentiments of Mr. Fox, in relation to the policy of preserving the integrity of European Turkey, he would inform the noble Baron who had just addressed the House, he had taken from the most indisputable authority within his reach. The noble Lord had represented his distinguished relation as the invariable enemy of the Ottoman dominions in Europe, and stated, that any speech expressing a contrary doctrine must be a misrepresentation. Now he begged to inform the noble Lord, that the extract he had quoted was from no speech or report of Mr. Fox's opinions, but from his own letter, written with the deliberation due to an official document, for such it was. The occasion which gave rise to the following declaration of opinion on the part of Mr. Fox was a letter to him, as Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, from M. Talleyrand, dated April the 1st, 1806, in which the French Minister, among other matters, says, "The integrity and the complete and absolute independence of the Ottoman Empire form not only the sincerest desire of the Emperor, but constitute also the undeviating object of his policy." To which Mr. Fox replied in a letter, dated Downing-street, April 8, 1806, as follows:—"as to what relates to the integrity and independence of the Ottoman Empire no difficulty can present itself, those objects being equally dear to all the parties interested in the present discussion." Now, though this declaration did not amount to a pledge that Mr. Fox would guarantee the integrity of the Ottoman Empire, it went to show that the expulsion of the Turks from Europe was not, as the noble Lord had stated, an invariable object of his policy.
Lord Holland
said, he was not then able to determine how far the declaration, just read by the noble Earl, was inconsistent with what he had stated as the sentiments of Mr. Fox on the policy of protecting or discouraging the Turkish dominion in Europe. The matter was rather new to him, and he would investigate it before he would offer any opinion on its apparent discrepancy with what he had stated,
429
The Motion was then put and negatived.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, February 12, 1830.
MINUTES.] THE RIGHT HON. JOHN CHARLES HERRIES took the Oaths and his Scat for Harwich.—MR. WRIGHT presented accounts of balances of sums issued for the payment of Dividends due and not demanded, and of Lottery Prizes not claimed; sums received and expended by the Commissioners for the Reduction of the National Debt; Exchequer Bills purchased by the Bank of England, or on which sums have been advanced; applications to the First Lord of the Treasury and Chancellor of the Exchequer for advances to Government [by Act]; of advances made to Government on Exchequer Bills and all other securities.—New Writs were ordered for Fowey in the room of the Hon. Robert Henley Eden, who had accepted the Chiltern Hundreds; and for Wenlock, in the room of the Hon. George Cecil Weld Forester, made Groom of His Majesty's Bedchamber.
The Solicitor-General
brought in a Bill to amend the laws regulating Illusory Appointments,—also one to alter and amend the laws respecting Arrests for Contempt; a Bill for the amendment of the Conveyancing Laws: for consolidating and amending the laws respecting Infants and Lunatics; and for consolidating and amending the laws respecting Real Estates,—which were read a first time.
Sir T. Martin
presented a petition from the Merchants, Shipowners, and other persons interested in the trade of Plymouth, praying that no exclusive privileges should be granted on the expiration of the Company's Charter.
Mr. Stanley
presented a petition from the Chamber of Commerce, and signed by a great number of Merchants and Manufacturers of Manchester, praying for a modification in the Charter of the East India Company.
Mr. E. Wodehouse
presented a petition from Tunstead, in Norfolk, praying for a revision of the Corn Laws, and against the continuation of the Malt and Beer Duties.
Mr. O'Connell
gave notice of his intention to move, on the 17th inst., for leave to bring in a Bill for amending the Vestry Act.
DISTRESS OF THE COUNTRY.]
Colonel Sibthorpe
presented a petition from the Merchants, Tradesmen, and Inhabitants of Lincoln, complaining of the general Distress of the Country, and praying the House not to grant further supplies until the state of the Country should be taken into consideration, and measures adopted
430
Mr. Fazakerley
said, he could bear testimony that the petition expressed the feelings of a large majority of the very respectable inhabitants of Lincoln, and he fully concurred in the prayer of the petition.—Ordered to be printed.
REPORTING DEBATES.]
Colonel Sibthorpe
expressed his intention of moving on a future day for granting greater facilities to those persons who attended the House for the purpose of reporting its proceedings. The accurate reporting of the Debates was of great consequence to the country, especially at the present time; and he should hereafter name a day on which he would bring that subject forward.
LAW OF FORGERY.]
Mr. Secretary Peel
gave notice that he would move, on Thursday, the 18th of March next, for leave to bring in a bill for amending and consolidating the Laws relating to Forgery.
ESSEX PETITION.]
Mr. Western
rose to present a petition from Capel Cure, Sheriff, on behalf of a meeting of Freeholders of the county of Essex, adopted at a general meeting held on the preceding day relative to the distressed state of the country, and observed that the petition was not the one he had supported at the meeting, and that it contained, in some parts of it, sentiments to which he strongly objected; yet he felt it his duty to present it. It was signed by the High Sheriff of the county, in accordance with a resolution passed at the meeting, but he (Mr. Western) would much rather it had borne the signatures of those freeholders whose sentiments it purported to express. He fully felt for the distress—the general public distress—prevailing throughout the
431
Mr. D. W. Harvey
said, he lamented to observe, that the hon. Member for Essex seemed to have a lively recollection of the defeat which his propositions experienced the day before at the meeting of the freeholders of his own county. The hon. Gentleman certainly did the meeting justice in one respect, though he withheld it in another—he impeached its prudence while he extolled its patience. Now he (Mr. Harvey) understood that these virtues were always co-existent. It would be too much to expect from the hon. Gentleman an eulogy on the prudence of a meeting which rejected his petition, and adopted one diametrically opposed to it; but it was creditable to his candour to admit the patience which was shown by the freeholders in listening to his oft-repeated arguments on the currency. The truth was, that never was there a more patient, prudent, or deliberative meeting. It heard the different speakers with attention, and decided from reflection. It bore not the tone of party about it, and it rejected all factious feelings. It admitted that distress existed, but it denied its universality; and, while every man was persuaded that the public suffering was increasing, and would, if not checked, become overwhelming, he appeared convinced that it was not yet too late, and that effectual measures would ensure relief. The meeting did not concede every thing to Parliament, but it stated that much could be done out of doors, and it
432
hear, hear
l.
433
Lord Howick
said, he must confess his great surprise to hear the calumnies which prevailed in some of the publications of the day against the landlords of England, uttered in that House. He listened with indignation to those imputations on the whole body of the landed interest. He could not with patience hear it declared that the landlords exacted from the tenantry more than the value of the soil. He declared that such a charge was totally unfounded, and while he regretted that any man could say so, he was still more surprised to find the observation cheered by hon. Gentlemen who were the advocates of political economy. Those Gentlemen knew better than that rents were regulated by the cupidity of landlords; and it was not from ignorance of the subject that they denied, by their cheer, that land, like every thing else, was a fair subject of competition. He knew that the landlords were not that grasping and avaricious body which they were charged with being; and he could only state that, though distress existed largely in that part of the country with which he was connected, a single farm never came out of lease without becoming the subject of an active competition at an advanced rent.
Mr. Lennard
observed, he must, in justice to the meeting of yesterday, state that not one word of the conversation repeated by the hon. Member for Colchester fell from any body but himself. Indeed, the hon. Gentleman had given the House a very temperate version of what he did say. At the meeting he spoke of the landlords as having flinty hearts—as mere voluptuaries—as men rolling in luxury, and careless about the sufferings of those around them. It was because these sentiments were listened to with approbation at the meeting, that be wished to hold
434
Mr. Poulett Thomson
begged not to be understood as approving of what had been said about the severe exactions of the landlords, because he had given a cheer to one of the observations of the hon. Member for Colchester.
Mr. Hume
said, he thought that the hon. Member for Colchester had been unfairly dealt with. He proposed an alteration of the present system of taxation, which was better than a system which oppressed only particular interests, and he looked for relief to those sources where, in his opinion, it could be best afforded. Now, he appealed to the House, whether it would not be wise to abolish tithes altogether, and pay the Clergy moderate stipends, according to their duties. The petition said no more, and if his hon. friend had declared that some Clergymen were voluptuaries, and lived a life of pleasure, it was no more than a man might be induced to do who had twenty thousand a-year. The error lay in the enormity of the payment. It was not fit that the minister of a religion which preached poverty and temperance should receive such an income; and there was no duty which he performed for which it could be claimed as a compensation. The petition fairly went to the question without any consideration for particular interests. For instance, by the operation of the law the agriculturists had a monopoly of corn. Would they, when they wished to bring every thing down to the standard of 1797, give up that monopoly? That was the proper way to treat the subject, and the petition did no more. He considered it to be a very fair one, and he hoped to see a similar one from every county in England.
Mr. F. Palmer
said, he thought that if the salaries of public offices were reduced to the standard of 1792, it was a fair proposition to have the rents lowered by the same measure. Let the taxes be reduced to the same standard, and he would go
435
1.
l.
Mr. N. Calvert
said, it ought to be remembered, that there were many hard landlords as well as good and benevolent ones, but the former must give way, as the land would, after all, only fetch its value in the market.
Mr. Western
begged in reply to say, that as the hon. Member for Colchester (Mr. Harvey) was so personal to him and to his tenants, he hoped the House would permit him to say a few words in explanation. In the first place he must declare that he had not on his land an arrear of 100
l.
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
hear
436
Mr. Western
then presented another petition, signed by eight hundred or nine hundred respectable Gentlemen, Merchants, and Traders, in the town and vicinity of Chelmsford, the object of which was to state to the House that distress prevailed in every class of society as much as it did among the agricultural. It stated that the evils of the country were growing with frightful rapidity to a head, and they entreated the House to take steps to arrest them, which alone could be done by repealing the Bill of 1819, which, by altering the currency, tended mainly to inflict them. He also presented a petition from the owners and occupiers of land in the parish of Tellingham, in Essex, in which one farm of the best land was abandoned by the tenant, the charges on it being greater than the produce.—Petitions ordered to be printed.
SUPPLY—REDUCTION OF PUBLIC
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
moved the order of the day for receiving the Report. On the Motion being put, that a Supply be granted to his Majesty,
Mr. Callagan
said, he could not help taking the liberty of giving his opinion on the present most unprecedented crisis of the country's affairs. He did not offer himself to the notice of the House for his personal gratification; but, as it was the duty of every Member, in the present state of the country, to see whether any new measures might be elicited for its benefit, and to deliver his opinions, he would speak them because his present observations would save him the trouble of repeating them on future occasions. The question relative to the country embraced two considerations—those of our foreign relations, and the internal condition of the Empire. On the former his general habits would not allow him to speak; but he felt grateful to Ministers, and he begged to tender them his personal gratitude, for their leaving the country in a state of profound tranquillity, both as regarded Portugal, and more particularly that untoward or unfortunate affair of Navarino. On this point he would conclude by saying that this country, more than any other in Europe, was interested in the tranquillity of the new States of the southern hemisphere. And he thought that England and the other Powers ought to interfere to prevent
437
calls of "Question.
438
coughing, and considerable interruption.
Sir James Graham
then rose and said, he could not but observe that the hon. Gentleman who had just sat down had taken a very extraordinary course, as he argued in support of his (Sir J. Graham's) motion without waiting to hear it. However, from this he entertained every hope that the hon. Gentleman would vote for the resolution with which he meant to conclude, because he imagined that it would come up to the hon. Gentleman's ideas, both as to reduction of expenditure, and taxation. He never rose in the House without embarrassment, and imperfect recovery from recent illness aggravated that feeling on the present occasion. The task he was about to undertake was an ungracious one, for though all liked economy and reform in the abstract, they very seldom relished it when it came to be acted upon with respect to themselves. He felt this, but his sympathies were not confined to those who derived their incomes from the public purse—his compassion was rather directed to those from whom the taxes were drawn, and he could not turn a deaf ear to the distresses of the country. That distress was general, for notwithstanding that the Speech from the Throne said that distress was confined merely to some parts of the country, yet the whole efforts of Ministers to fritter down our misfortunes have produced nothing but the greatest possible disappointment, and changing hope into despair, had gone nearly
439
hear.
per saltum
440
l.
s.
1.
s.
d.
441
s.
Oh miseras hominum mentes! Oh pectora cæca!
l.,
l.
442
l.
s.
l.
l.
l.
l.,
443
444
"Ill fares the land, to hastening ills a prey,
Where wealth accumulates and men decay."
"Tis your's to judge how wide the limits stand Between a splendid and a happy land."
s.
d.
"Hic locus est, partes ubi se via findit in ambas."
cheers
ex officio
445
446
l.
l.
l.
l.
447
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.,
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
s.
s.
448
l.
l.
s.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.,
l.
449
s.
s.
450
Mr. G. Dawson
said, though he admired the talents, ability, and eloquence displayed by the hon. Baronet, it was not his intention to follow him through the various topics on which he had been pleased to dwell. He would confine himself strictly to the limits which the duty of his office imposed. Instead of following the hon. Baronet, therefore, through those various subjects in a speech, which were, in fact, a condensation of all the topics which had been discussed last Session, he would address himself simply to that object which he had no doubt the hon. Baronet was most anxious to attain, although he had made such slight mention of it. He did not take the same view of the salaries of
451
No, no.
l.
l.
l.
452
l.
l.
loud cries of No, no, from the Opposition
453
minimum
l.,
maximum
l.
minimum
l.,
maximum
l.,
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
hear, hear
454
l.
l.
l,
l,
l.
l.
l.
l.
l,
l.,
l.
455
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
456
l.
l.
d.
d.
No, no, from the Opposition
d.
d.
renewed cries of No, no, no, from the Opposition
457
458
"That his Majesty was graciously pleased to assure this House, in reply to an Address of this House of the 27th June 1821 (that his Majesty would give directions for a minute inquiry into the several departments of the Civil Government, as well with a view to reducing the number of the persons employed in those departments, which from the great increase of business was augmented during the late War, as with reference to the increased salaries granted to individuals since the year 1797, either in consideration of the additional labour thrown upon them during that period, or the diminished value of money), that his Majesty would give directions as desired by the said Address.
"That an humble Address be presented to his Majesty, praying that his Majesty will be graciously pleased to direct that there be laid before this House an Account of the progress made in such inquiry, and of the measures adopted in consequence thereof.
"That it is the opinion of this House, that, in all the Establishments of the Country, Civil and Military, every saving ought to be made which can be effected without the violation of existing engage-
459
Mr. Croker
said, he rose to mention some facts relative to the department to which he belonged. In 1797 the salaries of the Admiralty Officers were 14,140
l.
Sir James Graham
apologized for interrupting the hon. Member, and observed that, in speaking of the Admiralty, he had adverted solely to the salary of the First Lord of the Admiralty, which in 1797 was 3,000
l.
l.
Mr. Croker
begged his pardon. The hon. Baronet had assumed that the gross amount of salaries of persons employed in the Civil Service was, in 1797, 1,374,000
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
460
l.
l.
l.
l.
Mr. Spring Rice
said, he must advert to what had fallen from the hon. Secretary (Mr. G. Dawson). If he (Mr. Spring Rice) were capable of dealing with the House in the manner represented by his hon. friend, the Secretary to the Treasury, he should be wholly unworthy, not only of presenting him self there, but any where else. His hon. friend had told the House that he (Mr. Spring Rice) had stated in a private communication, that distress did not exist in Ireland, while his hon. friend would now represent him as acting in subserviency to some person or persons, and asserting that distress did exist there. He could only say that never was any representation more unjust or unfounded. Not only had his hon. friend totally misrepresented him, but he appeared to be driven to the necessity of inventing facts to sustain the course of argument he had pursued. He (Mr. Spring Rice) had not implicitly adopted the opinions of the hon. Member for Clare nor of the right hon. Member for Kerry. On the contrary, he had stated most distinctly that he differed from them both. While he had stated that there was, generally, less distress in Ireland than in England, he had stated at the same time that the great interests
461
462
Mr. G. Dawson
explained. He was afraid that some expressions painful to the feelings of his hon. friend might perhaps have escaped him; he was most anxious to take the earliest opportunity of stating that, neither remotely nor otherwise, had he the slightest intention of accusing him of making any statement which he did not believe to be grounded on fact. He had, however, felt some surprise, after the conversation which he and his hon. friend had had upon the subject, that his hon. friend appeared to differ from him so materially, taking a view of the question which he (Mr. Dawson) could not admit. There was not one man in that House, on either side, of whom he was less disposed to say any thing unkind than of his hon. friend. He had long known him, and no one could more admire his talents and his merits.
Mr. Spring Rice
expressed himself quite satisfied with this explanation; but he must say, at the same time, that, if he had not felt strongly on such an occasion, he should have been unworthy of appearing either in that House or elsewhere.
Sir George Warrender
considered that the Ministers of the Crown were still more urgently called upon than the hon. Member for Cumberland to come forward, on an occasion like the present, and to propose some practical measure of relief. It was, however, most satisfactory to know that the Representatives of the people were not insensible to the distress which prevailed. He found that, since the year 1797, judicial salaries had increased by at least 100 per cent; and his only object
463
Mr. O'Connell
said, that the hon. Member for Londonderry (Mr. G. Dawson) could not contradict the statement which he (Mr. O'Connell) had made on a former night. The hon. Member had given as his authority Mr. Latouche, who, on his return to Dublin from London, stated, at a meeting of the Society for the Improvement of Ireland, that the people of Ireland were not suffering in the same degree as the people of England; and, when contradicted upon this fact, he replied that the increase of the Excise tended to establish it beyond all doubt. He (Mr. O'C.) then told him that his argument was founded on the resource of the desperate, namely, on the drinking of spirits, the increase of which could never be considered as a proof of national prosperity. His professional duties placed him in constant communication with merchants and others who were acquiring estates in Ireland, and from whom, and other clients, he had ample opportunities of obtaining information as to the real state of things in that country. To show to what extent distress prevailed there, he needed only say that one gentleman, who had a rent-roll of 4,000
l.,
l.
Lord Morpeth
said, the Motion of his hon. friend, the Member for Cumberland (Sir J. Graham) would at any time have commanded the attention and support of the advocates of economy; but when it came before them coupled with complaints of the overwhelming distress of every class in the country, then, indeed, it must prove irresistible. Whether, however, they adopted the Motion of the hon. Baronet, or were content with the Resolutions intended to be proposed by the Secretary of the Treasury, it was plain that the House was about to give a new pledge to the country of its determination to prosecute a system of retrenchment and reformation in every branch of the public expenditure. Some hon. Members recommended as a remedy for the distress, that the House
464
hear
Mr. Hume
said, he should prefer the Motion of the Secretary to the Trea-
465
l.
l.
l.
l.
466
l.
Sir John Wrottesley
said, he was apprehensive that this resolution, if adopted, would not have the effect of relieving the great distress under which the country now laboured. The measure adopted in 1826 had had, as he had then foretold it would have, a most prejudicial effect on all the great interests of the country; and they all, from that period to the present, had continued to decline. He considered the whole of the distress to have been caused by the measures relative to the currency.
Mr. W. Duncombe
said, he could not agree with some hon. Members, that the course pursued by Ministers was that which was consistent with their duty, as responsible servants of the Crown. He thought they were very ill-advised in describing the distress in the qualified manner they had done. Instead of blinking the question, they ought, to have come down to the House, and acknowledged honestly the extent of the evil, and proposed effectual measures of relief. He thought it highly important at the present crisis that a country party should exist in that House; but, in saying that, he would not be understood as wishing to separate the landed interest from the manufacturing and commercial interests. He maintained the same sentiments on that point which he had ever professed—namely, that no one class could flourish unless the other classes were prosperous. But at present all classes laboured
467
Mr. M. A. Taylor
said, that in voting as he had done, in favour of the Address, he wished to protest against being understood to doubt the extent of distress in the country, or to deny that it was severely felt. For himself, he had no connection with Ministers; and, at his time of life, after having been for four or five and forty years in that House, he wished for nothing but happiness;—he meant the happiness of the people and the prosperity of the country. He considered it his duty to weigh the merits of his Majesty's Ministers, and of those who con tended with them. These Gentlemen said, that they wished for economy and retrenchment. Now on that point he wished to try them fairly. What, he would ask, was the condition of Ministers? Were they the authors of the mischief? Were they the promoters of the French war, which was, in fact, the source of all the evil? He was one of those who voted during Mr. Pitt's Administration, on the question of the French War, and he had foretold the calamities which had since befallen the country from that cause. He was not attached to any party in that House. He was an independent man, but was it to be expected that he should support those who wished to get into power by proclaiming the grievances of the country? He would not support Ultra Whigs or Ultra Tories. His Majesty's Ministers had, in his opinion, done great things for the nation. They had passed two great measures, the most important of which was that of Catholic Emancipation. He would, therefore, trust to them to do what was necessary and beneficial for the country. He
468
l.
l.
l.
laughter
Mr. Peel
said, I do not conceive that
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
The conclusion of this speech was delivered in an expressively animated manner: and was received with loud cheers.
Mr. Attwood
said, that he must declare, whatever other resolutions were adhered to, that the right hon. Gentleman had now abandoned the grounds upon which he brought in his Bill of 1819. On another occasion he doubted not that he should be able to convince the right hon. Gentleman of the real character and tendency of that Bill, and to make him sensible that there was no principle of national faith which called for the introduction of the metallic standard and the maintenance of salaries at the rate to which they were raised during a depreciated paper currency. He would ask the right hon. Gentleman—supposing that Bill had never been passed—on what scale would the salaries of the servants of the Crown be at present? They would, according to the right hon. Gentleman's own admission, be twenty-five per cent lower than they are, and the public burthens would of course be lessened in the same degree. He did not inquire at present whether the public servants were overpaid or not; the only question was, whether the Bill of 1819 was necessary to vindicate the national honour. He could not entertain the same confidence which Ministers professed they felt in the permanent nature and unchangeable character of their standard, when he found that they were, notwithstanding the admitted alteration of value
476
Mr. Secretary Peel,
in explanation, begged to say that an inference had been attempted to be drawn from his declining to enter into details, which was totally unfair—namely, that he had admitted that an alteration had taken place generally, about the period of 1819, to the amount of 25 per cent, or upwards. He begged to say that he never had, either in words, or tacitly, made any such admission, and he was satisfied, neither the hon. Member who last spoke, nor any other who concurred in opinion with that hon. Member, could prove that any such depression then took place. Whilst thus availing himself of the privilege of explaining, he would take this opportunity of saying that he anticipated great advantages from the improvement of the banking system,
477
l.
Mr. Saville Lumley
briefly stated, that he was apprehensive that a standard of gold with a paper circulation was now ill adapted to effect the objects meditated.
Sir James Graham,
in reply, observed that he never for a moment could have argued in favour of, or been solicitous for, an inconvertible paper currency. The result of resorting to such an expedient would possibly, if not unavoidably, be an issue of assignats. In his mind the decision of 1819, as to the resumption Of a gold standard, was injudicious, and unsuited to the condition of this country. It appeared as if the article of gold had a tendency to become scarcer, while silver had a contrary tendency. Our standard being gold rendered debts more onerous; and, as this country owed more debt than any other, it was worse calculated than any other for a gold standard. At a proper period, he pledged himself to prove that it would be eminently beneficial to the nation to introduce a different standard—namely, that of silver, which, having a tendency to become abundant, would render the consequences of our past engagements, and the debt, less onerous. He must disclaim having any objects of his own to carry in the proposition he now submitted, or in the opposition he sometimes found it his duty to give to men in power. His ambition was fully satisfied in representing a large and populous county of England. Nor was it true that he was desirous to upset the Duke of Wellington's government. He believed the Duke was, both on account of his profound judgment, and the vigour of his measures, the fittest man in the country to hold the helm of affairs; and he thought that, after the noble Duke had well weighed the temper of the House, his conduct could not fail to be influenced by the very general opinion prevalent among all ranks in favour of a change in the standard. If it should so happen that Members were sent back to their constituents, he believed they would find that out of doors the popular opinion ran very strong in favour of an issue of small notes. The sentiments of his constituents he had reason to believe, were
478
Mr. G. Dawson's
resolutions were afterwards adopted, and the Committee of Supply appointed for Monday.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Monday, February 15, 1830.
CURRENCY—BANK CIRCULATION.]
Earl Stanhope
said, he rose to present a petition from the owners and occupiers of land in the neighbourhood of Chipping Norton, complaining of agricultural distress, and praying for the repeal of the duties on Malt and Boer. He would avail himself of that opportunity to put a question to the noble Duke (Wellington) on the opposite benches. It would be in the recollection of their Lordships, that on the first night of the Session the noble Duke produced a paper from which he read several extracts, purporting to be an account of the amount of the Bank of England notes, of the country bank-notes, and of the gold and silver coin, in circulation at the present and in former times. He wished to ask the noble Duke whether he had any objection to produce that paper? If he had no objection, the noble Duke would perhaps move for its production; if he had any objection, he (Earl Stanhope) would move for it, as he was convinced that the statement of the noble Duke was founded in fallacy.
The Duke of Wellington
.—The paper which I read to the House on the first night of the Session, was a memorandum made out by myself of information which I received in the course of conversation with some gentlemen, who were much better informed on the subject of the currency than I can be. That paper is not of such a nature as will enable me to lay it before the House; but I have no
479
Earl Stanhope
said, that his object was, to obtain a return of the amount of Bank of England notes, of country notes, and of the gold and silver coin, in circulation at the present, time, and in former years.
Viscount Goderich
said, there could be no doubt of the possibility of ascertaining the amount of Bank of England notes in circulation. As to the amount of country bank notes they could only come to an approximate conclusion, and no account could state accurately the quantity of gold and silver coin in circulation. The account which he then held in his hand, and for which he intended to move, would perhaps assist the object which the noble Earl had in view. He intended to move for a return of the quantity of gold and silver coined at the Mint since the 1st of January, 1819, clown to the present time. He should also move for a return of the quantity of British gold and silver coin exported within the same period; and also for a return of the quantity of foreign bullion and coin exported during the same period. He was well aware that there was no law which compelled an individual, who was going abroad, to give an account of the quantity of gold coin which he carried with him. It could not, however, be very considerable. But when gold, in consequence of the exchanges, was exported in large quantities as an article of merchandise, returns of the quantity so exported were made to the Customs, and therefore could be produced before their Lordships. He knew that such returns would not be conclusive; but they would all serve to show the data on which the reasons must rest of such a calculation as that which had been entered into by the noble Duke.
The Duke of Wellington
said, the returns for which the noble Viscount had declared his intention to move, would give the noble Earl, he thought, all the information which he required. If he (the Duke of Wellington) could discover any other information which was likely to throw light on the subject of that calculation, he could assure his noble friend that he would most willingly grant it.
Earl Stanhope
said, that his object in
480
The Duke of Wellington
stated, that his comparison had been made upon accounts, for the two periods, which, if not exactly correct, had at least corresponding errors, and thus would prevent any error of magnitude from taking place in the result; these returns were as accurate as, perhaps, any could be, and probably, the later returns were the more accurate.
The petition was then laid on the table.
TREATY WITH AUSTRIA.]
Earl Stanhope
wished to ask the noble Secretary for Foreign Affairs a question. Had a Treaty of Commerce, which by some sad misnomer was called a Treaty of Reciprocity, been signed between this country and Austria?
The Earl of Aberdeen
.—It was true that such a Treaty had been signed, and he believed ratified.
HOUSE OF COMMONS,
Monday, February 15, 1830.
MINUTES.] CHARLES BULLER, Jun. Esq. sworn for West Looe.—Mr. PLANTA moved for a new Writ for Radnorshire in the room of the Right Hon. THOMAS F. LEWIS Treasurer of His Majesty's Navy. —Ordered.—The Marquis of CHANDOS postponed till the 23rd instant his Motion for a Bill to amend the Game Laws.
SUPPLY.—REDUCTION OF ESTABLISHMENTS.]
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
moved "That the order of the day, for the House to resolve itself into a Committee of the whole House to consider of the Supply, be now read."
Mr. Hume
said, he wished, before the House resolved itself into the Committee, to submit to the House what, as it appeared to him, it was their duty to perform before they granted any Supplies whatever. He had, for many years past, endeavoured to impress on the House, that the difficulties which were then weighing on the
481
482
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
483
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
484
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
485
l
l
l
l
l
l
hear and a laugh
l
l
l
l
l
486
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
487
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
488
l
l
l
489
490
l
l
l
l
491
l
l
492
l
l
l
l
l
493
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
494
l
l
l
495
l
l
l
496
l
l
l
l
l
d.
d.
l
497
l
l
l
s
s
l
l
l
l
l
498
l
499
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, he addressed the House on the present occasion, under feelings of considerable embarrassment, not only from the difficulty of the task of following the hon. Member for Aberdeen (Mr. Hume) through his various and complex statements, but from a conviction of the almost impossibility of refixing the attention of hon. Members to the question really at issue when they had been so long pre-occupied by the hon. Member. The hon. Member had added to his difficulties by not adopting a new line of proceeding from that usually followed by him: that is, by not refraining from his usual minute investigation of the details of the various items of the revenue and expenditure of the country,—items, a due discussion of which would require each a separate evening, and more time and attention than the House could bestow without a total neglect of its other duties. Nor was the variety of the hon. Member's statements their only objectionable feature— the length of time embraced by the hon. Member's inquiry added to the task of replying to them—a period extending from 1792 to the present year. The hon. Member had thought proper to
500
501
502
l
l
l
l
l
l
503
l
l
504
l
505
l
l
l
No, no.
506
Mr. Maberly
was of opinion, that the right hon. Gentleman had over-stated the proposition of his hon. friend the Member for Montrose. He had not contended that they should forthwith—namely, tomorrow for example—proceed to repeal taxes to the amount named; nothing, he was sure, could be further from his intentions—nothing of which the House would be less likely to accuse him—no; his object was, that as soon as possible the House should proceed to fix some period from which the repeal of those taxes might commence. He (Mr. M.) begged to call the attention of the House to the real question before them; the country was in distress, that was not to be doubted, and his hon. friend proposed that there should be a reduction of eight, or six, or four, or two millions: he demanded that there should be some great reduction, and he thought that in the name of the country he had a right to demand that a great reduction should take place. His motion, he thought, was entitled to the support of the House; for though the speech of the Mover embraced a wide field, and though there might be much in it from which many Members would dissent, yet that did not affect the merits of the Motion, standing as it did upon the strongest grounds. Doubtless many of the topics to which his hon. friend had adverted were such as had much better be referred to a Committee, but it would be in vain that the hon. Member should seek to have a Committee to which to refer them. When the Finance Committee was appointed, the right hon. Secretary eulogised it in the highest terms; but the moment it began to do any good, the Government turned round upon it and put an end to its labours, and by that act did one of the greatest injuries to the country which it ever sustained. It was perfectly certain that the various details of the public expenditure could never be advantageously discussed in that House—a Committee was the only place in which the charges
507
508
l
509
s
s
s
510
Mr. Western
said, that in the abstract, he was ready to give his hearty concurrence to the Motion of the hon. Gentleman. As far as it went in general he did not see how it was possible for the House to do otherwise than adopt it, for all that it contended for, was the necessity to reduce the expenditure to the lowest point, consistent with the safety of the country. He, however, apprehended that the House was already pledged to the full extent of the proposition which had been introduced by the hon. Gentleman, and he thought that the next step should be for one of his Majesty's Ministers or for some hon. Gentleman to propose the reduction of any specific tax that appeared most feasible or desirable. The universal decision of the House the other night on the Amendment of the hon. Gentleman (Mr. G. Dawson), undoubtedly pledged the House and the Ministry to turn their attention to every possible reduction; and for himself he was disposed to give some degree of confidence to the disposition evinced by the Ministry to redeem their pledge, though there might, perhaps, be some difference of opinion as to what portion of reduction ought to take place. When they brought forward their reductions should such a difference arise, then would be the right time for debate. In his opinion, it was
511
Lord Althorp
said, it had been argued by the hon. Member for Essex (Mr. Western), that the Motion of the hon. Member for Aberdeen was nothing but a repetition of the Amendment moved on a former evening by the Secretary to the Treasury (Mr. G. Dawson). To a certain extent this was true; and he (Lord Althorp) was disposed to place so much confidence in the profession of the present Ministry, that he should have felt it right to give them an opportunity of fair trial before he pressed them any further; but then the Motion of his hon. friend also went to this extent, and was so far different from that Amendment that it desired a pledge of a reduction of taxation as well as of a reduction of the establishments,
512
513
Sir F. Burdett
said, he felt himself called on, whatever might be the consequence, and however much he might differ from those hon. Gentlemen he saw around him, and whose opinions he respected, to state boldly and conscientiously that he agreed most fully with the hon. Member for Essex in all he had stated with respect to the operation of the currency in producing the distress under which the country was acknowledged to be labouring. He was convinced, and he felt bound to declare it, that if the currency was not the cause of all the distress, it had at least produced nine-tenths of the whole of it. With respect to the motion of the hon. Member for Aberdeen he would say he believed there were few Gentlemen on that side of the House who did not agree that some reduction of taxation and of public expenditure was necessary, and that if it were necessary at all times, it became more imperatively required from them when the working classes on whom it bore hardest were labouring under so many difficulties. There were two objects to be at all times kept in view, as affording a ground for the reduction of the public Establishments. The first was, to save, to the utmost extent of their power, the property of the public; and the second was, to diminish that mass of patronage connected with taxation, which necessarily devolved on the Government, and which operated so much to the prejudice of the best interests of the country. He feared, however, that no reduction of taxation, even if carried to the extent proposed by the hon. Mem-
514
515
516
—"æternum servans sub pectore vulnus."
517
Mr. Charles Wood
begged to state that he differed from the hon. Baronet and the Member for Essex in their views on the subject of the currency, and hoped they might never be able "to carry them into effect. He thought, however, that the manner in which the Government met the Motion of the Member for Aberdeen was well calculated to increase the dissatisfaction felt as to the manner in which the distress was mentioned in the King's Speech. The quibble resorted to by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, ought not to influence the House, and he advised the House not to consider the feelings of that right hon. Gentleman, but those of the country.
Mr. Herries
said, he should not detain them long. [There had been some calls for "Mr. Baring," and "Mr. Grant,"] but he could not help observing that the hon. Member for Aberdeen, after having promised to tell them nothing new, had, in a speech of three hours, most religiously kept his word. He did not mean to follow the hon. Member for Aberdeen through all the topics introduced into his speech; but he should hold himself ready, on some future occasion, when the topics were separately discussed, to consider and reply to them. There were many things stated by that hon. Member in which it was impossible for him to agree, and others in which he did concur with him. He was persuaded that the only way to get at any profitable results was, to confine their attention to particulars; and in this too he concurred with the hon. Member for Aberdeen. In those parts of his speech in which he eulogized the Finance Committee he also thought the hon. Member was perfectly correct. But he thought that the hon. Member had not done his Majesty's Government justice, who had participated in all the labours of that Committee, and had shown no backwardness in promoting its labours. Of the labours of his Majesty's Ministers neither he nor the hon. Member for Abingdon (Mr. Maberley) had spoken with approbation. If they examined the matter fully, they would find that those who sat on his (Mr. Herries's) side of the House had had their full share in suggesting and promoting the measures
518
l
l
519
520
hear
Mr. C. Grant
said, that before the question was put, he wished to say a few words. He, for one, had always been anxious to give his support to measures of economy, when it was possible to do so with due consideration for the public service. He had already, by his vote on the Address, expressed his opinion of the general nature of the distress; and feeling resolved to follow up that opinion, being prepared to take every opportunity of enforcing it, yet he must confess that he could not support the Motion of the hon. Member for Aberdeen. The Government had made the strongest professions of economy in the Speech from the Throne, and the Ministers had the other night pledged themselves in the strongest terms to the same effect. Under these circumstances, believing in their professions, and seeing that they had not yet had time to carry them into execution—believing in these things, and thinking it would not be dealing fairly with the Government to express prematurely an opinion of measures it had not yet proposed—believing that it would be premature to express a distrust of such positive declarations, he could not support the Motion. To him it seemed more fair towards the Government to allow it to produce its propositions to the House, and when the House saw them, it would deal with them as it thought fit. He admitted the propriety, and indeed the necessity of reducing taxation; he trusted that this would be done by the Government; and when it made its propositions for reducing the establishments, it would
521
Lord Howick
said, those who opposed the Motion, objected to the time at which it was brought forward; but he believed the proper time for the Motion was before the Estimates were submitted to the House. The Ministers ought to be admonished to reduce the Estimates. He hoped nothing would be done to alter the currency; and for this reason he also hoped that some steps would be taken to reduce the expenditure, as otherwise we should be sure to have a national bankruptcy. The course which would avoid such a result was that proposed by the hon. Member for Aberdeen; and therefore he should support that hon. Member's Amendment. It was no longer time to inquire, if taxation could be kept up to the expenditure, or if the expenditure could be reduced; the country
522
Mr. Secretary Peel
expressed his satisfaction at having on that occasion to vote with the hon. Baronet, the Member for Westminster [
"No, No," from Sir F. Burden.
523
524
525
526
Mr. Wodehouse
declared, that his confidence in his Majesty's Government was utterly gone. All great authorities differed from the right hon. Gentleman and his colleagues. All the pigmies of former days differed from those giants of the present. The one set was wise, but the other was knowing. Knowledge was always proud that it knew so much; wisdom humble because it knew no more. Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman opposite would have some respect for that chicken Lord Bacon. He would here read an extract from Bacon, who held that "It is bad for a State when money is gathered in a few hands; for money, like muck, is only good when it is spread."
Mr. Hume
in reply denied that his Resolution went so far as the right hon. Gentleman opposite imputed to it. In
527
The House divided: Ayes 184; Noes 69. The main Question was then put, whereupon—
Mr. J. Duncombe
, alluding to something which had passed whilst the gallery was cleared, spoke in terms of censure of the criminal prosecutions recently instituted by the Attorney-General, and then adverted to the distressed state of the country. He said that in these unexampled days of unmitigated taxation, he felt it his duty to raise his voice in behalf of the distressed agriculturists and the unemployed manufacturers. He warned the Government not to exult either in their numbers or power. He would tell them, that if they should persevere in a course of lavish expenditure, they might perhaps find, when it was too late, that there was a majority out of doors which would make the majority within doors at length acknowledge the just views of the small minority of this night.
Mr. Peel
said, the hon. Member must have completely misunderstood what fell from him if he supposed that he expressed any feelings of triumph on account of the division which had taken place.
On the Question that the Speaker do leave the chair.
The Marquis of Blandford
said, he thought it wrong that the House should proceed to dispose of the nation's money before it had considered the nation's distress. He therefore moved as an Amendment "that the House do now adjourn."
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
wished to be allowed to place the Estimates on the Table in a Committee of Supply: the House would then by comparing them with the Estimates of last year, see the extent to which Government proposed to reduce the expenditure.
Mr. Tennyson
thought, that laying the Estimates on the Table ought to be preceded by an explanatory statement from the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and he wished to know their amount.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
replied, that the amount would be stated in the ordinary course.
Mr. Maberly
was anxious that the Chancellor of the Exchequer should state the amount of the Estimates at once.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
, said, that when the subject was before the
528
SMALL POX.]
Mr. Dickinson
presented a petition from Mr. William Towsey, M.D. and others, for the adoption of a remedy to prevent the practice of Inoculation. It spoke of the prevalence of the Small-pox, and prayed the legislature to take efficient measures to prevent children afflicted with that malady from being carried about the streets.
Mr. Hume
said, he wished to call the attention of the Secretary of State for the Home Department to this subject. He found that many deaths from the Small-pox had recently occurred, owing to the industrious efforts of certain practitioners, who wished to persuade the public that no benefit was derived from Vaccination. After the public had been put to such expense to render Vaccination effectual, he thought, something ought to be done to prevent children afflicted with the Small-pox from coming in contact with those who were liable to catch the disease, leaving individuals at liberty to inoculate in whatever way they pleased.
Petition ordered to be printed.
SYSTEM or BANKING.]
Mr. Wodehouse
said, he was authorized by the hon. Member for Shaftesbury (Mr. E. Davenport) to withdraw his notice of Motion which stood for to-morrow (upon the Distressed State of the Country). The hon. Member was induced to take this step partly on account of ill health, but chiefly from a desire to concur with those Members who were of opinion that it would be unwise to do any thing at the present moment which could have a ten-
529
Mr. Peel
said, in reply to the hon. Member's question, that all he had stated on a former day was an opinion that it was possible materially to improve the system of banking, by removing the restrictions which impeded the formation of companies to carry on the business of banking. He had then said, that he hoped to see the day when a sound system of banking would be established; but he had said nothing with respect to any measure being in contemplation, nor was he now prepared to make any further declaration on the subject.
Mr. Wodehouse
asked whether it was trite that Mr. F. Lewis had been appointed to the office of Treasurer of the Navy?
Mr. Peel
answered Yes;—a new writ has already been ordered.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Tuesday, February 16, 1830.
MINUTES.] MR. HUME, for the purpose of diminishing as much as possible the Public Expenditure, gave notice of several Motions:—The first was for the 8th of March, to withdraw the Establishments at present maintained in Sierra Leone. The next was for the 10th of March; and its object would be to put an end to the offices of Receiver Generals of Land Revenue and Assessed Taxes, and to unite their duties with those of the Commissioners of Excise. For the 16th of March the hon. Member gave notice of a Motion for the appointment of a Committee to inquire into the renewal of Crown leases at Harwich, Dungeness, Orfordness, and Bridlington. On the 23rd of March the hon. Member intimated his intention to move the abolition of the office of Lord Lieutenant of Ireland.
DISTRESS OF THE COUNTRY.]
Mr. Benet
presented a petition from the inhabitants of several parishes in the hundred of Hindon, county of Wilts, complaining of the extreme distress of the times, and praying for an immediate reduction of Taxation. The petitioners observed, that the change in the currency had greatly raised the salaries of persons in office, and they wished that those salaries should be reduced in a ratio equivalent to the amount and value of wages. They contended that it was extremely hard on them that the price of labour should be reduced so greatly, while no reduction was effected elsewhere. This, be conceived, was a very
530
Mr. Portman
said, he felt it to be his duty to support the prayer of this petition.—Those by whom it was signed were men of knowledge, experience, and reputation, and their representations were entitled to serious consideration. He thought it necessary to say a few words on this occasion, because last night he heard the Ministers of the Crown again and again deny the existence of general distress throughout the country. Now he did not know how hon. Members who represented
531
Petition ordered to be printed.
EX-OFFICIO PROSECUTIONS.]
Sir Charles Wetherell
gave notice, that on the 3rd of March he would move for Copies of the
Ex-officio
IRELAND—POOR LAWS.]
Mr. Brownlow
presented a petition from the Inhabitants of Clare and its vicinity, for the establishment of Poor Laws in Ireland: it complained of severe distress, and prayed that the 43rd of Elizabeth might be ex-
532
EAST INDIA CHARTER.]
Mr. Marshall
presented a petition from Bankers, Merchants, Manufacturers, and others of Leeds, against the renewal of the East India Company's Charter. He must support, the prayer of the petition. From the limited removal of restrictions on the trade that had already taken place, he augured that the most favourable results would ensue from a further extension of that principle of relief.
Mr. W. Whitmore
said, that seeing the Chancellor of the Exchequer in his place, he would ask a question; he wished to know if it were the intention of his Majesty's Ministers to give notice to the Court of Directors what would be done with their Charter at the expiration of the three years? For his part, notwithstanding the professions of Government, he could not believe in the neutrality they professed, and be thought it apparent that they had a disposition to compromise this question. It would be difficult to show a case which could justify Ministers in withholding a full investigation of the question. If the people of the country were apathetic on the subject, their right would not be conceded. He was prompted also to express a hope that Ministers would not
533
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, he did not know upon what ground the hon. Member assumed that Government would not act with good faith, in reference to the East India Question; and could only repeat what had been stated by his right hon. friend the Secretary for the Home Department, on the occasion of moving for a select committee, that Ministers went into the inquiry without any pre-engagement as to the particular course which they should adopt, and that, so far from that being the case, they would be free to adopt whatever might appear best for the general interest, after a fair investigation. With respect to the hon. Member's question, it had evidently been asked under misapprehension as to the terms of the Company's Charter, and the nature of the notice required. The hon. Member would find, on reference to the subject, that no notice was necessary till the month of April, 1831; and he would perceive that circumstances might occur before that time to guide the Government as to the course which it ought to adopt, and the decision to be taken in reference to the matter.
Sir George Philips
said, he regretted that his hon. friend by whom the petition
534
Mr. Astell
begged to refer to two cases in which the East India Company had been of the utmost service in relieving the distress that existed in the manufacturing districts. An application was made to Mr. Loch, the Chairman of the Company, a few days ago, by Mr. Heald, vicar of Birstal, who represented the distress that existed in that neighbourhood, and solicited orders for cloth in order to mitigate it. The Company, although not in immediate want of the article, made a considerable purchase, to the great relief of the suffering manufacturers. In Norwich, much suffering prevailed among the working classes in December last, and acts of violence were perpetrated by some of the weavers, but extensive orders from the Company had produced the happiest effects in tranquillizing and affording employment to the people. Facts such as these were the best answer to any imputations cast upon the Company, as to having stood in the way of giving relief to the manufacturers, or impeding their interests.
Petition ordered to be printed.
535
RETRENCHMENT.—ARMY ESTIMATES.]
Sir H. Hardinge
presented, by command of his Majesty, the Army Estimates. He moved that they be printed. And gave notice that on Friday next he should propose Resolutions on them in a Committee of Supply.
Mr. Hume
wished to put a question to the Chancellor of the Exchequer in reference to something that fell from him last night, and which seemed to have been misapprehended. The Committee of Supply stood postponed till to-morrow (Wednesday), and it had been understood that the right hon. Gentleman intended to state the reductions which Ministers were prepared to make in our establishments upon that occasion. He now wished to know whether the Chancellor of the Exchequer would go into the subject of these retrenchments on Wednesday, or on a future evening;—he should persevere in resisting Supply, till the nature of the relief to be afforded to the country was stated.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, he should be obliged to move for a Committee to-morrow evening, in order to found a vote of Ways and Means thereon; but it was not his intention to go into the subject referred to on that occasion. When his gallant friend moved the Army Estimates on Friday, he (Mr. Goulburn) would then state the reductions which Ministers proposed to make upon all the Estimates of the year.
Mr. Hume
put it to the gallant Secretary at War whether the House ought to be called on to vote any part of the Estimates on Friday, when in all probability Members would only have seen them on the morning of that day. He should wish for a day or two to consider them, particularly as reductions were talked of.
Sir H. Hardinge
said, the hon. Member should have a printed copy of the Army Estimates in his possession to-morrow evening, or early on Thursday morning.
Mr. R. Gordon
wished to know whether the House would be put in possession of the number of military officers who held civil situations, including those on full pay as well as half-pay.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
replied that he had no intention of bringing forward such a return, but it was competent to the hon. Member to move for the information required if he pleased.
Mr. Gordon
.—Has the right hon. Gentleman any objection to such a Motion?
536
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
intimated that he should be prepared with an answer when he saw what was the hon. Member's Motion.
Sir F. Burdett
said, if reductions of such a nature as was understood last night were to be brought forward, the House would require some little time to consider them. He believed he was rather obscure in what he stated last night on the subject of the Motion of his hon. friend the Member for Montrose; and there was one point in respect of which he wished to set himself right with the House and his hon. friend. He should be sorry to have it supposed that he had desired in any degree to depreciate the value of the Motion which his hon. friend had brought forward so ably, though he thought that there were other measures of equal or even greater importance which would relieve the depression which was, unfortunately, so prevalent.
Lord J. Russell
hoped, that when the right hon. Gentleman stated, on Friday, the reductions to be made in the Estimates, he would also state what relief was to be afforded to the country in the amount of taxation.
Sir H. Hardinge
said, no man was more conversant with the details of the Army Estimates than the hon. Member for Montrose; and therefore he would take the liberty of stating that the only difference in the Estimates of this year, as compared with preceding years, would consist in some items of diminished expenditure, and probably a reduction in the amount of force. Under such circumstances, if the Estimates were placed in the hands of the hon. Member to-morrow evening, he would have the whole of Thursday and Friday to consider them. He hoped this would not be inconsistent with entering into the subject in a Committee of Supply on Friday evening, particularly as the Committee had already been delayed a few days by impediments which prevented the introduction of the Estimates so soon as he had expected.
Mr. Maberly
wished to ask the gallant officer if it were decent to press the Estimates forward in that manner? The House required a longer period of examination than had been proposed.
Estimates ordered to be printed.
SUB-LETTING ACT.]
Lord F. L. Gower
moved for leave to bring in a Bill to ex-
537
ex post facto
Mr. Wallace
desired to express his thanks to the noble Secretary for Ireland, (Lord L. Gower) for the alteration he proposed to make in the Sub-letting Act. It certainly would be something in favour of the Irish tenantry that the first section should not have an
ex post facto
538
Mr. A. Dawson
said, he concurred with the hon. Member who spoke last, in returning thanks to the noble Secretary for Ireland (Lord L. Gower) for the explanatory Bill which his Lordship proposed to introduce; but in his opinion, it would be better to get rid of the Act altogether; because he thought the Union between Ireland and England never would be complete until the same Statute. Law was made common to both countries. For himself, he saw no good argument on which the continued existence of this Act could be defended, since the alleged reason for its creation (at least the only reason he had ever heard given) had ceased to exist. This Act had been passed to prevent great landholders from sub-dividing their lands for electioneering purposes; but now, by a late and most beneficial and just measure of the House, all temptation to the creation of collusive freeholds had been removed, and therefore the foundation upon which the Bill had been introduced being swept away, the law itself should not be suffered to remain.
Mr. O'Connell
begged it might be borne in mind that the predominant feeling in addressing the House upon this question which actuated him, was an anxiety to divest it of all party and political considerations; he wished it to be treated simply upon its own merits, and not as a question between one side of the House and the other. He had bestowed much attention upon this Act, and could conscientiously declare that he believed it mischievous, and in proof of this his belief, he referred to the Report of the Lord Mayor's Committee lately made at Dublin, from which it appeared, that of the seven thousand persons then famishing in that city, the greater number had been driven from the country by the operation of that Act. Now this fact he stated upon testimony that could not be doubted. This Act had met with great disapprobation, and had created great dissatisfaction throughout Ireland. Many petitions had been presented against it last Session, and several had already come in this year. In stating this he begged not to be understood as
539
540
Mr. Doherty
(the Solicitor-General for Ireland) said, he would not follow the hon. Member for Clare through the details upon which he had touched, details which he (Mr. Doherty) thought might be better discussed in the Committee, clause by clause. With respect to the general question, if the political life of the hon. Member (Mr. O'Connell) had commenced on the first day of that Session, he (Mr. Doherty) might perhaps have laboured under the mistake that it should be discussed upon its own merits, without reference to politics or party, as the hon. Member had expressed his desire it might be; but when he happened to know that it had been made the subject of agitation, and had been rendered an object of dissatisfaction in Ireland (though by no means to the extent stated by the hon. Member), he could not bring himself altogether to subscribe to the sincerity of that hon. and learned Gentleman's declaration. Before proceeding further, however, he had to state that he was not the legal adviser of the Secretary for Ireland at the time when this Act was passed. He was the unworthy successor of one whose character ought to have been sufficient to protect this measure from having been at least intended to produce the baneful effects attributed to it by the hon. and learned Gentleman. The hon. Member seemed not to understand the policy or the history of this Act. This Act had emanated from a Committee of the House of Commons, before which there were two objects prominent. One was the Catholic Question, the other that now before the House. In favour of the Catholic Relief Bill there was a preponderance of opinion, resulting from the evidence; but there was no difference of opinion at all as to the necessity of a Sub-letting Act. It was true that nothing could be more fair than for the hon. Member for Clare to advocate the middlemen, but this was not the feeling of the Committee; they thought
541
542
Lord Althorp
begged leave to give his approbation to the principle of the measure, and to observe that he thought Mr. O'Connell had been improperly attacked, for he had stated his objections to the Bill in a most candid and temperate manner.
Sir H. Parnell
wished to express his obligations to the noble Lord who had introduced this measure, which he was sure would be productive of great benefit to Ireland. It was true that there had been petitions in great numbers against the Act, and such petitions deserved the utmost possible attention; but he believed that the complaints made by the petitioners were not against the principle of the Bill, but against some particular clauses in it. It was supposed by some
543
Sir F. Burdett
said, that as to the fact stated by the hon. and learned Member for Clare, that the Sub-letting Act had tended to produce a large portion of the pauper population of Dublin, he would not deny the statement; but he begged to remark, that it was the subdivision of land which had, in a great measure, created that poverty. There was something in every country, but especially in such a country as Ireland, stronger than Acts of Parliament, and that was the custom of the people. The hon. and learned Member must, on that subject, be better qualified than any other man to give the House information, and to guide them in the attainment of their evident wish for the amelioration of Ireland. He was glad to hear from such an excellent and indisputable authority as the Solicitor-General for Ireland, the salutary effects of the great measure of last Session, and he should indulge with that hon. and learned Member in warm hopes for the future increasing prosperity of that country. But when he heard these statements, and the statements of the same hon. and learned Member, as to the satisfactory falsifications of all the prophecies of the evils that measure would have produced, he could not help asking whether the Member for Clare, more than any other person in the kingdom, was not the man to whom the country was indebted for these advantages? So that in referring to that hon. Member, they ought not to go backward in his career to find cause of blame, and, least of all, to seek to discover it in those expressions which the heats of discussion on that great question had called forth. The present was not a party question, and he trusted it would not be so treated.
The Solicitor-General
stated, that he thought the law of England and Ireland might be advantageously assimilated in many respects; but still there were peculiar circumstances which made a difference in each. They were not then to consider whether a law should be passed
544
ex post facto
The Motion was agreed to; and the Bill ordered to be brought in by Lord F. L. Gower and Mr. Doherty.
ECCLESIASTICAL CORPORATIONS IN
Mr. Stanley
said, he should make no observations on the Motion of which he had given notice, as the noble Lord, the Secretary for Ireland, had told him there was no objection to it on the part of the Government. He moved for leave to bring in a Bill to amend the Laws respecting the Leasing Powers of Bishops and Ecclesiastical Corporations in Ireland.
Motion agreed to, and Bill ordered to be brought in by Mr. Stanley, Mr. Spring Rice, and Sir Thomas Acland.
SETTLEMENT OF GREECE.]
Lord John Russell
.—In rising to bring forward the
545
546
547
548
549
"Dî meliora piis, crroremque hostibus ilium."
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, notwithstanding the peculiar circumstances in which I am placed, I trust that I shall be enabled to give such general explanations to the noble Lord as may induce him to be of opinion that it is not necessary to take the sense of the House upon his Motion. I say that I am placed under peculiar circumstances, because the House will recollect that on the first day of the Session, in the Speech from the Throne, his Majesty stated, that in conjunction with his Allies, and in conformity with the Treaty of the 6th of July, he was on the point of concluding a final arrangement for the pacification of Greece, and for the determination of its relations with the rest of Europe: and his Majesty was pleased to add, that all the papers connected with that arrangement, sufficient to explain the course he had taken, should
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
Sir J. Mackintosh
said, he must compliment the noble Lord on the candid tone of his whole speech, and the right hon. Secretary on the corresponding character of the earlier part of what he had addressed to the House. He would not follow the latter over the debateable ground of the policy of employing the influence of England in preventing the late war between Russia and Turkey, but he would say, expressly, what the right hon. Gentleman had said by implication, that the success of Russia in that just war (for such he admitted it to be) had enabled the three Allied Powers to bring the Treaty of the 6th July to a happy conclusion. He did not know that it was a matter of serious importance to inquire what had been the opinions of Mr. Fox thirty years ago relative to the independence of Turkey, but the case might be stated in a few words. In the course of the correspondence between Mr. Fox, as the head of the Foreign Office, and the Ministers of France in 1806, an opinion was expressed which had reference to that time, and to the then peculiar circumstances of England and France. It was wished to consolidate the peace of Europe, and for this purpose it was thought that the two powers should guarantee the integrity of Turkey. Such was the opinion of Mr. Fox at that single moment of his life, and under a peculiar combination of circumstances; but to that opinion was opposed what was well known to all the friends of Mr. Fox, that as an Englishman and as a lover of liberty, as a citizen of the world, he was an enemy to the institutions of Turkey—that he detested her tyrannical and barbarous principles—and that he heartily wished the Turks expelled from the boundaries of Europe, Mr. Fox
557
558
Lord Palmerston
said, in adverting to the recommendation of his right hon. friend (Mr. Peel) that they should postpone the discussion of the present question till the papers were before them, he could not but complain that the right hon. Gentleman
559
560
561
minimum
562
563
564
Mr. Peel
.—I am extremely sorry, that when I stated that his Majesty's Government had been able to execute the Treaty
565
566
Lord Palmerston
said: Nothing that has fallen from my right hon. friend shall tempt me to deviate from that temper which I believe is always most successful in argument. My right hon. friend has told the House that he does not know whose representative I am. I will tell him. I stand here, humble as I am, as one of the Representatives of the People of England; and next, as the Representative of my own opinions—opinions, Sir, which I will never shape to suit the opinions of any other individual, let his situation be what it may, either in this House, or out of this House. I stand here as the Representative of my own opinions, and I think I can appeal to the recollection of my right hon. friend himself, to bear witness that those opinions have not changed since I had the honour of acting with him. I also stand here, I trust, as one of that body which represents, or which at least ought to be the maintainers of the honour and interests of England; and I can assure the House that I shall never be deterred from that duty by any taunts which my right hon. friend may not think unworthy of himself, or by any taunts which may extract a reluctant and unfrequent cheer from those who sit behind the Treasury Bench. Neither, Sir, will I ever be deterred by any of those—I will not call them unfair—but by any skilful dexterities of debate, from stating to the House those opinions which I honestly entertain on the public affairs of the country; and little shall I care whom those opinions may please or displease, or what motive may be imputed to me for doing what I most firmly believe to be my duty. But my right hon. friend has insinuated that I have availed myself of information obtained while in office; now my belief is, that I have stated nothing which every man who reads the newspapers of Europe, or who mixes in the society of any country he may happen to be in, might not have stated just as fully; and if the Ministry think that nothing of all this is known beyond the corner of
567
impromptu.
Mr. Peel
.—I can assure my noble friend that I admit his perfect right to express his opinions, and to have them considered expressly as his own; and if I had objected to it, I should have been justly subject to censure. But I was not speaking of opinions, but of facts. Neither did I impute to my noble friend any improper disclosure of the information he obtained while in office; all that I stated was, that having made a speech, I was placed under a disadvantage when my noble friend entered into details. The fact to which I referred was this—that my noble friend stated certain circumstances in such a manner as must have led those who heard him, to suppose that he spoke from authority, and that he was in possession of the negotiations between the powers, thereby leading those who heard him to conclude that England stood alone on the question of limits; and that if she would waive her objections on that head, there was reason to believe that the other powers would also waive theirs. For this reason I thought it necessary to state that the three contracting powers were agreed upon this point, and that there was no such want of harmony as my noble friend would have made out. It was for these reasons that I made the observations I did; and I beg to assure him, that in making them I did not in the least intend to impute to him any improper disclosures.
Lord Palmerston
.—I can assure my right hon. friend that nothing which may pass between him and me in this House will impair the friendship which exists between us: but I am sure the House could not imagine, when I was stating my opinion as to the boundaries of Greece, after having been two years out of office, that I was taking upon myself to insure
568
Sir Robert Wilson
wished to know whether the noble lord (lord J. Russell) intended to press his Motion to a division: because, if he did not, he (Sir R. Wilson) would not trouble the House with his opinions on the question in its present state. He also thought that it would be unfair to press the matter to a division, as the papers were not before the House.
Lord J. Russell
said, it was not his intention to divide the House on the Motion, which was then negatived without a division.
SLAVE TRADE.]
Mr. Powell Buxton
moved, that an Address be presented to his Majesty for Copies or Extracts of all correspondence which may have taken place between his Majesty's Government and Foreign Powers, relating to the Slave Trade, since 1st of January 1829, and not already laid before this House: of all correspondence between his Majesty's Government and the British Commissioners of the mixed Commission Courts at Sierra Leone, the Havannah, Rio de Janeiro, and Surinam, relative to the Slave Trade, since 1st of January 1828, and not already laid before this House: of all correspondence which may have taken place between the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty and the Naval Officers stationed on the Coast of Africa, at the Cape of Good Hope, or elsewhere, relative to the Slave Trade, since 1st of January 1828, and not already laid before this House: and of all correspondence touching the Slave Trade received from the Governors of Sierra Leone, and other British Possessions on the Coast of Africa, and from the Governors of the Mauritius and the Cape of Good Hope, since 1st of January 1828, and not already laid before this House.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Wednesday, February 17, 1830.
MINUTES.] Lord W. POWLETT obtained leave to bring in a Bill to extend to the County Palatine of Durham the Act of Queen Anne, "for the better security of Rents, and to prevent frauds committed by Tenants.—Mr. LITTLETON gave notice, that on Thursday the 2,5th instant, he would move for leave to bring in a Bill to render more effectual the laws relating to the Payment of Wages in Money. —Mr. GRATTAN obtained leave to bring in a Bill to amend the Irish Act, 11th and 12th Geo. III. respecting the establishment of Houses of Industry in Ireland. — Colonel DAVIES gave notice, that on Thursday the 11th March, he would move to bring in a Bill to alter and amend
569
SMALL DEBTS.]
Mr. Sykes
wished to ask the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Peel) if he intended to proceed with the Bill for the better recovery of Small Debts.
Mr. Peel
said, the reason of his abandoning the Bill last Session was the difficulty he met with in allotting compensation to the officers of the several Courts whose interests would be affected. He intended, however, to submit a preliminary proposition to the House to-morrow evening, and he hoped, by watching its progress and effect, to be able to accomplish all that was desired on the subject.
TOBACCO AND SNUFF DUTIES.]
Mr. C. Calvert
presented a Petition from the manufacturers of Tobacco and Snuff in the cities of London and Westminster, and the borough of Southwark, complaining of losses which they had sustained in consequence of the conduct of his Majesty's Government, and praying for relief. The hon. Member stated, that the petitioners had in 1825 sustained a loss of 23 per cent, on their stock, in consequence of being misinformed with respect to the intentions of Ministers. An Act by which they were affected having expired in July 1825, a delegation waited on the then Chancellor of the Exchequer (Mr. Robinson) and, inconsequence of the communication which he made to them, he having informed them that no alteration would be made in them, they had subsequently increased their stock to the large amount of 2,500,000
l
l
Mr. R. Dundas
presented a similar Petition from the Tobacco and Snuff manufacturers of Ipswich: and Mr. W. Smith, a similar Petition from the Tobacco and Snuff manufacturers of Norwich.
MILITARY OFFICERS HOLDING CIVIL
Mr. Gordon
said, that, in compliance with repeated wishes which had been expressed to him from various quarters, he begged again to call the
570
The Motion was agreed to.
FEES PAID BY PERSONS ACQUITTED
Mr. Secretary Peel
rose, in pursuance of his notice
571
s
d
s
s
572
Sir T. Baring
expressed his satisfaction that it was intended to appoint a Committee to inquire into the amount and nature of the fees paid to Clerks of the Peace. In his opinion all officers of County Courts ought to be paid by salaries, and not by fees; and he was happy to find the right hon. Gentleman of the same opinion. He would take the opportunity of observing, that the Act which had been introduced by the right hon. Gentleman for compelling the county to pay prosecutors their expenses, though very good in principle, was not so in practice; and in some cases had increased the county rates so alarmingly, that it was a subject which ought to be considered by the proposed Committee.
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, he had abstained from giving an opinion as to whether all officers in those courts to which his Bill had reference should be paid by salary or by fees. All he asked was, whether, when an individual was discharged, he should be called on to pay for that which was not essential to his defence. He did not say that he meant to do away all fees and substitute a fixed salary. That was a point of grave importance and required much consideration.
Sir T. Baring
, in explanation, said that in many Courts the Clerk of the Peace disposed of his fees for a certain sum to a deputy, who, of course, extended their amount as much as he was able.
Mr. W. Smith
hoped, that before any compensation were granted for fees, their nature and amount would be strictly inquired into.
Sir James Graham
observed, that it was
573
Mr. O'Connell
thought that all judicial fees ought to be abolished.
Leave was granted to bring in the Bill.
CLERKS OF THE PEACE.]
Mr. Portman
moved for leave to bring in a Bill regulating the office of Clerk of the Peace, particularly with respect to the abolition of fees and to the substitution of a regular salary.
Mr. Freemantle
could bear testimony to the fact, that the present regulation of paying the Clerks of the Peace by fees was attended by very great confusion and inconvenience. The preferable mode was to pay by a regular salary.—Leave was then given to bring in the Bill.
CHARITABLE ESTABLISHMENTS OF
Mr. Callaghan
moved for a Return of the different Charitable Establishments of Ireland. The hon. Member felt himself obliged to say that the condition of the poor in the City which he represented was so appalling, that a delay of one day in inquiring into the causes of the evil might be dangerous to the peace of the community. He would take the opportunity to ask the hon. Member for Limerick what was the proposed scope of his inquiry with respect to the condition of the poor of Ireland, for which he intended to move the appointment of a Select Committee on the 11th of March. There was much anxiety in Ireland on the subject of the hon. Gentleman's motion; and he inquired whether the hon. Member's object was to procure means of relief for the infirm, to investigate the condition of unemployed labourers, or to propose the introduction into Ireland of the principle and practice of the present system of English Poor Laws. He regretted that so distant a day was fixed for the Motion upon the subject, particularly as it was not understood in Ireland whether it were intended to introduce the Poor Laws into that country or not.
Mr. Spring Rice
, in reply to the hon. Gentleman, must state that his motive for deferring his Motion was, because no relief granted to Ireland could be complete without a previous inquiry into the charitable institutions of that country. His first object was to ascertain the actual state of the poor of Ireland, which would
574
Mr. Maurice Fitzgerald
said, he was ready to confirm the statements of the hon. Member for Limerick as to the credibility of the source of the information referred to on the subject of the present condition of some parts of the South of Ireland. Nobody felt more deeply than he did the vast importance of the question of which the hon. Member had given notice for the 11th of March; but he saw the propriety
575
576
in toto
in toto.
Hear, and laughter.
"—vires acquirit eundo:"
in toto
577
578
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, he had had no previous expectation that his right hon. friend would have appealed to him on the subject of his public conduct, for he was not aware that it had been attacked. Now that he was informed of the fact, he participated in the indignation expressed by his right hon. friend; and would say, that within the last six months, of all the representatives of Ireland there was not one who had exhibited a more sincere desire to mitigate the calamities under which that country had unfortunately laboured; and he might add, that all his right hon. friend's representations to Government proceeded on the ground that the poorer classes were suffering great distress from want of employment. His right hon. friend was not content with urging upon Ministers the necessity of relief, but submitted to him projects for affording it, to the developement of which more hours of labour must have been applied than he had conceived it possible for a gentleman to devote to such purposes who acted without the incentives of official remuneration or official duty, and was merely influenced by a feeling of humanity and a desire to promote the public good by affording practical relief to the distresses of his countrymen. His right hon. friend had repeatedly urged upon Government the necessity of affording relief to the poor of Ireland, not only for the sake of that country, but also for the sake of this; and recommended, as relief through the medium of charity had proved ineffectual, that substantial relief should be afforded by the employment of the poor. He heard
579
hear
Mr. Jephson
suggested to the hon. Member for Cork the propriety of including in his returns the amount of money paid to the treasurers, secretaries, and other officers of the several institutions. If this were done, it would be found that an immense portion of the funds intended for the benefit of the poor was frittered away in the support of useless and unwieldy establishments.
Mr. O'Connell
had nothing to do with the comments that appeared in the newspapers upon the right hon. Gentleman's conduct. He certainly understood the right hon. Gentleman to differ from him in degree in his opinion as to the distressed condition of Ireland, although the right hon. Member qualified the difference by an admission of the existence of the distress. He was himself one of the right hon. Gentleman's constituents, and would undertake to say that no county in Ireland sent a Member to Parliament who possessed more entirely the confidence of all his constituents than did the right hon. Member for Kerry. The hon. and learned Member proceeded to state, that the latest account which he had received from Ireland fully corroborated his previous statements as to the prevalence of distress in that country. He fully concurred with the hon. Member for Limerick in his statement of the happy results of the measure of last Session. However, contrary to an opinion expressed in Parliament, he thought the benefits of it more visible in the unanimity and good feeling produced by it among the lower than among the higher ranks of society.
Mr. Callaghan
said, that in the observations he had made, he referred only to the pauper population which came into Cork from the neighbouring county; and that what he had said had no reference to the disputed question of general distress.
The Motion was agreed to.
580
SUPPLY.]
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
moved the order of the day for the House resolving itself into a Committee of the whole House to consider the expediency of granting a further Supply to his Majesty.
Mr. Hume
, after stating that he was one of those who had voted against granting any further Supply to his Majesty until Ministers had given some pledge that the distressed state of the country should be taken into consideration, and promised to come forward with some information on the subject, declared that since the Chancellor of the Exchequer had stated that he would give that information on Friday, he (Mr. Hume) did not feel himself obliged to oppose the present Motion.
The House then resolved itself into a Committee of Supply.
2,500.000
l
l
l
The House resumed, and the Report was brought up. Adjourned.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Thursday, February 18, 1830
Lord Torrington
, in presenting a petition from four hundred and fifty owners and occupiers of land in the neighbourhood of Tunbridge, complaining of agricultural distress, and praying for a repeal of the duties on Malt and Beer, observed that he could assure their Lordships, that the distress in the neighbourhood of that district, which was emphatically called the Garden of Kent, was so great that nothing could exceed it. He himself resided in the parish of Mereworth, and he would, as a specimen of the distress which prevailed in that county, describe to them the condition of that parish. The number of acres it contained was two thousand two hundred, of which one thousand were very poor land. The rental of the parish was 1,668
l.
l.
l.,
581
l.,
s.
d.
CURRENCY.]
The Duke of Wellington
said, some nights ago a noble Lord opposite (Earl Stanhope) had asked him a question respecting the authority upon which he had made the statement which he had offered to their Lordships on the first night of the Session, as to the amount of the Currency. He had then told the noble Lord that he had made the statement from information which had been supplied to him, but that he could not at the moment say from what official documents it had been derived. He had since ascertained that point. If the noble Lord had no objection, he would now make a motion which would place the documents on which his calculation was founded, on the table of their Lordships. The noble Duke accordingly moved for various returns, elucidatory of his former statement.
Earl Stanhope
said, that the information which the noble Duke was now granting was very desirable, and very fit to be laid before their Lordships. He was, however, still unable to make out how the noble Duke could derive from these returns the results which he had stated. He would, for his own part, confess that the manner in which the noble Duke had spoken on this question on the first night of the Session, had left an impression on his mind, and he believed on the minds of the rest of their Lordships, that those results were derived from calculations founded upon official papers. It turned out, however, from what the noble Duke said on a former night, that they were derived from nothing but a memorandum of the noble Duke's own. The returns for which the noble
582
The Duke of Wellington
said, that he had moved for the production of the documents from which he had obtained his information, in the hope that they would make the same impression on the minds of others as they had made upon his own. If he had drawn erroneous conclusions from those documents, the noble Lord would be able to detect them, and would have a right to find fault with them as fallacious and delusive. He thought, however, that the noble Lord would not be able to convict them of error. Indeed, he was sure that noble Lords, after inspecting those documents, would agree with him that, in the comparison which he had drawn—for it was nothing else but a comparison— between the amount of the Currency at the time when there was the greatest circulation of paper, and the amount of the Currency at the present time, he was right in saying that there was a larger quantity of coin now in circulation than there was formerly. He was sure that all their Lordships would allow that when the exchanges were in favour of this country gold would not go out of it. Gentlemen might carry it abroad with them to meet their individual expenses, but merchants would not send it abroad as an article of merchandise. He admitted that when the exchanges were against this country, the quantity of gold drawn from the Bank might indicate the quantity taken out of the country, and the result of those two principles of calculation was that which he had stated to their Lordships on the first night of the Session.
Viscount Goderich
said, the documents for which the noble Duke had just moved, when added to those for which he had himself moved on a former evening, would put their Lordships in possession of all the
583
l.
l.
The Marquis of Lansdowne
said, that although the returns which had just been moved for might afford some approximation to the amount of our circulation, they would only afford an approximation, and ought not to be considered as accurate. He was, however anxious to slate to their Lordships why he should not attach much importance to these returns, even if they could be procured of perfect accuracy. He apprehended that Circulation was one thing, and Currency another, for the amount of Currency did not always agree with the amount of Circulation. He likewise apprehended that the amount of Currency was not. to be taken as a test of national prosperity. One of the most acute and enlightened Ministers, on points of finance at least, which France had over possessed, (M. Necker), had made a series of calculations at the time of the Revolution, from which it appeared that the amount of Currency in France was greater at that time than the amount of Currency now is in England; from which, if any body inferred that there was at that time greater prosperity in France than there was at present in England, he would
584
Earl Stanhope
stated, in explanation, that he never considered gold, once exported, as banished for ever from the country.
The returns were ordered.
CANDIA AND GREECE.]
Lord Holland
said, before their Lordships entered upon the important debate which was fixed for that evening, he wished to put a question to his Majesty's Ministers upon a point, which prior to the independence of Greece being finally settled, ought to be clearly and explicitly understood, not only by the parties immediately concerned in it, but also by the Parliament of England, and by the public at large. He addressed the question which he was going to ask to the noble Lords opposite in the plural number; for he really did not know from which of the public offices the orders had been issued to which he referred, and which were now acted upon by the Commanders of his Majesty's squadrons in the Mediterranean. He was given to understand, that the admiral and captains of his Majesty's vessels on the Mediterranean station were authorized and directed to search all Turkish vessels with which they might fall in, and to intercept all such vessels as they might find having Greek men and women on board, destined to be carried as slaves into foreign countries. It had been stated to him, that such were the instructions issued to all our naval Commanders upon that station. He did not know the precise period at which these instructions were issued, but he believed that they were given to them by
585
Earl Bathurst
came forward to declare that he was the Minister from whose office the instructions to which the noble Baron alluded had emanated. At the same time he could not help expressing a wish that the noble Baron had given him previous notice of his intention to ask a question upon this subject; for, by looking at the official documents, he should have been able to give the noble Baron a more accurate answer than he could now promise to do from a mere recollection of them, so long after the time at which they had originally been drawn up. As well as he recollected—and he trusted that noble Lords would not charge him hereafter with intentional misrepresentation in case his recollection were wrong—as well as he recollected, the instructions given to our naval Commanders in the Mediterranean were given under an impression, which his Majesty's Government believed to be well founded, that Ibrahim Pacha had published a proclamation in Greece, announcing his intention of taking every Greek whom he could capture to Egypt as a slave, and of transporting a number of Asiatics into Greece, to replace the population so removed. In consequence
586
Viscount Goderich
said, that his principal reason for rising was to inform their Lordships, that his recollection of the circumstances which gave rise to these instructions coincided in most respects with the account given by his noble friend, the President of the Council. It was undoubtedly true, that in consequence of information which reached this country that there was an intention on the part of Ibrahim Pacha to remove the Greek population from the Morea, and to substitute a Mahometan population in its stead, instructions were sent to our Admiral in the Mediterranean, directing him to obtain a categorical answer from Ibrahim Pacha on the one hand, and from the Sultan on the other, as to the reality of such an intention, in order to intimate to either of them, in case they avowed such an intention, that the British Government would not suffer a measure of that nature to be carried into effect. He did not think that the memory of his noble friend (Earl
587
Lord Holland
begged leave to say a few words in explanation, for it appeared to him, from what had fallen from the two noble Lords who had just addressed their Lordships, that they did not understand the drift of his questions. First of all, let him be permitted to say to the noble President of the Council that it was no want of candour that had prevented him from furnishing the noble Earl with previous notice of his intention to put these questions. Neither had the noble President any reason to complain of the course which he had pursued, for his main question was merely prospective. His question was, not when these instructions were first issued, and what was their precise nature and extent; but taking it for granted that they were in force, did they apply to Candia as they formerly applied to the Morea and to Negropont? And would they apply to Candia, when the pacification of Greece was completed, supposing Candia to be still left in the hands of the Turks? As to the extent of the orders, though he knew that it had been the subject of dispute between the Government and the gallant Admiral who had gained for himself immortal glory at Navarino, that, he could assure their Lordships, was not the point at which he had been aiming. But as one of the reasons assigned for the recall of that gallant officer was, that he had not put his orders in force in the manner in which he ought, he (Lord Holland) had been of opinion either that
588
The Duke of Wellington
said, that he could not pretend to recollect precisely the terms of an order issued four years ago; but he believed the fact to be as the noble Viscount (Goderich) had stated it —namely, that the order referred to applied solely to the Morea. He (the Duke of Wellington) believed that it was not applicable at that time to Candia, or indeed to any other part of Greece, save to the Morea. As the Morea had not been
589
Lord Holland
said, that there was one merit, at least, in the answer of the noble Duke—it was a distinct and explicit answer. He now understood that the instructions did not apply to Candia. He did not wish to argue the policy or impolicy of that arrangement at the moment, when their Lordships were about to have a great question submitted to their consideration; but he could not help requesting their Lordships to remark the situation in which this country and the British Admiral were placed by it. The original instructions were issued before the Protocol, and consequently before the signature of the Treaty of the 6th of July. On what principle were they issued? Were they not issued on the score of humanity? Were they not directly contrary —were they not in the very teeth of that austere and extreme neutrality which the noble Lords opposite so much affected? For, strictly speaking, we had no right, according to the ordinary law of nations, to interfere in any struggle which might be raging between the Turks and their subjects—the Greeks. He had no doubts that those instructions were issued because the honest, and manly, and humane nature of the late Lord Liverpool was shocked at the contemplation of a war conducted on such principles, and was revolted by the outrages which were committed during its continuance, upon human nature. Upon such grounds we had interfered to prevent such a traffic, and he wished to know whether any difference at all was made on that occasion between the inhabitants of Candia and those of the Morea? At all events, we sanctioned the principle of interference with such an odious traffic, and if it should hereafter be the policy of the Ottoman Porte to transport the Greek inhabitants of Candia as slaves to Egypt or elsewhere, having already sanctioned the principle of interfering, by preventing the transportation of Greek slaves from the Morea, we had set the example to the other Powers of Europe to interfere and interrupt such a trade, if trade it could be called, should it ever be carried on. If such a transportation of the inhabitants of Candia should be at-empted, it would be right and fair, under
590
The Duke of Wellington
said, the line pursued by the noble Lord on this occasion had been most informal. The noble Lord came down to the House, and without any notice whatever, put a question respecting transactions that had taken place three years ago; he made three speeches, containing long reasonings in each of them upon the subject, and then called upon his Majesty's Government to answer at once his hypothetical question. As to what might be the conduct of the Powers of Europe if certain occurrences foretold by the noble Lord should take place, it was not for him to say; but this he would say, that he was ready, whenever the noble Lord should think proper to bring forward any specific Motion upon the subject, to answer any questions he should have to propose. But for the present he would beg the noble Lord to bear in mind that the measures which had been taken to prevent the transportation of slaves from the Morea, were not applicable to Candia, because the circumstances respecting the transactions in the Morea did not apply to Candia; and before the noble Lord assumed that the same principle which had been formerly acted upon with regard to the Morea would be applied to what might occur in Candia, it was necessary for the noble Lord to show that the state of things in the Morea was similar to the state of things in Candia.
591
Lord Ellenborough
said, it should be recollected that the statement as to the transportation of Greek slaves from the Morea to Egypt was almost in every respect an exaggerated, false, and unfounded story.
Lord Holland
would merely ask, in reply to what had fallen from the noble Lord, whether a great many slaves who were about being transported by Ibrahim Pacha from the Morea had not been seized and released by Sir E. Codrington, and whether there were not many Candiotes amongst those who were thus released?
Lord Ellenborough
said, it was impossible for him to say whether there were or were not Candiotes amongst the slaves transported to Alexandria, but to show that there had been much exaggeration and misrepresentation abroad upon the subject, he would state a simple fact. It was well known that there were many Greek slaves serving in the Turkish army in the Morea, and when that army was about to evacuate the Morea, and they were left to their choice, either to go with their masters or to remain with their relations, they preferred going to Egypt to remaining in Greece.—The subject was here dropped.
POUTUGAL.]
Viscount Melbourne
moved, that that portion of the King's Speech delivered at the opening of Parliament which related to Portugal should be read; which having been done, the noble Lord rose to introduce the Motion of which he had given notice upon the subject. We regret to say, however, that the noble Lord throughout the whole of his address to the House, spoke in so low a tone, and so frequently dropped his voice, that it was exceedingly difficult to catch what fell from him. He commenced by observing that their Lordships were aware, from that portion of his Majesty's Speech which had been just read, that his Majesty saw very little prospect of the negotiations which were announced at the commencement of the Session in 1825, and were again mentioned in less sanguine terms in his Majesty's Speech at the close of the Session, being brought to any satisfactory conclusion,—that he saw very little prospect of a reconciliation between the Princes of the House of Braganza, and that so much inconvenience had resulted from the present state of affairs—the continued interruptions of the relations between this country and Portugal had been
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
The Earl of Aberdeen
said, that if the Motion of his noble friend had been more in accordance with Parliamentary usage and form, and if he had merely called for additional papers to explain the course which his Majesty's Ministers had deemed it right to pursue with regard to Portugal, he should have felt it his duty under such circumstances to oppose it, on the ground that such information was at present unnecessary. He was much more inclined
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
Viscount Goderich
concurred in what had fallen from the noble Earl with respect to the bringing of the Portuguese Constitution to Europe. It was deemed indispensable to the tranquillity of Europe that Portugal should separate from Brazil, and Sir Charles Stuart was sent to Portugal to explain the necessity of such a proceeding to Don John, then the King of that Country, who assented to the principle, and directed Sir Charles Stuart to proceed to his son, Don Pedro, at Brazil, with a proposition to separate the countries. Before Sir Charles Stuart arrived there, Don John died, and he was thus placed in the peculiar situation of messenger from the King of Portugal to the King of Portugal; for Don Pedro became, by his father's death, the sovereign of that country. He, however, consented to adopt the measure of separation. There were, it is true, at that time, considerable differences respecting the mode, in case of future successions, how the separation was to be perpetuated. However, in the end, Don Pedro consented to this separation, and also, which was not at first contemplated—granted a Constitution as well. When in the sequel it became known to Mr. Canning that Sir Charles Stuart was to be the bearer of this Constitution to Lisbon, he wrote to that Ambassador, on the 12th of July, in these words:—"Every thing which you bring from Rio de Janeiro to Lisbon will be precisely what the Portuguese nation have a right to expect, except the Constitution;" and Mr. Canning then went on to state, in the same despatch, "but, in order that we should better inculcate on other Governments our disinclination to meddle in their internal affairs, it is expedient, in this respect, to remove all grounds of jealousy of British influence, and it is therefore his Majesty's desire that you should proceed to England as soon as you deliver into the hands of the Infanta Regent, and of the Portuguese
617
618
619
620
hear
621
The Duke of Wellington here said "No."
622
Aberdeen.
623
624
Wellington
Holland.
de facto
de jure
de facto,
de jure
625
626
Lord Wharncliffe
said, he could neither concur with the noble Mover, nor with the noble Viscount who had just taken his seat. That noble Viscount, in particular, seemed to have gone over the papers to which he had referred so repeatedly by some system of cross-reading, and had arrived at a conclusion corresponding with that mode of perusal. The House ought to remember the statement of Mr. Canning, when he proposed that troops should be sent to Portugal. In terms stronger than any other man could use, he expressly asserted that they were not to act either for or against the Constitution—they were only to defend the country against invasion by the troops of Spain. What reason, then, could the Portuguese have for thinking that this country had taken what the noble Viscount was pleased to call the British-Portuguese Constitution under its special protection? His noble relative (Lord Stuart of Rothsay) when Sir C. Stuart, had only brought the Constitution to Portugal in his capacity of a Portuguese Plenipotentiary; and when the Emperor of Brazil was anxious to consult him on the subject, he was too prudent to consent to give any advice, so that that circumstance could not be construed into an approval in the face of Mr. Canning's direct disavowal. The simple question, was this:—When Don Miguel reached Portugal, and a party, which seemed the strongest, made its appearance adverse to
627
The Earl of Carnarvon
could not allow the question to come to a vote without offering a few remarks upon the peculiar situation in which this country was placed with regard to Portugal. He did not intend to uphold the policy of one Minister against that of another Minister; but to review the conduct of Great Britain towards Portugal as a whole, and to consider whether the natives of that country had been treated by this country in a manner to inspire affection and confidence, and to lead the rest of the world to believe that Great Britain had acted with becoming consistency and energy. He well understood the doctrine of non-interference; and in nine instances out of
628
629
de facto,
630
The Marquis of Lansdowne
observed that after what had been already said, it was not necessary for him to add anything to justify, and little to explain, the vote he intended to give. If, by supporting the Motion, it could be supposed that he meant at all to sanction the principle, that Great Britain ought to have interfered to guarantee the Constitution of Portugal, he would vote against it, and he trusted the time would never come when Ministers would advise the King to guarantee a Constitution of any kind for any Foreign State. He would also rather oppose the Motion of his noble friend than that his vote in its favour should lead to the slightest implication, that under the circumstances it was fit to recognise the authority of Don Miguel. The rule of that tyrannical usurper was repugnant to the feelings of the whole kingdom, and it was needless for him to add a single touch to the picture drawn by the noble Secretary of State. What he understood to be sought by the Motion was this,—that without interrupting negotiations, for none were pending—without committing Great Britain to any future course of conduct, for no such course had been pointed out— the House and the country ought at least to be furnished with the fullest information before a step was taken that could not be adopted without pain and regret. What, he would ask, had been done to meet this great evil? During the last two years our foreign relations had undergone an alarming change; at one end of Europe a mighty State, the maintenance of which was once considered essential to the balance of power, had been reduced to a state of dependence and vassalage; while at the other end those friendly relations, the preservation of which our wisest Statesmen had held necessary to the welfare of this country, had been torn asunder. Thus circumstanced, was it fitting that Parliament should show indifference to the important events passing before its eyes? If it consented merely to look on with apathy, notwithstanding what had been said on a former night by the noble Duke regarding the inexhaustible wealth and resources of this country, and her capability of meeting a new war should it arise, people would be found on the continent malicious enough to attribute our forbearance to other causes than indifference. With regard to our existing relations with Portugal, he
631
632
633
634
The Duke of Wellington
said, he felt himself bound to say a few words in answer to what had fallen from the noble Mover for the papers, and the noble Lords who had followed him in the debate, particularly in relation to the transaction at Terceira. The noble Mover had said, that we were bound to the maintenance of the Constitution in Portugal on account of the part we had taken in its establishment, and the interest we had manifested in its success. It was hardly necessary for him to add a word in proof of the contrary fact, after the observations of his noble friend (the Foreign Secretary), and of the noble Marquis who had just addressed the House. He could assure their Lordships that if there was one point on which Mr. Canning was more anxiously earnest than another, it was in enforcing the opinion that England would not, and had no right, to interfere in upholding the Constitution in Portugal. If there was any subject on which that right hon. Gentleman took more pains than another, and the mass of correspondence on the subject was almost incredible, it was to impress the Powers of Europe with the conviction that the Constitution of Portugal was not the offspring of English influence, and that Sir Charles Stuart's agency in its being brought to Europe was solely in his capacity of Minister to the King of Portugal, and not as Ambassador from the King of England. Mr. Canning repeatedly urged the Powers of Europe to remain tranquil, and to aid the establishment of the Constitution by the countenance extended by their several Ambassadors at Lisbon, on the assurance that England would not at all interfere in its maintenance, and that it did not, as he had said, originate with the British Government. If, therefore, Mr. Canning were to be believed, we had no right to interfere in the matter; and as a consequence no steps to the enforcement of the Constitution should be taken.—But then it was said, by the noble Marquis (Lansdowne) and the noble Viscount (Melbourne) on the second bench, though you are not pledged to guarantee the Constitution, yet you are bound to protect it by the part taken by your Ambassador in the earlier stages of its existence. The question then was, in what capacity was Sir Charles
635
636
637
638
639
640
de facto
641
642
643
Viscount Melbourne
said, he still retained his opinion that this country ought to have taken more energetic measures in support of those individuals who had advocated the constitution in Portugal, and that opinion was strengthened by the declaration of the Secretary for Foreign Affairs, that he would not look with favour upon any arrangement which did not include an amnesty for those individuals.
644
Their Lordships divided,— Content 21; Not Content 52;—Majority 31.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Thursday, February 18, 1830.
MINUTES.] Mr. BROUGHAM took the oaths and his seat as Member for Knaresborough.—Mr. STANLEY brought in a Bill to amend the Laws respecting the leasing powers of Bishops and Ecclesiastical Corporations in Ireland.—Mr. R. GRANT gave notice that on Monday next he would submit to the House a Motion for removing the Civil Disabilities of the Jews.
BURNING OF HINDOO WIDOWS.]
Mr. Protheroe
in presenting a Petition from the ladies and female inhabitants of Worcester, praying that effectual stop should be put to the burning of Hindoo Widows. He begged leave to ask, for the satisfaction of those who had intrusted him with this Petition, and of other persons who took an interest in the subject, whether the report which had gone abroad, that the Indian Government intended to abolish the practice of burning Hindoo widows, was correct?
Mr. G. Bankes
said, he would be happy to give the hon. Gentleman and his friends every satisfaction in his power. He had, a few nights ago, laid a paper on the Table relative to this subject; and a Report relative to it would also be speedily laid before the House. The statement in the newspapers respecting an order of the Governor-general forbidding the practice was not confirmed by any official document that had come home. But there was great reason to believe, from the information of individuals, to whom the sentiments of the people of India were known, that a considerable change had taken place in their feelings; and that, at no great distance of time, the practice would be abolished. But no step should be taken that would offend the religious prejudices of the natives. Nothing would be done by the Government in haste; but they most seriously wished that the object of the Petitioners might be carried into effect.
SUB-LETTING ACT IN IRELAND.]
Mr. O'Connell
in presenting a Petition from several parishes in Dublin against
645
LABOURERS' WAGES.—TRUCK SYSTEM.]
Sir J. Wrottesley
, in rising to present a Petition from a number of workmen employed at Bilston, in Staffordshire, against the practice of paying Labourers' Wages by goods, begged pardon of the House for the formal manner in which he was about to bring it forward. But the subject to which it related bore so strongly on the poor, that he felt himself bound to ask permission of the House to state it fully, and he trusted that Gentlemen would listen for a few moments to the observations he intended to make. The practice to which the Petition referred was one to which his own observation had been directed; but, in speaking of it, he would not confine himself to facts which came within his own knowledge; he would quote the principal points contained in the Petition which he had the honour to offer to the House. The Petitioners stated that the town of Bilston was connected with very large collieries and iron-works, for which very great rents were paid. They said, that a numerous body of men were employed there, who were chiefly paid in goods by their masters. They next stated, that if a workman sought for redress, he was immediately discharged. They complained that the masters resorted to various expedients to evade the law: they delayed to settle with the men sometimes for six weeks; and when the latter, in want of sustenance, applied to the masters, they supplied them with goods, thirty per cent above the market price. Other masters, they alleged, paid the workmen in money in one counting-house, with which they were obliged to purchase goods, the property of their employers, in another. They state, that as many months elapsed before the masters paid the bills which the workmen were compelled to run up with the shopkeeper, the latter forced the poor workmen to pay exorbitant prices. Under these circumstances, they called on the House to amend the law, in order to put an end to this ruinous prac-
646
l.
s.
d.
l.
647
l.
l.
l.
l.
s.
d.
l.
l.
648
On the Motion that it do lie on the Table,
Mr. Herries
remarked, that as he and some of his right hon. friends had lately had some communication on the subject with those who were personally interested in it, he felt that it would not be right to allow the petition to be laid on the Table without making a few observations. He would, however, entirely disconnect the question to which the petition referred from the subject of the currency, with which the hon. Baronet had endeavoured, very ingeniously, but not quite satisfactorily, to connect it. In his opinion, the object which the Petitioners had in view would be better promoted by discussing the matter without reference to any other topic than the grievance complained of. Of the difficulties which would attend the removal of that grievance without an interference between the employers and the persons employed; of the difficulties which would attend the application of an adequate remedy without the danger of injuriously increasing on the manufacturer and the capitalist the price of labour —of these considerations, which were of such vital importance, it would not be proper for him, on that occasion, to attempt to enter; the more especially as the hon. Member for Staffordshire had given notice that it was his intention, at a very early period, to move for leave to bring in a Bill, by which it was hoped that the evils now complained of might be remedied. Under these circumstances it would be worse than idle to anticipate the discussions to which the introduction of that measure would naturally give rise. But, as the subject had been mentioned elsewhere, he would merely observe that his Majesty's Government had expressed
649
Mr. R. Gordon
protested against the inference attempted to be established by the right hon. Gentleman, that the question of Barter had nothing to do with the currency. He was sorry that the right hon. Gentleman, and others of his Majesty's Ministers, were so ignorant of the true state of the country, as to suppose that the system of Truck was to be considered apart from the question of the currency.
Mr. Littleton
doubted the policy or expediency of connecting the subject of the petition with the currency. It was his intention to bring the question before the House on Thursday, when he should move for leave to bring in a Bill to render more effectual the laws for the payment of wages in money.
Mr. Benett
contended, that the system of Truck was immediately connected with the currency. As matters stood at present, no manufacturer could continue to carry on business without obtaining a double profit, first as a manufacturer, and next as a huxter. He sincerely hoped that the hon. Member for Staffordshire might find it possible to carry his meritorious measure into effect.
Mr. Benson
trusted, that the measure relative to the payment of wages in money would receive due consideration from Government and the House.
Sir R. Wilson
said, the hon. Member for Staffordshire would be a public benefactor if he could put an end to the system Of Truck, which was similar to the practice
650
repartimiento.
Sir John Wrottesley
said, he found it quite impossible to disconnect the subject of the Petition from that of the Currency.
LAW REFORMS.]
Mr. Secretary Peel
rose to make the Motion of which he had given notice respecting the Reform of the Courts of Law. Before he proceeded, he begged that so much of the Royal Speech at the opening of the Session as related to the measures for the improvements of the Courts of Law might be now read.
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
hear.
hear
658
banco
banco,
l.
659
l.
l.
l.
l.
660
661
662
663
hear
Mr. Brougham
expressed his satisfaction at what had fallen from the right hon. Gentleman, and agreed that the present was not the fit opportunity for discussing in detail the matters to which the right hon. Gentleman had alluded. He thought it right that the proceedings should commence by such a Motion as the right hon. Gentleman had just made, because the evil of fees was at the root. In many instances, the cutting down of the emoluments of larger offices had been attended by this consequence, namely, throwing inordinate increase into the emoluments of lower offices. In this way, some of the very reforms, which had had reduction for their object had in reality produced increased salaries. With respect to the other parts of the right hon. Gentleman's speech, if he should have occasion to differ from him on a future occasion, it would only be, because he thought the right hon. Gentleman did not go far enough. As to the Welsh jurisdiction, when the time was come it must be put an end to. To the abolition of it there were two objections—the first was, that
664
l.
l.
l.
l.
665
666
667
banco
nisi prius,
668
Mr. Ferguson
gave also his concur-
669
670
671
Mr. Hume
begged to express the satisfaction he felt at the proposed changes, as far as they went; and as they had now been submitted to the consideration of the House, the sooner they were effected the better. He hoped, however, that in making them the country would not be put to any unnecessary expense. In making those changes, he did hope that the House would consider whether the number of Judges in the Court of Session in Scotland was not much greater than was required. The Scotch Judges had not one half the business
672
Mr. Ferguson
, in explanation, said that he had not expressed a wish that things should remain as they were in the Scotch Courts. He gave the right hon. Gentleman credit for what he proposed, but he was not a defender of the state of things as they now existed in those Courts.
The Attorney-General
trusted, that a the several subjects were not now before the House in detail, it would not be expected that he should then enter into a minute examination of those matters which hereafter would come fully before them. His right hon. friend (Mr. Peel) had only proposed to give the House a general view of the course to be hereafter pursued, and he trusted the House would feel that he was more entitled to credit for the extent to which his explanation had gone, than to blame for any omission of more minute detail of every part. He fully concurred with his right hon. friend in the remark that they owed much of those judicial reforms to the very able exposition given on a former occasion by his hon. and learned
673
Mr. O'Connell
never heard anything that gave him more satisfaction than the clear and distinct statement of the right hon. Gentleman; and instead of being surprised that he could not go more minutely into the technicalities of the subject, it was matter of astonishment that he had been able to compress so much in so short a statement. There was healing in what he said. It was a clear admission of the necessity for improvement—of the fact, that the Government are not hostile to a change—that it did not even oppose the
vis inertiœ
674
ab initio,
675
hear, hear.
676
ex post facto
Mr. Peel
, in reply, said, that he had avoided going into any detail as to the construction of the Scotch Courts, but referring to what fell from the hon. Member for Aberdeen, he should have no objection to such returns as those for which he intended to move, but he feared that the returns of the number of hours which the Scotch Judges sat in the Court of Session would not go far to establish the hon. Member's case — that the number could be reduced to half. Their attendance in Court would not show the amount of the business they had to perform. Great part of the business of the Scotch Courts was clone in writings; and besides the hours of attendance, the hon. Member should know how much of the time of the Judges was occupied out of Court in examining those written documents. Besides, it should be borne in mind that the Scotch Courts had much business in law and in equity, and that many matters connected with elections were brought before them. If, therefore, the hon. Member wished to see the whole extent of the business of the Scotch Judges, he should alter the form of the returns for which he had expressed his intention to move. He
677
ex post facto
Mr. O'Connell
said, the right hon. Gentleman had misunderstood what he said about a Code. He was not for making now a new Code of laws for the country. We had already the materials in English law for an excellent Code, and the comments of the Judges would form so many philosophic experiments by which the fitness of certain parts of it might be decided.
678
Leave was given to bring in the Bill.
PARLIAMENTARY REFORM.]
The Marquis of Blandford
spoke to the following effect.—I rise, Sir, to answer the call made on me last Session; and following the course suggested for my adoption by my right hon. opponent, the Secretary of State for the Home Department, I rise to offer for the consideration of this House, "a practical detailed measure:" and first, Sir, I must preface the observations I shall have occasion to address to you, by calling to the recollection of this House the course pursued by me upon the occasion I have referred to. I then, Sir, considered it my duty to divide the House upon the Question whether Parliament would or would not be pleased by a formal resolution to recognise the existence and venality of the close and decayed boroughs, for that really was the whole of the question which I thought it advisable to submit to the House, under the very singular opposition I met with from the right hon. Secretary for the Home Department. The venality of these boroughs is as sure as their existence, and both are equally notorious; but there is a wide difference between the notoriety of such offences, and a Parliamentary recognition of their existence. Mere notoriety begets defiance of public opinion and a fearless habit of offending. But if Parliament, by a formal vote, had put its brand mark upon these transactions—if by some general resolution it had stigmatized them as crimes against the law of Parliament and the Constitution of the country, a good foundation would then have been laid for the reform of what had been declared to be wrong and true, for the prevention of what had been denounced as illegal. But it did not seem good to the majority of this House to hurt the sensibilities of the Boroughmonger, by calling his trade by its proper name, or to injure his interests by saying, that his gains were condemned by Parliament and the country. The people, however, will speak out, though Parliament may chuse to keep silence, and may try to impose silence upon others. The voice of the country is not to be stifled by a vote of this House— it will attempt in vain to smother truth—
679
"Dat veniam corvis, vexat censura Columbas."
680
681
682
683
fraunche et due election,
quod omnes tangit ab omnibus approbetur;
Nuls autres in nulle manière.
stat nominis umbra;
684
de quolibet Burgo duos Burgenses qui in navigio et exercitio mercandisarum notitiam habeant meliorem;
in exercitio mercandisarum,
685
adagia
"novis legibus non recreatœ acescunt"
qui mala non permutat in bonis non perseverat"
"Morosa moris retentio res turbulenta est œque ac novitas"
686
687
"Sum ex Us qui antiquos mirantur."
688
689
1.
1.
690
691
feu-rights,
1.
692
693
694
695
696
697
Anno Domini
De tallagio non concedendo;
698
acmé,
Mr. Hume
seconded the Motion.
Mr. Pendarvis
said, he was willing to bear his testimony to the necessity of Reform, in evidence of which he would state that the county of Cornwall was by no means benefitted by the number of Members that it returned to serve in Parliament. Until the noble Mover had communicated them to the House, he had not been aware of the provisions of his Bill, nor was he
699
Mr. Benett
professed his admiration of the noble Marquis's speech generally, although he could not promise him his unconditional support. In the present calamitous state of the country, it was, in his opinion, an object of the first importance, to administer relief to the people, and most sincerely sorry was he to see that no disposition to grant that relief had been manifested by the Government. When he looked to the two past Sessions, with a grateful recollection of the important measures which they had passed, to the great benefit of the country, he had hoped that the present Session also would have been similarly distinguished. But he now saw that Parliamentary Reform must precede every suggestion for public advantage, and on that account he would support the Motion of the noble Marquis. People who were but lukewarm in the cause, or at heart disinclined to it, were accustomed to lay hold on the details of a proposed measure, and stop it
in limine,
700
Sir Robert Wilson
said, that he had much doubted the noble Marquis's sincerity last Session, when he first introduced a Motion upon the subject, as it did not appear to him that he had really put on the armour of a Reformer. He then thought that the noble Marquis had ostensibly avowed himself a champion of Reform for the purpose of attaining better vantage ground to attack Ministers for having carried another measure which he conscientiously opposed. He had at present however, no longer any doubt of his perfect sincerity, and felt confident that if it were in his power to-morrow he would execute all that he had proposed. In short, he believed in the reformation of the noble Mover. The principle of the measure he should always support, as he was sent thither by his constituents for that purpose. If Reform had been long since accomplished he was convinced that many of the burthens under which the people suffered would have been withdrawn ere now, and many obnoxious laws would have been effaced. Some of the latter, indeed, had been repealed, owing to the liberality and wisdom of the right hon. Gentleman opposite. He was sorry not to see the Attorney General in his place, as he had wished to have made some allusion to the law of libel, which that right hon. Gentleman had been pledged, under the administration of Mr. Canning, to reform. This was assuredly one of those laws which ought to have been repealed, inflicting, as it did, transportation on a second conviction. If the Parliament had been reformed, we should not have heard of men being dispossessed of their property by a borough proprietor, because they had presumed to exercise their rights as free men. We should not then have heard of British citizens being treated on the footing of goods and chattels. The Members of that House were daily disputing as to whether the present distress was to be considered partial or general, but that question would have soon been set at rest if every Member were personally acquainted with the circumstances of his constituents, and able to declare them. He would advocate and support a fair and free representation, and he was not authorized by his constituents to go further. It occurred to him that the measure proposed was partially objectionable, as it gave somewhat too despotic a power to the Committee, who were permitted to denote,
ad libitum,
701
laughter
Lord Nugent
expressed his willingness to vote with the noble Marquis, as the defects in the representation were so numerous that he had long acknowledged the general necessity for Reform. His sentiments on this point he had already taken too many opportunities of expressing to require his doing so on the present occasion. Although he consented so far to support the Bill, he avowed himself to be comparatively ignorant of its details.
Mr. Hobhouse
was anxious to hear what the opponents of the Motion could say to it, as hitherto they had heard nothing but arguments in its favour. He could feel no nicety in declaring that he had always voted for Reform, and always would vote for Reform, and all the measures that had the least resemblance to that under their consideration; and for this plain reason, viz. that he conceived the present system the worst possible system of representation that ever existed in a free Government. He would not take up the time of the House in urging the reasons for this opinion, but he would say that every day convinced him more and more of the truth: of this position. We had the forms of freedom with all the disadvantages of the most corrupt system of representation that was ever devised. He would vote for the Motion, because he was satisfied that the Bill could not possibly make us worse than we were, because the Parliament was not collected with the consent of the people but with their complete disassent; because it. was not assembled by their will, but against their conviction; and because the Members were not assembled to do the business of the people, but their own. He could not understand why some reformers should oppose the Motion, for it could not do otherwise than good. He did not understand the Bill, but he understood: that it was the object of the noble Lord to reform the House, and that was enough for him. He was anxious to vote for this measure, because the House had of late been fixing its attention on particular cases; and when it could fix its fangs
702
Si quœris monumentum, circumspice.
l.
1.
703
1.
l
Mr. Twiss
said, he should not have troubled the House if it were not that the hon. Member opposite had expressed his desire to hear what the opponents of the measure could say against it. He thought the opponents of the measure were absolved from saying anything against it by the opposition the Motion of the noble Marquis had already met with on the other: side of the House. All that had been said in favour of the Bill was the mere assertion—that the House did not represent the people. That assertion embraced
704
Sir F. Burdett
observed, that the hon. Member who had just sat down, who had attempted to throw a ridicule upon the Motion of the noble Lord, had so utterly mistaken the purport of the paper read by his hon. colleague, that he seemed to think the paper an irony on the present state of the House. The hon. Gentleman had mistaken, and perverted, and misunderstood the argument of his hon. colleague, who had admitted, as he (Sir F. Burdett) ad-
705
706
707
708
l.
709
710
711
The Attorney General
rose to address the House, but his commencing observations were inaudible, and during the whole of his Speech he was very indistinctly heard, owing to the emotion which he appeared to feel. After some remarks upon the Motion of the noble Marquis, he proceeded to say, that he had not risen so much for the sake of speaking upon it as for the sake of observing on the extraordinary conduct of his hon. friend opposite, who, in a debate which had no allusion to him (the Attorney General) personally, had thought proper to cast the weight of his heavy censure upon him. He thought that as there were two Motions already upon the order book, which would afford some regular opportunity for discussing his conduct, he might have expected that at least, in candour, his friends—from his enemies he could expect nothing but hostility—would have abstained from introducing such a discussion until he had received due notice of their intention. But as his hon. friend the Member for Westminster had introduced him to the notice of the House, he would commence by assuring his hon. friend that there was no act of his professional life on which he looked back with greater satisfaction than that in which he had had the distinguished honour of appearing as his defender. This he could at least say, that whether he had defended his hon. friend ably or not, he had done it honestly, zealously, and sincerely, for he felt at that time, and he felt now, that the prosecution which was instituted against his hon. friend was a prosecution which ought never to have been instituted at all. He would not shrink from stating his opinion upon that prosecution at all times and in all places; but if his hon. friend would look into the proceedings to which he had just alluded, and would impartially consider all that had been done or said in the course of them, he was persuaded that his hon. friend, for whom he felt the utmost regard and affection, would find that he had neither done nor said any thing inconsistent with the principles on which he had defended him. He could not accept the compliment which his honourable friend had wished to pay him, in supposing that the late prosecutions had been forced upon him by the compulsion of the Cabinet. Those prosecutions required to be looked upon not incidentally in the course of another debate, they were of sufficient
712
713
nec mala nec remedia pati possumus.
714
Lord John Russel
said, that he had known his hon. and learned friend (the Attorney General) for many years, and had never known him profess any opinions but such as were favourable to the cause of freedom. He should therefore wait to hear his explanation of his conduct in the recent prosecutions before he ventured to give any opinion upon it. He could not, however, refrain from remarking, that there had lately appeared in the newspapers words attributed—perhaps incorrectly—to his hon. and learned friend, which, if they were correct, he must say could not be looked upon without regret. It was only the other day that he read in the newspapers words said to have been used by his hon. and learned friend, which led him to suppose that his hon. and learned friend objected to the public's canvassing the opinions of judges and of juries. He hoped that his hon. and learned friend would be able to explain these words away at the proper time. The noble Lord then proceeded to state, that in voting with the noble Marquis upon the present occasion, he did so not upon the grounds upon which the noble Marquis had put it, but upon the grounds upon which he had not put it. He voted for it not because he thought that it was a question which ought to be referred to a Commit-tee of twenty-one, but because he thought that it was a question which ought to be referred to a Committee of the whole House. The noble Lord ridiculed the idea that the House had acted unfairly to such boroughs as it had disfranchised for corrupt practices, inasmuch as it was notorious that practices equally corrupt prevailed in every part of the country. There was no ground for applying, as the noble Lord had done, the hacknied quotation,
"Dat veniam corvis—vexat censura columbas."
columbœ,
l.
a laugh
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, he was unwilling to give his vote unaccompanied by a few observations, lest he should be deemed
715
eloquentiœ satis, sapientiœ parvum
a laugh
716
717
l.
l.
"Hear," and laughter
Viscount Howick
observed that, from the manner in which the benches of that House were filled, it was impossible to expect any great object, for the benefit of the people would be carried. The hon. Baronet below him (Sir F. Burdett) had not been able, with all his great talents, his well-known perseverance, and his tried integrity, to prevent the passing of any one of those measures which had brought the country to its present state. Mr. Pitt, who commenced his career as a reformer, soon deserted the interests of the people. His great energies were first displayed in the strenuous support of those interests, but that he soon found was a losing game. He saw that the voice of the people in that House was weak and powerless, and that the voice of another class, which had been raised to influence, was all-powerful there; and to that class he attached himself. They now beheld before them a
718
hear
Mr. O'Connell
said, he certainly should not have risen at that late hour, had he not been pointedly alluded to by his hon. friend, the Member for Westminster (Mr. Hobhouse). On a former occasion he did most cheerfully join in hunting down the mangy wolf, and now he would as readily join in the pursuit of the remaining portion of the flock.—[This allusion of the hon. and learned Gentleman was to the conclusion of a speech of his own in the discussion some days before, on a Motion respecting the Borough of East Retford.] If they had scotched one wolf, they certainly ought not to let the others escape. As for the Committee of twenty-one, he was as little disposed to support it as the right hon. Secretary. He was decidedly of opinion that no authority short of the Legislature itself should possess the power of disfranchising Boroughs or Cities, —but these details were matters of secondary importance—he looked to the principle of the measure; it was a Bill to secure the popular representation of the people, and beyond that it was a Bill to exclude placemen and pensioners from Parliament; as such he would support it, though he confessed that the plan for paying the Representatives of the people did not meet his approbation. He neither wished for wages from the people, nor for salaries from the crown. But when the right hon. Secretary talked of the wages as so likely to alienate the confidence of the people, he should have remembered
719
l.
720
l.
721
Mr. Brougham
commenced by declaring, that he considered the conduct of the hon. Members for Aylesbury, Cornwall, and Wiltshire to be unfair, they having stated that, although they approved of certain portions of the noble Marquis's Resolution, and would vote for his having leave to bring in his Bill, yet that they did so with the intention of opposing it at some future stage of its progress through that House. He also considered that this project of suffering the measure to exist for one moment, that they might strangle it in the next, was senseless and ridiculous. He would pursue a different course. It was not because he disapproved of some points in that Resolution that he was to pronounce a sweeping condemnation of it, for there were others which met with his most decided approbation; and if he looked upon the question with no other view but that one, he should feel himself bound to give the noble Marquis his vote. He differed certainly from the noble Marquis in the first part of his project, as far as any one man possibly could differ from another. He also disagreed with him as to the policy of wages or payment for Members; yet, when he looked to other parts of that Bill, if he did not falsify all his just professions—if he did not run counter to all his former votes, he could not refuse to give the noble Marquis the opportunity of bringing in his Bill, and so afford him the chance of having its provisions carried into effect. Amongst the desirable objects of this Bill, he found that all copyholders were to have a right to vote—that the
722
hear, hear
723
cheers
Mr. H. Twiss
said, he had not the remotest idea of imputing to the noble Marquis any such feeling as the hon. and
724
Mr. Brougham
certainly did hear the hon. and learned Member speak of two sorts of irony—the one more ludicrous, the other more stern. As to his observation being unbecoming, he thought the hon. and learned Gentleman should thank him for giving him an opportunity of explaining a point, with respect to which, but for that explanation, it would appear that the whole House would have been totally and entirely mistaken.
Mr. Stanley
said, he felt it to be his duty, being called on to give his vote one way or another, to declare, that he would vote against the Bill. He could not support a Bill now, which he knew he must oppose hereafter.
Colonel Davies
said, that the Amendment was general, and the hon. Gentleman might vote for that.
Mr. Maberly
Lord Althorp
declared, that he would vote for the Motion of his noble relation, if it were pressed to a division; but, agreeing with his hon. and learned friend, he thought the best course would be to adopt the Amendment. He therefore moved, "That all the words after the word 'that' be omitted, in order to insert the following:—"It is the opinion of this House that a Reform in the Representation of the people is necessary."
List of the Majority and also of the Minority.
MAJORITY.
Atkins, Alderman
Astley, Sir J. D. Bart.
Ashurst, W. H.
Ashley, Hon. W.
Apsley, Lord
A'Court, Capt. E. H.
Alexander, J.
Ashley, Lord
Arbuthnot, rt. hon. C.
Acland, Sir T.
Arbuthnot, hn. Col. H,
Bankes, H.
725
Bankes, W.
Greene, T. G.
Bankes, G.
Hill, Sir R.
Batley, H.
Hill, Lord A.
Buxton, T. F.
Holmes, W.
Burrell, W.
Hay, A.
Benson, R.
Hope, W. H.
Byron, T.
Hope, hon. Sir A.
Barclay, C.
Herries, rt. hon. C
Barclay, D.
Heathcote, Sir W.
Bright, H.
Holmesdale, Lord
Baring, B.
Hastings, Sir C.
Boyle, hon. J.
Irving, J.
Campbell, J.
Jones, J.
Campbell, A.
Knatchbull, Sir E.
Cust, hon. E.
King, Hon. R.
Castlereagh, Lord
Kekewich, S. T.
Carrington, Sir E.
Knox, hon. T.
Clive, hon. R.
Lygon, hon. H. B.
Cooper, B.
Loch, J.
Cartwright, W. R.
Littleton, E. I.
Clerk, Sir G.
Labouchere, H.
Courtenay, rt. hon. F. P.
Langston, J. H.
Cockburn, Sir G.
Lushington, Col.
Calvert, J.
Martin, Sir B.
Calcraft, rt. hon. J.
Mountcharles, Lord
Craddock, Col.
Meynell, Captain
Callaghan, G.
Moore, G.
Capel, J.
Morgan, Sir C.
Corry, hon. H.
Marryat, J.
Corry, Lord
Manners, Lord C.
Colborne, R.
Morgan, Captain
Corbett, P.
Macleod, J. N.
Darlington, Lord
Murray, Sir G.
Downie, R.
Milbank, M.
Doherty, J.
Maitland, Hon. A.
Dottin, A. R.
Morland, Sir S. B. Bt.
Downes, Lord
Mildmay, P.
Daly, J.
Malcolm, N.
Denison, J. E.
Norton, G. C.
Dundas, R.
North, J. H.
East, Sir E. H. Bart.
Northcote, H. S.
Eliot, Lord
Owen, Sir J. Bart.
Estcourt, T.
Owen, H. O.
Estcourt, T. H.
O'Bryen, W.
Egerton, W.
Palmer, R.
Ewart, W.
Perceval, S.
Freemantle, Sir T.
Petit, L. H.
Foster, L.
Peel, rt. hon. R.
Fergusson, C.
Peel, W.
Gower, Lord F. L.
Peel, J.
Graham, Marquis
Peach, N. W.
Graham, Sir J.
Peachy, General
Grant, rt. hon. C.
Powlett, Lord W. J. F.
Grant, rt. hon. R.
Palk, Sir L. V., Bart.
The following is a Copy of the Bill as proposed by the noble Marquis:—
A BILL
To restore the Constitutional Influence of the Commons in the Parliament of England, and to secure for ever the Purity of Representation, and the Freedom of Election, of Members to serve in the Commons House of Parliament.
WHEREAS it has been declared and admitted from time immemorial, as well as by ancient statutes, "that the Commons of
726
Palmerston, Lord
Trench, Colonel
Roberts, W. A.
Twiss, H.
Rose, Capt. G. P.
Townshend, hon. J.
Ross, C.
Thompson, L.
Rice, T.
Valletort, Lord
Strathaven, Lord
Vyvyan, Sir R.
Somerset, Lord R. E.
Van Homrigh, P.
Somerset, Lord G.
Vernon, G. G. V.
Scott, Sir W.
Villiers, T. H.
Smith, R. V.
Walrond, B.
Spence, G.
Wallace, T.
Spottiswoode, A.
Wood, Colonel
Scarlett, Sir J.
Wynn, rt. hon. C. W.
Scott, H. F.
Warrender, right hon. Sir G.
Sandon, Lord
Sidney, P. C.
Walpole, Colonel
Sanderson, R.
Ward, W.
Sefton, Lord
Wigram, W.
Surrey, Lord
Wall, B.
Stewart, Sir M. S.
Whitmore, W. W.
Slaney, R. A.
TELLERS.
Stanley, Hon. E.
Dawson, G. R.
Thynne, Lord J.
Planta, J.
MINORITY.
Althorp, Lord
Nugent, Lord
Benett, J.
O'Connell, D.
Bernal, R.
Palmer, F.
Birch, J.
Pendarvis, E. W.
Blake, Sir F.
Poyntz, S.
Brougham, H.
Protheroe, E.
Butler, C.
Ramsbottom, J.
Burdett, Sir F.
Robarts, A. W.
Calvert, N.
Robinson, Sir G.
Cholmeley, M. J.
Russell, Lord J.
Clive, E. B.
Russell, J.
Denison, W. J.
Saville, L.
Davies, Colonel
Smith, W.
Davenport, E.
Sykes, D.
Dawson, A.
Taylor, M. A.
Ebrington, Lord
Thomson, P.
Easthope, J.
Warburton, H.
Fergusson, Sir R.
Webbe, Colonel
Fortescue, hon. G.
Wilson, Sir R.
Gordon, R.
Wells, J.
Hobhouse, J. C.
Whitbread, H.
Howick, Lord
Whitbread, S.
Ingilby, Sir W.
Western, C.
Jephson, C. O.
Wrottesley, Sir J.
Lambert, J. S.
Wood, Ald.
Marjoribanks, S.
Wood, J.
Marshall, J.
Wyvill, M.
Marshall, W.
TELLERS.
Martin, J.
Blandford, Marquis of Joseph Hume
Monck, J. B.
England were ever a part of the Parliament:"
And whereas it is one of the most ancient and undoubted prerogatives of the Crown, with the advice of the Privy Council, to summons, by writ issued out of Chancery, Sheriffs of the different counties to return Knights, Citizens, and Burgesses to serve in Parliament for such counties, and the cities and boroughs within the same:
And whereas the purpose and object of conferring on the Crown this high and transcendant prerogative, was to insure, by the return of such
727
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, February 19, 1830.
MINUTES.] The Speaker informed the House that he had received a letter from the Hanaper Office, in Dublin, enclosing a petition from Mr. Massy Dawson, which complained of the undue return of Mr. P. Grady for the County of Limerick.
Sir James Graham gave notice, that on Monday next he would move, as an Amendment to the Orders of the Day, a Resolution to consider the manner in which the office of Treasurer of the Navy had been filled up.
Mr. E. Davenport rose to correct an erroneous impression that had got abroad, relative to his motives for postponing his Motion concerning the State of the Country, which stood for Tuesday next. He would have brought his Motion forward on Wednesday, 3rd March; but as another Motion stood for that day, he should postpone it to Friday, the 5th, when he should move a Call of the House.
QUESTION OF PRIVILEGE.]
Mr. Littleton
rose, to present a petition involving a Question of the Privileges of that House. The petition was from a
Knights, a representation in Parliament of the landholders or landed interest of the kingdom, and by the return of such Citizens and Burgesses a representation of the trade, and of all other interests within the realm:
And whereas it has ever been considered a noble privilege which entitles the subject to a share in the Government and Legislature of the country, and such as he ought not to be denuded of by accidental or unforeseen circumstances, nor by craft and design:
And whereas when the right of voting was annexed to some tenement, house, or spot of ground where a house had stood, it was never contemplated that any number of these bur-gage-tenure estates should be purchased by one person in order to be conveyed to so many of his friends or dependants, and that thereby each should have a right to vole, and that so a command of the return of Members to serve in Parliament, and a proprietary interest therein, should be obtained:
And whereas in consequence of the departure from the spirit and meaning of the law, the election of Knights, Citizens, and Burgesses, is often attended with canvassing, solicitations, and even bribes, on the part of the candidate, and with scenes of drunkenness and corruption on the part of the electors, disgraceful to both parties, and highly detrimental to the community at large; and in other cases such elections are entirely under the command of a
728
single individual, and such individual is, in many instances, a Peer of Parliament, and thus the returns of many Citizens and Burgesses to serve in the House of Commons have become the subject of sale and barter for money, whereby any foreign prince or potentate may, by the mere power of money, and in some instances actually has, purchased for his friends or agents, seats in the House of Commons of England:
And whereas all such things and doings are in direct contradiction to the spirit and meaning of the law, a disgrace and scandal to Parliament, subversive of the rights and liberties of the people, and of the just prerogative and interest of the Crown, rendering it impossible for the King to conduct the government of the country without being dependent on a system of corruption and intrigue, highly detrimental to the safety, honour, and welfare of this kingdom; and whereas the continuance of such abuses would be treason against the people and little short of treason against the King:
And whereas it is highly expedient and necessary that all such abuses should be reformed, and the Commons of England restored to their due and undoubted share in the Legislature, and also that the reformation of such long existing abuses should be brought about with all due care, and in the most rational, just, and considerate manner:
729
The petition was then brought up. On the Motion that it be read,
Mr. D. W. Harvey
said, he thanked the hon. Member for Staffordshire for the candid manner in which he had yesterday evening communicated to him his intention of presenting this petition. Whatever other sentiments the House might entertain respecting the letter in question, they could not consider it defective in candour and openness. As to the petition, until he heard on the authority of the House itself that professional persons engaged in that branch of the profession to which he devoted himself were to be interdicted from pursuing the most respectable part of it, if they happened to be Members of the House of Commons, he should not believe that such was the law. He admitted frankly and at once that the statement in the letter, as it respected himself, was true. If it were declared to be contrary to the law of Parliament, no one would bow more readily than himself to that decision. But the question was one of much greater importance than as it affected him individually. The consideration of it ought to be co-existent with the consideration of a very broad species of reform. Whatever principle on the subject the House might
And whereas for the accomplishment of the great ends and important objects of this Act, it is expedient that a Committee of the House of Commons be forthwith appointed in the manner, and with the powers, hereinafter mentioned:
Be it therefore enacted by the King's Most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same,
That immediately after the passing of this Act, and in every subsequent Session within ten days after the assembling of Parliament for the despatch of business, a Committee shall be appointed by ballot or lot in the usual manner, consisting of twenty-one Members of the Commons' House of Parliament, with full power to do all things required by this Act, and the said Committee shall be called the Reform Committee, and shall retain its power till the prorogation of the Parliament in which it shall have been appointed:
That it shall be the duty of this Committee, in the first place, to order by any letter or paper writing signed by their Chairman, the Sheriffs of the different Counties, or the Returning Officer of every City and Borough in the United Kingdom, to report to the said Committee the number of Electors for the choosing of Members to sit in the House of Commons for the said City or Borough, dis-
730
tinguishing the number of resident Electors from the number of non-resident Electors, and stating the nature of the rights of voting in such City or Borough; and if necessary the said Committee shall call the said Officer before them, together with all books or papers in his possession relating to the same, and in like manner shall call before them and examine upon oath the said Officers and any other person or persons having, or claiming to have, any interest in the Election of the said Members, or any knowledge concerning the same.
And whereas, certain Corporations or Corporate Bodies do possess the right of franchise by Charter, and do by virtue of the King's Writ, return Members to serve in the Commons' House of Parliament; and whereas such Corporations or Corporate Bodies were, at the time of granting such Charters and Rights of Enfranchisement, composed of the most respectable persons resident in the towns or places to which such Corporations or Corporate Bodies belong, and the members of such Corporations or Corporate Bodies were for the most part chosen or elected into office by the Inhabitants of such towns or places, out of the most discreet and respectable of the townsmen or inhabitants of such towns or places: And whereas, by the lapse of time and from other causes, many of such towns and places have fallen into decay, and abuses have taken place in the mode of election of such
731
Corporations or Corporate Bodies, so that in some cases they have been, and now are elected from persons not resident in or connected with the towns or places to which the said Corporations or Corporate Bodies belong; and in other cases they are elected by each other, that is to say, by the Corporation or Corporate Body itself, the inhabitants or citizens of such towns or places having no voice or influence in such elections:
And whereas, it is an undoubted and established principle that all Charters of Franchise may be forfeited by mis-user or non-user:
And whereas it never was contemplated by the law that any City or Borough that had fallen into decay, and was unable to bear the burthen of sending Members to the House of Commons, and of paying them the wages of their attendance, should by any art, decree, or contrivance, fall into the power of a few persons or of a single individual to cause the return of a Member or Members to serve in Parliament, and therefore no method is pointed out by the law of putting an end to such abuse, except upon the petition of the said City or Borough, to be relieved of the burthen of sending Members to Parliament:
And whereas the first Writs
de expensis militum,
And whereas the exact amount, of such
732
l
l
l
l
wages have been fixed by Act of Parliament, and ought to be paid according to the difference and in the value of money at the present day:
And whereas from the most ancient times such qualifications have been required on the part of those who are to elect the said Knights, Citizens, and Burgesses, as should secure, as far as human wisdom could secure, the independent exercise of such important rights, and therefore the right of voting for Citizens and Burgesses, where there was no charter or custom to the contrary, was limited to all Householders within the same, paying scot and lot,
Be it therefore further enacted, that as soon as the said Committee shall have ascertained the fact that any city or borough shall have fallen into decay, and ceased to be such populous and wealthy place, as, according to this Act was originally intended to bear the burthen of sending a Member or Members to serve in Parliament, or that such city or borough shall by any means have fallen into a state that the return of a Member or Members to serve in Parliament, is become a proprietary interest, or is absolutely in the power and at the command of any one individual, or of a few individuals, whether sole or corporate, or that such return at the last election was obtained by means of money given to the electors, or that the electors of such city or borough are
733
hear, hear
Mr. Littleton
gave great credit to the hon. Gentleman for the candour and frankness with which he had expressed himself. He had not determined whether to move the reference of the Petition to a Select Committee, or to the Committee of Privileges. At present he would merely move that the Petition be printed.
Mr. Harvey
observed, that he had omitted to mention that before he had taken the step which he had adopted, he had taken the advice of a very eminent pleader, who was a Member of a Committee of which he was also a Member. That Gentleman had reminded him of the instance of Sir James Graham. The Committee on which they were sitting was a Gas-Light Committee; the hon. Member, when he (Mr. Harvey) asked him if he thought there would be any objection to the step which he contemplated, on the ground that a Mem-
so reduced in point of wealth and number, that they could not, and ought not, to bear the burthen of sending a Member or Members to serve in Parliament, and to pay the wages of attendance according to the value of money at the present day, or that any corporation of any city or borough to which a Charter has been granted to send a Member or Members to serve in Parliament have not been elected by the Burgesses at large, but elected by themselves or in any other manner, whereby the city or borough is deprived of the power of electing a Member or Members to serve in Parliament: in all or any of such cases, it shall be the duty of the Chairman of the said Committee to report such fact to the Secretary of State for the Home Department, and such report shall be deemed and taken to be the petition of the city or borough to which it relates, to be relieved of the burthen of sending a Member or Members to serve in Parliament, or where there has been a franchise by Charter to such city or borough, granted by the Crown or by Parliament, such report shall be deemed and taken to be a forfeiture of such franchise upon the ground of misuser, and it shall be the duty of such Secretary of State to announce in the Gazette that under and by virtue of this Act, such city or borough has ceased to send a Member of Members to serve in Parliament.
And it shall be the duty of the said Committee to begin making such reports as are
734
a laugh
Mr. Littleton
said, that the hon. Member was mistaken in supposing that he had any interest in the Coventry Canal. In other Canal Bills, however, he had certainly had an interest.
The Petition was then ordered to be printed.
COMMUTATION OF SENTENCES.]
Mr. Stanley
begged to call the attention of
herein before-mentioned in respect of those boroughs where the right of voting depends upon estates held by burgage tenure, and then in respect of those cities or boroughs where there are the fewest number of electors, and to proceed in such order throughout the whole of the cities and boroughs in the United Kingdom that send a Member or Members to serve in Parliament.
And as soon as it shall be declared in the Gazette that any city or cities, borough or boroughs, or any cinque port or other town that now sends a Member or Members to serve in Parliament, has ceased to send a Member or Members to serve in Parliament, it shall be the duty of the said Committee to select, and report to the said Secretary of State, that they have selected such populous, unrepresented, or inadequately represented town or place, including such hundreds, districts, or parishes surrounding such town or place as the said Committee shall think proper to point out, in order to fulfil the object and intentions of this Act, so that the said electors shall be fully equal to bear the burthen of paying a Member or Members the wages of attendance according to the value of money at the present day, and that there shall be no immediate danger of the franchise being abused by misuser or non-user. And it shall be the duty of the said Committee to point out in such report who shall be the
735
returning officer or officers of such town or place.
And be it further enacted, that in all such cases the right of voting shall be, and is hereby declared to be, in all the inhabitant householders assessed to any rate or tax, parochial or Parliamentary, within such town or place, or within such hundreds, districts, or parishes surrounding the same; and all such electors shall be assessed by the returning officer or officers thereof, for the payment of such wages as aforesaid, and of all expenses attending the return of a Member or Members to serve in Parliament, according to the value of the houses inhabited by such electors.
And it shall be the duty of the said Secretary of State upon the receipt of such report from the said Committee to cause the same to be forthwith published in the Gazette, and to transmit a copy thereof to the Lord High Chancellor of England, to the Speaker of the House of Commons, and to the returning officer or officers of such town or place, with directions forthwith to make the same as public as possible therein: and such report so made by the said Committee to the said Secretary of State according to the directions of this Act, shall be deemed and considered to be the Charter of enfranchisement of such city, borough, town, or place as shall be therein mentioned, for the purpose of sending a Member or Members to serve in Parliament.
736
hear, hear
And it shall be the duty of the Lord High Chancellor of England, in the event of a new Parliament, and of the Speaker of the House of Commons, while Parliament is sitting, to cause such writs to be sent to the Sheriffs of every county in which such town or place shall be situated, for the return of a Member or Members to serve in Parliament, as shall be in conformity with the provisions of this Act.
And it is hereby enacted, that the wages of attendance, as aforesaid, shall be well and truly paid to the said Member or Members, and that any agreement or understanding to the contrary shall render void the election of any Member that shall have entered into the same; and the amount of such wages, according to the present value of money, shall be deemed, and taken to be, after the rate of a day for every Member of any city, borough, town, or place, and a day for every Member of any county; and the same shall be assessed upon the electors, according to the value of the houses they inhabit, or of the lands, tenements, or hereditaments, which afford the right of voting.
And be it further enacted, that as soon as the said Committee shall have proceeded in manner as aforesaid, to have enfranchised such populous unrepresented, or inadequately represented cities, boroughs, or towns throughout the United Kingdom, in place of those that
737
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, that he believed the hon. Member had correctly stated all the facts of the case, as far as the Petitioner was concerned. The Petitioner, whose name was Wild, was capitally convicted in the year 1824, under
shall have been thus declared to have ceased to send Members to serve in Parliament, it shall be the duty of the said Committee, if any number of seats remain unfilled-up, as aforesaid, to select such counties in Scotland as are at present subject to alternate representation only, and afterwards such other counties in the United Kingdom as the said Committee shall think stand most in need of one or more additional Members, and thereupon to make their report to the said Secretary of State; and it shall be the duty of the said Secretary forthwith to publish the same in the Gazette, and to cause copies thereof to be sent to the Lord High Chancellor of England, the Speaker of the House of Commons, and the Sheriffs of the said counties for the purposes aforesaid; provided always, that before the said Committee shall thus add to the representation of any of the counties in the United Kingdom, save and except to those counties in Scotland, now unrepresented as aforesaid, it shall be the duty of the said Committee to select such hundreds, parishes, and districts, surrounding such cities or boroughs where the inhabitant householders now have the right of voting, and which city or borough shall not fall within any of the reasons above-mentioned, to justify the said Committee, according to the meaning and intention of this Act, in making any report concerning the same to the said Secretary of State, so that the inhabitant householders in
738
hear, hear
the said hundreds, parishes, and districts, assessed to any rate or tax, parochial or parliamentary, shall, together with the present electors in such city or borough, be fully equal to bear the burthen of paying the' wages of attendance as aforesaid; and upon such selection to report the same to the said Secretary of State; and it shall be the duty of the said Secretary forthwith to publish the same in the Gazette, and transmit copies thereof as aforesaid, and for the like purposes.
And it is hereby declared, that all such inhabitant householders shall be electors at the next, and at all future elections for the said city or borough, and shall be assessed accordingly, in manner aforesaid.
And be it further enacted, that if, notwithstanding the obvious intent and meaning of this Act, to confer upon every householder as aforesaid, in the United Kingdom, the right of voting for a Member or Members to serve in Parliament, any such householder shall find himself not included in any of the hundreds, parishes, or districts, selected in any case by the said Committee as aforesaid, it shall be in the power of such householder to vote at the next and all future elections for a Member or Members to serve in Parliament in the city, borough, town, or place, that shall happen to be the nearest to the residence of such householder, provided he shall not be entitled to vote for the county at large, and that before
739
tendering his vote, he shall have given notice in writing that he is ready and willing to be assessed as aforesaid, and such notice shall be given to the returning officer of such city, borough, town, or place:
And whereas, when the right of voting for Knights or Members for counties to serve in Parliament was limited to freeholders, leaseholds for long terms of years were unknown, and copyholders were absolutely dependant on the will of their lords:
And whereas, in that part of the united kingdom called Scotland, a system has crept in of separating the freehold or superiority from the property, whereby voters have been created who may possess no land whatever within the county, and moreover much landed property is now held by what is called feu-right for long terms of years, and quite independent of the will of the Lords or superiors; and all such property, like the said leaseholds and copyholds in England, is entirely unrepresented, contrary to the fundamental principles of the Constitution:
And whereas, many freeholders, whose lands, tenements, or hereditaments happen to be situate in any city, borough, or other place, which is a county of itself, may be unrepresented:
Be it therefore further enacted, that all such freeholders last above mentioned shall he entitled to rote at the next, and all subsequent
740
elections, for the county at large, within which such city, borough, town, or other place, shall be situate, the same as if their lands, tenements, or hereditaments, were situate in the said county, and that all persons who shall hold lands, tenements, or hereditaments, by copy of Court Roll, or under and by virtue of any leases, or feu-rights for ninety-nine years, or for any other term of years, provided such leases or feu-rights for such other term of years shall be renewable from time to time for ever at the will of the leasee or feuar, or by virtue of any lease or feu-right for any term of years, whereof not less than twenty-one shall be to come and unexpired at the time of such persons tendering their votes, shall be entitled to vote at the next and at all subsequent elections for a Member or Members to serve in Parliament for that county within which such lands or hereditaments are respectively situated in the same manner as if such persons had a freehold estate in such lands, tenements, or hereditaments.
And it is hereby declared, that the right of voting in any county for a Member or Members to serve in Parliament, shall in no case whatever be hereafter created, by any such contrivances of separating the superiority from the properly, nor shall such right be hereafter exercised by any person not in possession of the property, as well as the superiority; but all persons now in possession of such rights of
741
voting as arise from the superiority alone, distinct from the property, shall be entitled to vote at the next and at all subsequent elections for the city, borough, town, or place, that shall be nearest to the place of residence of such persons, provided such notice shall be given to the returning officer thereof in respect of assessment, as is hereinbefore mentioned.
And be it further enacted, that no Burgess, or other person now having a right to vote in any city, borough, or place, for any Member or Members to serve in Parliament, shall again be allowed to exercise such right, unless he be resident within the same; and as it is not the intention of this Act to disfranchise any person whatever, it is hereby declared, that all such non-resident Burgesses, shall be entitled to vote at the next and all subsequent elections for the city, borough, town, or place, that shall be nearest to the place of resilience of such persons, provided such notice shall be given to the returning officer thereof, in respect of assessment, as is hereinbefore mentioned.
And whereas, it is expedient to prevent the present enormous expense often attending elections both in towns and counties; be it therefore further enacted, that it shall be the duty of the said Committee to make such regulations, as to counties, respecting the places in each county at which the poll, if demanded, shall be adjourned after the two
742
Sir C. Wetherell
confirmed the statement made by the right hon. Gentleman. The case had been referred to him officially when he was Attorney General, and he had given it as his opinion that a sentence of death might be commuted for perpetual imprisonment; but that any second commutation would be illegal.
Colonel Davies
said, that this individual had been wounded in the head, and when in liquor he was insane; as the persons in New South Wales had an equal value for their lives as the people of England, it was as absurd to allow the prisoner to go free in one country as in the other.
Mr. Peel
said, that no man was in any danger from the prisoner, except an individual against whom he entertained some, particular feelings of revenge. The House, he trusted, would pause before they asked for papers in a matter so exclusively belonging to the prerogatives of the Crown.
Mr. Stanley
read a part of the Petition;
first days of the election; and as to large and populous towns, respecting the manner in which the numbers of the electors in each town may be increased and apportioned, or such other regulations as the said Committee may think proper for the sake of putting an end to all great expenses, and of rendering the right of voting as convenient and as efficient as possible. And such regulations shall be reported to the Secretary of State, to be pub-listed in the
Gazette,
And be it further enacted, that an Act passed in the 9th year of his present Majesty, entitled "An Act to regulate the mode of taking the poll at the election of Members to serve in Parliament for cities, boroughs, and ports in England and Wales, and all other Acts whereby the expense of erecting booths or polling places for the election of any Member or Members to serve in Parliament, is put upon the candidate, or on the person putting such candidate in nomination, are hereby repealed.
And whereas, by repealing a modern Act of Parliament, namely, the 1st of Geo. I. commonly called the Septennial Bill, and by the repeal of another Act still more modern, namely 14th George III. c. 58, which repealed the wise enactments of the 23rd Hen. VI. c. 14, and the 1st of Hen, V. requiring the electors
743
WAYS AND MEANS.]
The House, upon the Motion of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, resolved itself into a Committee of the whole House upon the Ways and Means.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
then moved—first, "That, in order to make good the Supply voted to his Majesty, the sum of 2,500,000
l
l
The Motions were passed, and the Report was ordered to be received on Monday next.
SUPPLY—REDUCTIONS.]
The order of the day for a Committee of the whole House to consider further of the Supply having been read,
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, in moving that the Speaker do leave the Chair, in order to enable the House to go
and the elected to be resident within their respective counties., cities, and boroughs, the purity of representation would be greatly increased, and those laws restored which ought never to have been repealed.
Be it therefore further enacted, that from and after the expiration of the present Session of Parliament, the said Act made in the first year of the reign of his late Majesty, King George the First, entitled, "An Act for enlarging the time of continuance of Parliaments appointed by an Act made in the sixth year of the reign of King William and Queen Mary," and also the said Act made in the fourteenth year of the reign of his late Majesty George the Third, entitled, "An Act for repealing an Act made in the first year of the reign of King Henry the Fifth, so much of several Acts of the eighth, tenth, or twenty-third years of King Henry the Sixth, as relates to the residence of persons to be elected Members to serve in Parliament, or of the persons by whom they are chosen," shall be, and the same are hereby wholly repealed and declared to be null and void to all intents and purposes whatsoever, as if the said Acts had never been had or made. Provided always, that whenever any city, borough, or port is now entitled by Charter to choose from themselves and others, a Member or Members to serve in Parliament, it shall be the duty of the said Committee, notwithstanding any thing
744
contained in this Act, by their report as aforesaid, to confirm the said right of choosing from others to such city, borough, or port, or to transfer such right to such other town as they may select to fill up the place of such city, borough, or port, according to the directions of this Act. And it is hereby declared that the fact of any such resident inhabitant of any city, borough, or place, being elected to serve in Parliament, shall be held to make such inhabitant free of such city, borough, or place, for the purpose of satisfying the said Act passed in the first year of King Henry the Third, hereinbefore mentioned.
And whereas, from the time of the reign of King Henry the Third, to the ninth year of the reign of Queen Anne, there was no law to prevent such Citizens and Burgesses from sitting in Parliament as might not be in possession of freehold or copyhold estates of the annual value of three hundred pounds:
And whereas it is expedient that the laws of England touching the representation of the Commons of England, should be restored to the state in which they stood for so many hundred years; and that cities and boroughs should not be bound down to make choice of landed men, inasmuch as such landed men may not be always found in the said cities and boroughs, and therefore the electors thereof should be at liberty to elect such persons among them as have the same interests, know-
745
hear
ledge, and feelings as themselves: and whereas, by an Act passed in the 12th and 13th year of the reign of his Majesty King William 3rd, entitled "An Act for the further limitation of the Crown, and the better securing the rights and liberties of the subject," it was among other things enacted "That no person who has an office or place of profit under the King, or receives a pension from the Crown, shall be capable of serving in the House of Commons," and by the same Act it was solemnly declared that the laws of England are the birthright of the people thereof:"
And whereas this wise provision for the better securing the rights and liberties of the people, has been entirely defeated by an Act passed in the 6th year of the reign of her late Majesty Queen Anne,
Be it therefore further enacted, that so much of the Act passed in the ninth year of the reign of Queen Anne entitled "An Act for securing the freedom of Parliaments by the farther qualifying the Members to sit in the House of Commons," as renders it necessary for every citizen or burgess to have an estate of freehold or copyhold of the annual value of 300
l
746
and render more effectual the Laws relating to the qualification of Members to sit in the House of Commons," and all those contained in an Act passed in the fifty-ninth year of his late Majesty King George 3rd, entitled "An Act for further regulating the qualification of Members to serve in the United Parliament of Great Britain and Ireland;" and also that so much of the Act passed in the 6th year of the reign of Queen Anne, entitled "An Act for the security of her Majesty's person and Government, and of the succession to the Crown of Great Britain in the Protestant line," as enables any person or persons accepting offices or places of profit under the King to be re-elected, is hereby repealed; and it is declared that the said enactment in the Act passed in the 12th and 13th year of the reign of King William 3rd, was meant to extend to all offices or places of profit under the King that then existed, or that should thereafter exist, and the said enactment is hereby extended to the same accordingly.
And whereas it is expedient that no modern Act touching the freedom of election or the eligibility of Members to serve in Parliament should be suffered to disgrace the Statute-book, if the same shall have been made in any particular case, and from personal motives towards any individual, and particularly where the rights and interests of a large and learned body of men have been thereby improperly affected:
747
l
l
l
l
And whereas An Act passed in the forty-first year of his late Majesty King George 3rd, entitled, "An Act to remove all doubts respecting the eligibility of persons in holy orders to sit in the House of Commons," was passed for a particular case, against a single individual, and does affect the rights of a large and learned body of men, and by its then
ex post facto
Be it therefore further enacted, that the said Act shall be cancelled and taken off the file and records of the Statute Book, or otherwise defaced and obliterated that the same may not be visible in after ages, and the said Act is hereby wholly repealed and declared to be null and void to all intents and purposes.
And whereas it is expedient and highly necessary that effectual means should be taken to secure the due attendance of the Members of the said Committee: Be it therefore further enacted, that not less than fifteen Members of the said Committee shall always be present at each sitting, and that the Chair shall be taken in succession, that all the expenses of witnesses; and all other expenses necessary for the carrying this Act into full execution, shall be paid in the same manner as in all other parliamentary inquiries; that in no case shall the time of the said Committee be occupied in hearing counsel, nor shall any unnecessary
748
l
l
l
delay take place; and upon complaint of any Member of the House of Commons, it shall be the duty of the Speaker to give such directions under his hand, respecting the sittings of the said Committee, and of the attendance of the Members thereof, as shall secure the due execution of this Act.
And be it further enacted, that it shall be the duty of the said Committee to direct how and by what persons the assessments herein before-mentioned may most conveniently be raised and levied on the electors, and how all other things necessary to give effect to this Act are to be done and executed, and to report the same to the said Secretary of State, and it shall be the duty of the said Secretary of State to give notice of the same to the proper authorities, and to see that all the directions transmitted to him by the said Committee are duly executed and performed.
And be it further enacted, that it shall be in the power of the said Committee to send for and examine upon oath such witnesses as they may think proper, and that all the Members of the said Committee shall themselves take the following Oath:—
"I do solemnly promise and swear, that laying aside all private interests or motives, I will, to the best of my judgment, faithfully execute all the provisions of the Act under which I have been appointed a Member of the Reform Committee, according to the plan and
749
l
l
l
l
obvious meaning of the said Act, as set forth in the preamble and enactments of the same, and if it shall appear to me that any improvement can be made in the said Act for the better fulfilling the clear intentions of the Legislature as therein expressed, I will not fail to propose that such improvement shall be reported to the House of Commons, or to vote for it if proposed by others, and that in a matter of such importance, as restoring to the House of Commons the perfect confidence of the nation, and securing for ever the rights and liberties of the people, I will consider it ray duty to be regular and punctual in my attendance' on the said Committee, sickness or any other unavoidable cause alone preventing such attendance."
And whereas, in the present distressed and alarming state of the country, it may not be safe to wait for the deliberate investigations and reports of the said Committee, as required by this Act,
Be it therefore further enacted, that in case of a dissolution of the present Parliament before the said Committee shall have reported upon every city, borough, and port, in the United Kingdom, and that such report shall have been published in the Gazette, by the said Secretary of State, in manner before mentioned, no writ for the election of Citizens or
750
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
Burgesses, shall be sent to the following places Old Sarum, Gatton, Westbury—
*
And be it further enacted, that writs in place of the before mentioned writs shall be sent by the said Secretary of State, together with a sufficient number of copies of this Act to the Sheriff's of such counties as the King, with the advice of the Privy Council, shall think proper, and the said Sheriffs shall be commanded to return such number of Citizens and Burgesses for such large, populous, unrepresented, or inadequately represented towns, the same being fully able to bear the burthen of paying the wages of attendance as aforesaid, as shall be specified in the said writs; and the said Sheriffs shall be further commanded to give notice to such persons as may be appointed to be the returning officer or officers of such towns or to the inhabitants thereof, as publicly as possible, that returns of all Members to serve in Parliament are to be made by the majority of votes of the inhabitant householders of such towns, assessed to any tax, parochial or parliamentary, and who shall agree to be assessed to the wages of attendance as aforesaid.
And be it further enacted, that all the pro-
*
751
l
visions of this Act, as to the right of voting, right of sitting in the House of Commons, and in respect of all other matters and things therein contained, shall be in full force and virtue the same as if the said Committee had made the reports required by this Act.
And with respect to all other cities, boroughs, or ports, which now send a Member or Members to Parliament, the same directions shall be sent by the said Secretary of State to the returning officers thereof, so that the elections may be made therein by such inhabitant house-holders, as aforesaid.
752
l
l
l
hear.
And all the provisions of this Act in respect of towns and counties, and all other provisions of this Act, shall be in full force and virtue.
And it is hereby declared, that nothing in this Act shall be construed to extend to the Universities of Oxford, Cambridge, or Dublin, and that all cities, boroughs, ports, or towns in the United Kingdom that do send a Member or Members to serve in Parliament, are intended to be included in the provisions of this Act, and are included accordingly.
753
l
l
l
hear
l
l
754
Mr. Hume
said, that either he must have explained himself very imperfectly, or the right hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer must have strangely misunderstood him. He had never maintained the opinions attributed to him by the right hon. Gentleman. What he had said was, that no adequate reduction could be effected on those items—that nothing could be thus done which would afford the people relief; nor was he in the least disposed to retract this assertion. He would not acknowledge he was mistaken. In the first place, he thought the right hon. Gentleman had made an erroneous statement. He (Mr. Goulburn) said the present Estimates were lower than any since the year 1804; but he (Mr. Hume) found that so far was this from being the case, that the reduction was not that of one year, but of a series of years. He hoped, therefore, the House would not suffer itself to be led away by the erroneous statements of the right hon. Gentleman. Many of his assertions were more erroneous; as, for instance, he had stated that the Estimates of this year were 200,000
l
l
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
—No, no.
Mr. Hume
said, that if this fact were contradicted, he must beg that the balance sheet be read.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
explained, that the balance sheet was merely an account of the expenditure during the year past, and never tallied with the Estimates, In the present
755
l
Mr. Hume
, in continuation, said, he was quite aware of that as well as of the fact that Ministers were in the habit of using the Estimates or the balance sheets as best suited their purpose. Now he begged to call the attention of the House to the condition they were in in the years 1822 and 1823. In the year 1822 the total expenditure for Army, Navy, Miscellaneous, and Extraordinaries was 16,000,000
l
l
l
l
l
hear, hear.
l
l
l
l
l
756
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
hear
757
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
758
hear, hear.
hear, hear
l
hear, and a laugh.
l
759
l
l
l
l
hear
l
Lord Althorp
said, he would not withhold his praise from the reductions as far as they went; they certainly were greater than he expected, but yet he was bound to say they were not sufficient when he considered the distressed state of the country. [
hear
hear, hear
760
hear
Sir E. Knatchbull
allowed, that the reduction exceeded his expectations, and he gave the Administration credit for wishing to reduce the expenditure of the country to the utmost possible limits, consistent with what they deemed the efficient maintenance of the Civil and Military Establishments. [
hear
hear, hear
761
hear, hear
hear
hear, hear.
Mr. W. Horton
said, the allusion in the King's Speech to the distress of the country was vague and unsatisfactory. There were three classes suffering at present. The landowner, who did not get his rents; the capitalists, who had to endure a diminution of profits; and lastly, the labourers and artizans—the most numerous of the three—who were compelled to work for their support. Now he contended that unless a division were made in this triplicate character of distress, little could be done. Every man must agree with the hon. Member for Montrose (Mr.
762
763
Mr. Baring
said, that the attention of every body was directed to the distress now prevalent, and every body both within and without that House looked out for some measure of relief. No persons at all acquainted with the state of the country could deny that the distress was very general; but if they looked to the reductions the Government would be able to make as a permanent source of relief,
764
hear hear! from the Treasury benches
765
766
767
hear
768
hear, from Mr. Hume
769
hear, hear
Mr. Alderman Waithman
said, that the efforts of any hon. Member to procure retrenchment must be ineffectual without the aid of the Government; and yet retrenchment they must have, and that of a more extensive kind than any that had been hitherto adopted. He agreed with those hon. Gentlemen who said that these reductions would not give material relief to the country; but at the same time he felt assured, that without them no relief whatever would be obtained. The causes of the distress had not been sufficiently examined. How was it that some were abounding in plenty, while others were deeply distressed? that the warehouses of the manufacturer were over-stocked, and yet that thousands were in want of the articles of his manufacture? In this condition, how small was the relief that the reduction of one million of taxes would give the country! With respect to the Estimates, he thought it was incumbent on the Government to act with a view to the greatest possible economy; for though the relief was but small, still it was absolutely wanted. There were some taxes that ought more than others to be immediately abolished. In his opinion no tax bore more hardly on the mass of the people than the House and Window Taxes,
770
An hon. Member
Mr. Maberly
commenced by referring to what had fallen from the hon. Member for Callington, whom he had expected, and had not been disappointed in that expectation, to be merely the echo of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. On one point, however, like the celebrated echo of the sister kingdom, he had even said more than was put into his mouth, and had suggested a plan which the right hon. Gentleman would never have thought of proposing. The hon. Member for Calling-ton had been one of the last to support the now exploded fallacy of the Sinking Fund, which, if maintained at all, should be preserved, not by paying with one hand and borrowing with the other, but by an actual
bona fide
771
l
l
l
772
l
l
l
l
l
773
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
774
Mr. Cutlar Fergusson
had been disappointed by the statement of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, not merely at the amount of reduction, but at the mode of its application. He thought that both the Army and Navy cost the country too much, more especially after Ireland had been pacified, and all chance of war in Europe was at an end, in consequence of the subjugation of Turkey. In Ireland alone, a reduction of the military force might be made to the extent of 5000 men.
Mr. W. Smith
congratulated Ministers, that the well-applied exertions of the noble Duke at their head had placed the country in such a situation, that even if much larger savings were made it could look an enemy in the face without apprehension. Thirty or forty years ago it had been said that the Army of England was the ridicule of the Continent, but now it was at once a source of terror and admiration. With regard to our colonies, an important saving might be effected, for the best of all reasons—because they were not worth keeping at their present expense. Most hon. Members seemed afraid to look the National Debt in the face—it had grown to such a giant size, that it certainly was not a pleasant object of contemplation; but we could not make it less by not venturing to estimate its height. He admitted that it was advisable to have a small available surplus, but it was mere folly to devote it, under the delusion of a Sinking Fund, to the supposed payment of a debt exceeding seven hundred millions. Instead of these vain attempts to reduce the Debt, the wisest plan would be to endeavour to increase the comforts of the people.
The Question was then put that the Speaker leave the Chair, and being carried, the House resolved itself into a
COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY.]
Sir H. Hardinge
proceeded to state the Army Estimates for the ensuing year. He should pursue the
775
l
l.,
l
l
776
l.,
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
777
l
l
l
l
loud cheers
l
778
l
l
l
l
779
780
l
Colonel Davies
rose, but for a considerable time the noise of Members leaving the House rendered the observations of the hon. and gallant Member totally inaudible. He declared that he should not have troubled the Committee, were he not influenced by a deep sense of the importance of the savings which might be effected in those
781
renewed and increased disturbance
l
much confusion and frequent cries of "Order order."
Mr. Hume
said, if the Committee were not disposed to listen to the observations of his hon. and gallant friend, he should move and divide upon it, that the Chairman do report progress, and ask leave to sit again. If a full assemblage of the House such as that were not disposed to listen to the well-founded objections which his hon. and gallant friend had to offer to the Estimates then on the Table, the only remedy left was to move, that progress be reported. He appealed to the Chairman of the Committee, to keep the peace—He appealed to hon. Members for decency's sake to listen to what might be urged; and he hoped the hon. Members near him would support him in moving to postpone the consideration of the Estimates till the House could meet in a better spirit, and more disposed to listen to the dictates of common sense and common decency, and the obvious suggestions of duty in promoting economy, [
hear
Colonel Davies
then proceeded to state his objections to the Estimates. He could not be brought he said to think that the country was in that high and pal my state which could warrant, the high amount at which the military force of the country was fixed in those Estimates. There never was a period at which our foreign relations placed us in a more disgraceful situation. [
No, no
782
hear.
783
hear, hear! and a laugh.
hear hear
784
hear, hear.
Mr. Hobhouse
said, he should support the Amendment of his gallant friend, although the address of the right hon. Gentleman was calculated to make converts of them all. For his own part he preferred a good weak Government to a good strong Government, because from the former concessions were sometimes obtained, while with the latter they had never been able to make head against abuses. It was from what was gained from a good weak Government that he expected the salvation of this country would one day or another be insured. The reason for which he rose to trouble the House at that particular moment was this: He wished to ask the right hon. Gentleman, who had that night come forward with an explanation of the general reduction of Expenditure for the year, whether it was or was not his intention to make any reduction in the amount of taxation? [
hear, hear.
785
hear, hear
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, he rose to say a very few words in reply to the questions of the hon. Member for Westminster. He confessed that if, consistently with his view of the duty he owed the public service, he could give an explicit answer to that question, he should be most happy to comply with his desire, The House had already seen the readiness with which he had acceded to the general desire, in laying before it, at the earliest period, a statement of the amount of reductions; and he trusted he might, from; that fact, be credited for the assurance that he should feel equally ready to convey information with respect to the application of the saving, did he not feel that it was totally out of his power to state what might be the ulterior views of the Government on that subject, [
hear
hear, hear
Sir John Wrottesley
approved of the silence preserved by the right hon. Gentleman on this subject, and observed, that if it were once known the saving was to be applied to the reduction of taxation, all
786
hear, hear.
Mr. Western
rose amid cries of "question." He said he merely wished to express his belief that Ministers were anxious to make every reduction in their power, but he should be glad to know why there was a difference of six thousand men in the Estimates of 1822 and 1830?
Sir Ronald Ferguson
, as a military man of some standing, and as one who had some knowledge of the Colonies, felt himself bound to say, he did not think they could do with a single regiment of the line less than the number they possessed The hon. Member for Worcester had made some observations on the number of men kept up for the Colonies, but he recollected well that the hon. Member, and a number of friends whom he saw around him, had, in 1822, complained of the miseries to which regiments were subjected by remaining so many years abroad without relief. A better system had since been adopted, and the regiments were regularly relieved. Before that, however, it was not unusual for a regiment of the line to rot away in the West Indies, or to remain fifty years in the East; but there were no soldiers now who could not claim relief after being a fixed time abroad, and was not entitled to remain five years and a half at home. How, he would ask, were these regulations to be preserved, and these regiments to be relieved, unless they had a competent force at home? The hon. Member for Worcester had recommended the use of the colonial regiments, to save the expense of troops of the line. He (Sir Ronald) had seen a good deal of these colonial troops, and a more useless body of men he never knew in any country. It had been recommended to them to incorporate the officers of the line with the colonial troops; but he thought the experiment would be useless. They had the 6th regiment, the African corps, and the West-India corps; but although those regiments contained many highly honourable men, it was found, in too many instances, that
787
hear
Colonel Davis
, in explanation, said he knew the colonial corps were, in many cases, a set of the greatest outcasts in the Army; but he asked if the East India colonial troops were so bad, or if it were not practicable to adopt the system, without the necessity of officering the regiments in the manner alluded to?
Sir R. Wilson
, after complimenting the lucid analysis of intricate accounts produced by the Secretary at War, observed, that he did not think the number of men for the Colonies too large, although it might be another question whether it were expedient to retain so many Colonies. [
hear, hear
hear
Sir Henry Hardinge
said, that the East India Company paid 60,000
l
Mr. Stanley
objected to the amount of men retained to supply the place of those in the Colonies, which he recollected very well the Secretary at War stated, in his examination before the Finance Committee, to be in the proportion of four to six—that is, that for every sixty men we had in the Colonies, it was necessary to keep forty in this country. He hoped, however, the hon. Member would not press his Motion to a division, because it would imply a want of confidence in the Government, which the statements and hints of the Chancellor of the Exchequer that evening, if he had not misunderstood them, did not deserve. If, however, the hon. Member proposed the appointment of a Committee to follow up the plan of the Finance Committee, and consider what reductions could be made, he should have his cordial support. If the hon. Member pressed his Motion to a division, he would vote with him, although he hoped not to be called on to do so.
788
Lord Althorp
thought the roops of the line might be reduced; and although those of the colonies were not so good, in the present state of the country they might be found sufficient. If the Amendment were pressed, he should vote with his hon. friend.
Sir H. Vivian
defended the Estimates, and contended that the Cavalry, the effective services of which had recently been very apparent, were reduced as low as it was possible to reduce a force which could not easily be again raised if once disbanded.
Mr. Hume
said, the vote of that night involved the question of whether the country were or were not to have any relief. Could any Member of that House say that his constituent or constituents, if he had more than one [
Hear, and a laugh
l
Mr. Maberly
was of opinion, that if the Finance Committee, with a mass of evidence before it, had not been allowed to prosecute the subject of reduction, there was no hope of any good from the establishment of another Committee. If the question were to be decided only with reference to the convenience of the Army, there would be no reduction; but it was not by the convenience of the Army that the question ought to be decided. He would say, that the Guards might be made available, and then some Regiments of the line might be diminished. He pressed on the attention of the House the propriety of making every reduction possible, and declared his intention to vote for the Amendment.
Lord Palmerston
said, he could not give a silent vote on the occasion, and he was anxious to state, that he could not consider it consistent with his public duty to vote for the Amendment which had been proposed by the hon. Member opposite. He was quite convinced of the necessity which existed for retrenchment and reduction in every quarter, in order if possible to relieve the distresses of the coun-
789
Mr. Labouchere
said, he should certainly vote for the Amendment. He found it difficult to persuade himself that five thousand men were necessary for the preservation of the provinces of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, [
hear
hear
790
loud cries of hear, hear
Sir H. Vivian
remarked that there were four regiments of Guards in this country always ready for foreign service.
Mr. W. Duncombe
said, the country was looking with the greatest anxiety for retrenchment, and he was convinced that the reductions proposed by his Majesty's Government would not at all satisfy the people, but would cause infinite disappointment throughout the country. He was sorry to hear the declaration from the Chancellor of the Exchequer, that he could not say at present that he should be able to come down to the House to propose any reduction of taxation.
Sir George Murray
wished to say a few words, in consequence of what had been; stated by some hon. Members in the course of the debate. The hon. Gentleman opposite said, that the Canadas were governed upon a garrison system. To show that was not the fact, it was sufficient to state that the Military force there now was the same as in 1792, though the population had considerably increased since that time, and the possessions of the Crown had been enlarged, not by the addition of new territory, but by the bringing into cultivation that which had lain waste and neglected. We had since then had a quarrel in that quarter of the world, and it was obviously necessary to maintain our Military establishment there at least upon the scale of 1792. With respect to the case of the officers of Militia mentioned by the hon. Member for St. Michael, all he (Sir G. Murray) could, state to the House regarding it at present was this—that the case of these officers had been referred to the present Governor,
791
hear, hear
792
hear
Mr. Hume
then moved, that instead of eighty-eight thousand eight hundred and forty-eight men, the number be seventy eight thousand eight hundred and forty-eight.
Mr. C. N. Pallmer
said, he was one of those who had refrained from voting with the Member for Montrose (Mr. Hume) upon a former evening, though he had felt it impossible to vote against him. He had held a suspended opinion, founded upon the hope that his Majesty's Ministers would that evening have come
793
794
Mr. Hume
, observing that the real number the Committee was called upon to vote for was eighty-one thousand, one hundred and sixty-four men only, he should alter his amendment to seventy-one thousand, one hundred and sixty-four. He said that in the year 1821 he had divided the Committee seventy-five times on the Army Estimates, as the noble Lord (Palmerston) well knew, for it had interrupted his parties; yet at the end of the Session, not one farthing of the expenditure was reduced. But an address to his Majesty was carried, and in two months after thirteen thousand men were reduced; and in the following year, 1822, the number was only sixty eight thousand, eight hundred. Now, however, the number was three-thousand more. He held this out to the House as a precedent.
Lord Althorp
said, that he should be very willing to vote for a reduction of five thousand men, but he could not concur with his hon. friend in thinking so many as ten thousand could be reduced.
Mr. Cutlar Ferguson
concurred with the noble Lord in thinking that five thousand men might be spared; but if the Amendment were pressed to the extent of ten thousand, he should vote against it.
Sir H. Hardinge
observed, that although the hon. Member for Aberdeen had stated that the number of men in 1822 was only sixty-eight thousand, if he had recourse to his arithmetic, and added the Veteran establishment and the colonial corps, which were not included in the Estimates for that year, he would probably find the number in 1822 was upwards of seventy-five thousand.
Mr. Hume
consented to alter his Amendment again, by substituting 76,164, instead of 61,164.
A division then took place, when the number swere—For the Amendment 57; Against it 167. Majority against the Amendment 110.
The original resolution was agreed to.
Sir H. Hardinge
suggested, that as the number of men was agreed to, probably the hon. Member for Montrose would have no objection to go on with the other resolutions, for their pay.
Mr. Hume and Mr. Maberly
objected,
795
HOUSE OF LORDS,
Monday, February 22, 1830.
STATE OF THE NATION.]
The Earl of Rosebery
said, that seeing a noble Earl in his place, who had given notice of a Motion of the utmost importance for Thursday next, in general terms, on the State of the Country, he wished to ask whether the noble Earl had any objection to state more specifically what the precise object of his Motion would be.
Earl Stanhope
begged to state, that the Motion he intended to submit to their Lordships on Thursday next, would be drawn up in the very terms in which he had already announced it; namely, "that; the House resolve itself into a Committee to take into consideration the internal state of the Country." By using the words "internal state of the country" he wished to exclude all discussion of its foreign relations.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Monday, February 22, 1830.
MINUTES.] On the Motion of Sir T. ACLAND, a new Writ was ordered for a Member to serve in Parliament for the Borough of Rye, in the room of H. Bonham, Esq. who had accepted the Chiltern Hundreds. A new Writ was also ordered for a Knight of the Shire to serve in Parliament for the county of Essex, in the room of Sir Eliab Harvey deceased.—Lord MORPETH gave notice, that he would on the 4th of March move for a repeal of 4th Geo. IV., which subjected to banishment persons who had been a second time convicted for libel. The Bill to prevent abuses in the Administration of the Poor-laws and Rates was read a first time.—The Paupers' Removal Bill was read a second time.—The Illusory Appointment Bill was read a second time.—Mr. LAMB obtained leave to bring in a Bill to regulate the performance of Dramatic Pieces, and to secure the rights of the Authors.
COURT OF ADMIRALTY (IRELAND).]
Sir J. Newport
, seeing the right hon. Secretary for the Home Department in his place, would take that opportunity of expressing a hope that the Report, which had been made with respect to the Admiralty Court in Ireland would not be allowed to remain on the Table without being acted upon.
Mr. Peel
, in reply, stated that the present was not a fit occasion for entering upon a general discussion respecting the Admiralty Court. He could assure the hon. Baronet that the Reports to which he alluded should be attended to. He felt himself called upon to say, that after the
796
hear, hear
PETITION OF THE JEWS.]
Mr. R. Grant
, in rising to present a Petition from the Jews, observed, that the Petition he held in his hand was the first application that had for the last eighty years been made by the collective body of the Jewish community to that House, for the purpose of being restored to their rights as British subjects. It was a Petition from the Jewish community, being native-born subjects of this realm. It was signed by five hundred and ninety seven individuals, all of whom resided in or near the City of London, the most of whom were persons of high station, influence, and respectability: the others were wealthy and substantial tradesmen. The Petition stated that the enactments which were imposed with respect to the enjoyment of certain offices, namely, the acts of Abjuration and Supremacy, bore upon them with extreme hardship. He was not going to discuss whether or not the prayer of the Petition should be granted, he only wished to put it to the House to say whether it were not well entitled to their serious consideration. The House would do well to inquire what were the grievances complained of, and who were the parties that, suffered under them. With regard to the nature of the particular grievances, it was scarcely necessary to add any thing to the statements contained in the Petition. The operation of the Oath of Abjuration and of the Declaration contained in the 9th of the King, had the effect of totally excluding Jews from seats in Parliament, from the enjoyment of the elective franchise, from all corporate and government offices, from the profession of the law, and from many subordinate situations. He implored the House to recollect that the body of the act, the operation of which went to exclude the Jews from the enjoyment of civil and political privileges, had nothing to do with their community directly; that the tests were not directed against them individually; but it happened that the words "on the true faith of a Christian" had been introduced, and it consequently followed that Jews could not subscribe the Declaration in that form: to which he
797
798
Mr. Ward
trusted, that he might be excused if he added to what had fallen from the hon. Member who presented the Petition, his humble testimony of the worthiness of the class of persons from which it proceeded. He had enjoyed opportunities of knowing a large proportion of the respectable Jews of London, and could say with perfect truth, that a more charitable and industrious class of persons did not exist. But it was not on the ground of their charity or industry alone that they were entitled to ask for concession: he believed that a safer concession could not be granted than that which was sought by this Petition. He should hold himself prepared to assist the hon. Member in forwarding the views of the petitioners.
Sir R. Inglis
said, two years ago, by the repeal of the Corporation and Test Acts, we separated the Church of England from the State: last year we separated the Protestant Religion from the Legislature by passing the Catholic Relief Bill: upon the latter occasion he had predicted that next year we should be called upon to separate Christianity itself from the State; and the present Petition bore out his prediction. He contended that whatever we had done with respect to Protestant dissent or Catholicism, we should at least preserve the connexion between Christianity and the Legislature inviolable. It appeared as if the honourable Member for the City of London contemplated the introduction of a Bill upon the subject of Jewish Disabilities; he (Sir R. Inglis) should regard the success of any Bill of that kind, as involving a separation of the last link that existed between the Legislature and the religion of the country. Not content with admission to the profession of the law, to corporate offices, &c., the Jews appeared, by their Petition, to demand admission to the highest executive situations in the State. It was not enough to say their number was small; it was well known that a small number of men, acting in concert, might exercise considerable influence, beneficial or otherwise, over the State. If Parliament were reformed, probably not one Jew could find his way into it (if eligible); but means existed at present, by which the entrance of Jews
799
Mr. O'Connell
wished to say one word. Instead of disapproving of the Petition in consequence of the principle which it involved, he thought it exactly what the House ought to approve of. Instead of separating the Legislature from Christianity, by conceding the claims of the Jews, we should prove ourselves still more Christian by doing as we would be done by, and carrying into effect the principle of perfect freedom of conscience,—a principle that already manifested its beneficial tendency, and which would be the more beneficial the more widely it was extended.
After an observation from Mr. R. Grant, the Petition, which was from certain Jews, praying that the peculiar grievances under which they laboured might be considered by the House, with a view to their removal, was read, and ordered to be printed.
REPORT OF WAYS AND MEANS.—QUARANTINE
On the Motion of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the order of the day for considering the Report of the Committee of Ways and Means having been read, Sir A. Grant brought up the Report.
On the question that it be read,
Mr. O'Connell
asked the right hon. the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether his Majesty's Government had been apprised of a law recently passed by the State of Georgia, imposing quarantine upon foreign vessels having on board free men of colour. By this regulation it would seem as if British subjects, not being white, were considered by the State of Georgia as a sort of pestilential objects: he wished to know whether steps had been taken to protect the rights of such individuals?
Mr. Peel
said, that Government had learned within the last few days (on the 12th of February), that the State of Georgia had lately passed an Act, imposing a quarantine of forty days upon vessels containing free persons of colour, and coming either from other States of the American Union or from foreign countries. The subject was now under consideration, having been referred to the King's Advocate, and he could not as yet speak explicitly upon
800
The Report was read, and the several Resolutions agreed to.
COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY.—ARMY ESTIMATES.]
The Chancellor
of the Exchequer having moved the order of the day for the further consideration of the Supply to be granted to his Majesty in Committee of Supply, the Speaker left the Chair.
Sir H. Hardinge
moved, that a sum of 3,015,3332. 2
s
d
Colonel Davies
entered his protest against the extravagant character of the Estimates: it was disgraceful to go on voting away millions when the country was suffering so much from distress. However, his right hon. friend should experience no more opposition from him in the voting of the Estimates: he did not care a farthing how it went: the other night he had not been fairly listened to, still less supported, when he attempted to go into the subject. He had no doubt, if the hon. Member for Cumberland had brought forward his Motion of disapprobation relative to the recent appointment of Treasurer of the Navy, that there would have been a large division against that appointment, because it was a million to one that any of those who might vote against the conduct of Ministers on this point would ever stand a chance of getting into the office; but as to the Army and Navy Estimates, the number who were interested in the question, remotely or directly, was so great as invariably to secure Ministers a large majority. When the House came to vote upon an office of 2,000
l
pseudo
801
Sir H. Parnell
said, he wished to make a remark upon the statement of the Chancellor of the Exchequer on a former evening, as to the amount of our expenditure upon which reductions could be made. The right honourable Gentleman said, that the whole amount of public expenditure subject to diminution was 12,000,000
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
802
Sir H. Hardinge
said, that if he had understood the hon. Baronet correctly, the hon. Baronet was of opinion that eighty-eight thousand men, rank and file, were more than sufficient, and that in consequence of some alterations that had lately taken place, the number might be reduced by six thousand or seven thousand men. But how long was it since these alterations had taken place? He had had the honour of receiving, through the courtesy of the hon. Baronet, a book on Financial Reform, which had proceeded from the pen of the hon. Baronet. The book had only been published a few days, and in it the hon. Baronet stated that the
803
Sir H. Parnell
said, that the gallant officer had not accurately stated what he had said elsewhere. The gallant officer had stated that he (Sir H. Parnell) had admitted elsewhere that eighty-seven thousand men were the proper number for the force of this country. Now he had expressly stated that we had a right to infer, from a comparison between the expense of our military force now and what it was in the peace preceding the war of 1793, that the present expense was much too great. He had stated, moreover, that the Finance Committee had been of the same opinion, and that if the Committee had been re-appointed it would no doubt have recom-
804
Sir John Wrottesley
was persuaded that our military force was too great, and that they ought to begin by reducing the number of men. He did not blame the Ministers for not making reductions,—it was the House of Commons that he blamed. It was the House that taxed the people, and not the Ministers. The Ministers brought down their Estimates, the House voted them, and when the Chancellor of the Exchequer afterwards came down with his Budget, the House might perhaps ask him to reduce the Taxes. The Chancellor of the Exchequer would of course reply, that that was not his place,—that he had only to find out ways and means. It was for the House, then, to make those reductions which the country needed. With respect to our military force, he had hoped now that there was a new and efficient police that the Guards might be done away with in the metropolis. He agreed, however, that the right hon. Secretary for the Colonies had, on a former evening, given a satisfactory explanation on this subject. The right hon. Secretary at War had stated that the number of battalions had not been increased since 1792, which was true; but the strength of the battalions had been increased. In 1792 a battalion consisted of about four hundred men: it now consisted of seven hundred and forty. In 1792 a regiment of Cavalry consisted of one hundred and ninety-six men; it now consisted of three hundred and five. He should propose that we should reduce our force by two battalions of Guards, by
805
The Marquis of Blandford
said, that he was fearful that in any observations he might make against the Ministers, his opposition might be, as it had been, attributed to factious motives. He begged however, once for all, to deny that charge most unequivocally. If that party which was generally known by the appellation of "Brunswickers" were to obtain the reins of power, and were to propose the repeal of the Catholic measure which passed last year, he would oppose such a proposition as stoutly as he had opposed the measure itself. [
hear, hear
hear
hear, hear
806
hear, hear
*
*
*
*
*
vena porta,
Sir G. Murray
said, that he was neither one of those who had attributed factious motives to the noble Marquis, nor did he approve the conduct of any who dealt in such imputations. There could be no doubt that every hon. Member had a right to give utterance to whatever opinion he entertained on public affairs, and he thought that that right was impeached as often as the expression of such opinions was attributed to any improper motives. The noble Marquis might be assured, therefore, that he (Sir G. Murray), widely as he differed from him, should never impute to him that he was actuated by factious motives. With respect to what had fallen from the hon. Baronet (Sir J. Wrottesley) and which had been the occasion of his rising, he begged to observe that he believed the duty at Windsor, Kew, and Hampton-court, had always been performed by the Guards.
807
Sir R. Heron
agreed that the retrenchments proposed by the Ministers were very small, but he did not think with the noble Marquis (Blandford) that the people would be at all disappointed, because he believed that the people had long since abandoned all hope of relief from those who called themselves their representatives. He thought that the Army Estimates were the best subject of any for reduction. [
hear
Sir J. Wrottesley
said a few words in explanation.
Mr. Maberly
said, that if the Finance Committee had been re-appointed, this subject would have been properly investigated, and the House would never have come to such votes as those to which it came on the last evening. They could now only make observations upon the Estimates,—they could not examine them. He contended that nothing could be more indefensible than to call upon the country to pay the East-India Company for twenty-thousand men. Great saving might also be made in the mode of paying general officers, and that without reducing their pay one sixpence, which he was not anxious to do. It was, however, of no use to make any statements upon the subject, because some gallant officer opposite would get up and contradict them, and no argument could be effectual in the teeth of a majority.
Mr. Hume
said, that he had been strongly
808
hear and laughter
hear and laughter
hear, hear
809
hear
hear, hear
810
hear, and a laugh
811
l
812
Some cries of "order, order.
l
l
s
d
l
l
s
d
l
s.,
l
813
l
l
l
l
l
l
d
s
s
d
814
s
d
d
l
l
l
l
815
d
s
d
d
s
d
s
d
816
s
l
817
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
On the Amendment being put from the chair,
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, he had no doubt but his right hon. friend the Secretary at War would be enabled to give the Committee a satisfactory explanation with respect to the details comprised in the latter part of the speech which had just been delivered by the hon. Member for Montrose. But in the preceding part of that speech the hon. Member had indulged in some observations of a very different nature, which he could not listen to without emotion and astonishment, as they were of a character such as had been never before uttered, within his recollection, in that independent and honourable assembly. When he heard the extraordinary language employed by the hon. Gentleman, he could not help thinking that the speaker stood before them in the uneasy character of a disappointed prophet, who desired some compensation for his inconsiderate declaration, that he expected no reduction
818
l
cheers and laughter
hear
hear, hear
819
hear
hear, hear
hear, hear
820
hear, hear
hear
cheers
hear, hear
821
cheers
Mr. Hume
, interrupting the right hon. Secretary, disavowed the inference which the right hon. Gentleman drew from his remarks, but he repeated that he was not inclined to retract a syllable of what he had said.
Mr. Peel
professed himself unable to understand what the hon. Member had intended to convey if his interpretation was erroneous. He had certainly stated 'that when Ministers, as in the late instance, were capable of procuring a corrupt majority, no other resource remained for the people, except an appeal to arms.' Language such as this was, in his opinion, open to no inference but. one. But if that address to the passions of a suffering people should be answered by their raising the standard of rebellion, what alternative, he demanded, would remain for Government but that of meeting it with prompt, powerful, and successful resistance? In that event, he apprehended, the hon. Member could hardly reconcile to his own conscience his declaration from his place in Parliament, that he should rejoice to hear of such resistance. [
hear, hear
hear
Colonel Davies
said, he had always heard that a total loss of temper indicated a consciousness of a defective cause, and he could not refrain from applying the
822
Mr. Peel
disclaimed having made the slightest allusion to the speech of the gallant officer, as he was not present on the occasion referred to, and might not have remembered it even if he were. [
laughter
Colonel Davies
proceeded to state his opinion that few of the majority in question had heard the arguments adduced, or were acquainted with the merits of the subject. He thought that it was unnecessary for the right hon. Gentleman to tax his hon. friend, the Member for Montrose, with having been absent during the earlier part of the evening, as no Member of that House was more regular in his attendance. He certainly, for one, felt no inclination to spirit up the suffering people to acts of violence, [
hear
Sir H. Hardinge
said, he should not be induced to swerve from the course which he had already prescribed for himself, or be influenced by the inflammatory invectives of the hon. Member for Montrose, to submit any measure which would operate harshly on the soldier. The suggestion for lowering their pay was repugnant, he had no doubt, to the better feelings of the Committee, and its wisdom in point of policy was at least very dubious. Participating fully in the indignation, which the speech alluded to had excited in the mind of his right hon. friend, he should proceed to refute, as concisely as he could, the misrepresentations advanced in that speech. The hon. Gentleman was mistaken when he described the pay of the soldier as having been increased since former times. In the year 1795, the pay with an increase of 2
d
823
s
d
l
824
l.
l
l
l
l
The Staff was less expensive this year than in 1822, by
£20,354
The Clerks of Public Departments, by
25,052
Medicines, by
11,936
The Military College, by
6,005
The Pay of General Officers, by
56,000
The Full-pay of Retired Officers, by
41,000
The Half-pay, by
149,951
The Foreign Half-pay, by
19,000
825
Mr. Denison
gave credit to Ministers for a sincere desire to economise; but the question of the necessity of maintaining the establishments, at their present point, remained. He felt satisfied that a considerable saving might still be made in the colonies; and sure he was that whatever reduction could be effected, in the present state of the country, ought to be attempted without delay.
Lord Althorp
said, it was alleged that it would be impossible to maintain the present high state of efficiency of the Army at a less expense than that stated in the Estimates presented. He believed that might be perfectly true; but he would ask the Committee whether the maintenance of that high state of efficiency were required? or, however desirable it might be, whether it were practicable to maintain that high degree of efficiency without inflicting upon the country an extent of distress which it was incapable of bearing? The right hon. Secretary opposite had said, that the proportion of Infantry as compared with Cavalry, was much greater in the British Army than in foreign Armies; that with us the infantry are as nine to one; while in foreign Armies they are as four to one; but the reason for that was obvious, the services on which our Army was employed being such as demanded a greater proportion of Infantry, therefore the Government had but small merit in adhering to a regulation convenient to themselves. As to the probability of our armies being again called on to perform duties which require an increased proportion of cavalry, he hoped that that time was not likely to return. He hoped that there was no
826
l
l
Mr. Monck
thought, that the pay of the soldiers might be very advantageously reduced from the 1
s
d
d
s
d
l
l
l
Mr. Hume
, adverting to what had fallen from the right hon. Secretary for the
827
Sir H. Hardinge
said, he had never once alluded to the Life Guards.
Mr. Hume
replied, that that was no answer to his speech. The right hon. Gentleman had asserted that there was no increase in the number of officers, placing them above the standard of 1792, and as that force was not wanted for the Colonies, it might, he conceived, be easily reduced. He came prepared with the Returns, which was the only way of meeting official Gentlemen—for some of that class would admit nothing that was not signed officially, and others even sometimes forgot their own signatures, therefore what he should say was not without authority. From that Return, it appeared that the force of the Life Guards in 1792 was six hundred and seventy-eight, and in the year 1828 it was one thousand one hundred and forty-four; was not that an increase, and in the most expensive species of force? By another return he saw that each Life Guardsman cost the country 75
l
l
828
l
l
829
cheers and laughter
cheers and laughter
830
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, that he had before felt satisfied that the hon. Member would, in his cooler and more candid moments, disavow or explain what fell from him. The event had shown that he had not made a false estimate of the hon. Gentleman's right feeling. He did not discuss the question of responsibility; he did not put any case hypothetically, but he thought he heard the hon. Gentleman say, that the
831
The Committee then divided:—For the Amendment 27; Against it 159; Majority 132.
The Resolution was then agreed to.
On the Question "that a sum not exceeding 109,347
l
s
d
Mr. Hume
objected to the sum as extravagant, and contended that it should be reduced to the amount paid in 1792. In the General Staff he found one Adjutant-General, one Deputy Adjutant-General, one Assistant Adjutant General at Head Quarters, and one Deputy Assistant Adjutant-General. Now he would ask, in the name of common sense, what necessity there was for such an establishment in the fifteenth year of peace? The pay, too, had been increased; was there any necessity for that? In the year 1805 the pay of the Adjutant-General was increased 500
l
l
l
l
832
On the Question "that the Resolution be for a sum of 94,000
l
l
Mr. Maberly
entreated the hon. Member not to waste the time of the House by pressing his Amendment to a division. It was but too obvious that nothing could be done in that House, and he was much inclined to dread that a convulsion, such as that described by the hon. Member, must ensue.
Sir John Wrottesley
complained of the practice of keeping four General Officers on full pay at the present moment.
Sir H. Hardinge
said, that whatever hon. Members might think or do with respect to these Estimates, it was his duty to offer every explanation of their items which might be demanded from him, and he was sure it would be found they were not open to the imputation of extravagance thrown out against them by the hon. Member for Aberdeen. The hon. Member complained that no reductions had been made in the Staff. Now the fact was, that an Assistant Adjutant-General and Assistant Quarter-Master-General had been reduced in Canada, Nova-Scotia, and several other places, and the whole reductions of the Staff, within the last two years, amounted, along with contingencies, to 29,000
l
l
833
Sir John Wrottesley
did not see the propriety of keeping one general officer at Portsmouth and another at Plymouth
Colonel Davies
complained of the practice of keeping up Inspectors of Militia at the Ionian Isles, and paying them also as residents, although there was not a militia corps in the Islands at present, or at any other time.
Sir G. Murray
said, that although they were called Inspectors of Militia, they were really residents, and paid as such. He thought, however, the number might be reduced. It had been said, that the Ionian Islands should be given up by this country or sold to some other power; but it might be well to recollect we were bound by treaties with Other Powers to occupy these islands, and to their inhabitants by treaty to afford them protection; and, whatever might be thought of the propriety of getting rid of them, he conceived that this was not the precise period, when the present unsettled state of Greece was considered, to agitate the question. At that moment, although it was said they paid none of their expenses, he could assure the House that those islands defrayed the whole of their civil charges, and 23,000
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
834
Colonel Davies
could not see why the Ionian Isles should not pay all their own. expenses. It was the same, however, with all the colonies. The Cape of Good Hope, under the Dutch Government, paid all its own expenses; but the moment we took possession of it, the expenses commenced.
Mr. Hume
, in reply, said that all the reductions alluded to by the gallant officer produced no diminution of the amount of expenditure. The hon. Member then alluded to the expenses of the Commander-in -chief's office, which, in 1792, under Lord Amherst, were 846
l
l
l
Sir H. Hardinge
denied that the only reduction which had taken place in the Staff was in the Medical Staff. With respect to the Commander of the Forces, his pay was not greater than it was in 1792, when Lord Amherst held that situation.
Mr. Hume
repeated his statements with respect to the Medical Staff; and observed that although it might be true that the pay of the Commander of the Forces was not greater than in the time of Lord Amherst, the expense of the office had increased to the amount which he had already described.
The Committee then divided:—For the Amendment 38; Against it 122; Majority 84.
Original Resolution agreed to.
The next Resolution moved by Sir H. Hardinge was, that the sum of 106,530
l
s
d
Mr. Hume
wished to know why the office of Paymaster-General had not been reduced? He described the circuitous manner in which the Army was at present paid, and maintained that by a simpler and more economical arrangement that payment would be greatly facilitated. The salary of the Judge Advocate General had been raised in 1817, to meet the great increase of duty arising from the increase in the number of the Army. Now that the number was reduced, why was there not a correspondent decrease in that salary?
835
l
Mr. Calcraft
said, that the office which he had the honour to hold (that of Paymaster-General) was a most ancient one. On looking back for the last hundred and twenty-five years, he found that it had been filled by some of the most distinguished persons who had taken a political part in the affairs of the country. Whether a better system of accounts might not be adopted in the office was a question upon which he would not enter. He administered the office as he found it. Referring to the accounts of the office for the last fifty years, he found that the public had not lost a single shilling of the money which had passed through that office. When the House recollected that during the" war hundreds of millions passed through the office, this was a fact of no small importance. Though the office which he held was not a very laborious one, yet it was one of great trust and responsibility. He had various duties to perform, which occupied a considerable portion of his time. Amongst the rest, he presided at the Board at Chelsea Hospital; and so constant was his attendance there, that since the prorogation of Parliament he had not had a single spare week to himself. The office at the present moment stood lower than at the time of Mr. Burke's great reform; for then there were two Pay-masters and two Deputies. It was painful for any man to talk of himself; but he was compelled to say, that he discharged the duties of his office, he was sure, conscientiously, and he hoped diligently. The House ought to be cautious in meddling with an arrangement which had secured such fidelity of service in the payment, through a number of years, of such very large sums.
Sir H. Parnell
said, that the right hon. Gentleman had made out no case to rebut the charge advanced by the Finance Committee; namely, that the office which he held was a sinecure office. The right hon. Gentleman's deputy told the Committee that he executed all the duties of his principal's office. It was, in his opinion, a serious objection to the establishment that the officers in it possessed too uncontrolled a command over the public money. The right hon. Gentleman's reference to the period when there were two Paymasters, was a common-place fallacy of justifying an existing abuse by
836
l
Mr. Calcraft
declared, that so far was the office of Paymaster-General from being a sinecure, that not a day passed on which his presence at the office was not necessary. If he were not there, the business of the office must stand still.
Mr. Maberly
said, that if he remembered rightly, the hon. Gentleman, when he sat on his (Mr. Maberly's) side of the House, always disapproved of the office of Paymaster-General. As to the importance of the office with a reference to the care of the public money, he need only refer to the evidence of Mr. Serjeant (a man of great respectability) before the Finance Committee. In answer to an inquiry what sum he could take away from the office, and how long he could keep it without the risk of detection, Mr. Serjeant stated that he thought he could take away 250,000
l
Mr. Calcraft
denied having ever disapproved of the office of Paymaster-General.
Mr. Maberly
said, in explanation, that he had only stated so hypothetically.
Mr. Calcraft
, in continuation, went on to say that the doors of his office had been thrown open to Mr. Abbott, who had examined all the books, and preferred the system followed in his office to that of
837
Mr. Maberly
said, the right hon. Gentleman had done no more than his duty in opening the doors of his office to Mr. Abbott, who was sent by the Treasury; and he ought not on that account to take any merit to himself.
Mr. Calcraft
did not claim any merit; he had only stated a fact.
Sir H. Hardinge
reminded the House that his right hon. friend, as President of the Board of Chelsea Pensioners, had to administer a sum of 1,241,000
l
Mr. G. Dawson
complained of Mr. Maberly making random assertions. He had stated that Mr. Serjeant had given in evidence before the Committee that he and two or three others might connive and draw out a sum of 250,000
l
Mr. Maberly
denied that he had made a random assertion, and would afterwards prove what he had asserted. He trusted to his own memory quite as much as to that of the right hon. Gentleman. Other gentlemen, as well as Mr. Serjeant, had given the same evidence; and it was the duty of the right hon. Gentleman, as well as that of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, to take care that the public money could not be so disposed of.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
admitted that he believed the memory of the bon. Gentleman was correct, and that
838
Sir J. Beckett
was surprised that the hon. Member for Aberdeen should now find fault with the expense of his department, when he had called for a complete return concerning it in 1821, and was then satisfied. The expense of it was less now than it was then by 500
l
l
l
l
l
l
Mr. Hume
had not forgot the return for which he had moved in 1821, nor that the expense of the office was then 5,180
l
l
l
l
839
Mr. Calcraft
admitted that he might have given his vote for a lumping resolution like that referred to by the hon. Gentleman, and that he might in that manner have voted for the reduction of the office of the Paymaster; but if the hon. Gentleman looked back at the whole of his conduct, he would find that he had always voted for the keeping up our establishments, as not too extravagant and not more than was necessary for the regular service of the country. He had always defended the Guards, for example. He could not think, therefore, that there was any inconsistency in his present vote and his having once voted for a lumping Motion of the hon. Gentleman.
The Chairman asked Mr. Hume if he meant to divide?
Mr. Hume
begged the House to recollect, that the hon. Baronet had stated, that out of 90,000
l
l
l
l
The House then divided, when there appeared for Mr. Hume's Amendment 42; Against it 118:—Majority 76.
The Question was then put on the original Resolution, 106,530
l
On the Question that 14,420
l
Mr. Maberly
produced the evidence given before the Committee of Finance by Mr. Serjeant, and showed that his statement had been quite correct, and not a random statement, as asserted by the right hon. Gentleman.
Mr. G. Damson
had understood Mr. Maberly to say, that the public money might be drawn without any check whatever, which was not quite correct. He had himself been wrong as to time.
840
Mr. Maberly
said a few words in explanation. He complained of the diversity of contracts for the supply of Medicines to the public service occasioning a great additional expense, and giving rise to private jobbing. The Finance Committee had reprobated the system. He had no objection to the vote; but it required attention.
The vote was then agreed to.
The next vote was for 60,612
l
s
d.,
Mr. O'Connell
rose to object to the vote, so far as related to Ireland. He thought that the Army in Ireland, during what he might, perhaps, be permitted to call the late civil commotions of that country, had performed its duty, from the highest officer down to the lowest subaltern, in the most exemplary and praiseworthy manner. He suggested to the right hon. Gentleman opposite, that it was necessary to recollect that a large portion of that Army had been employed in the North of Ireland for purposes into which he would not enter. The conduct of the Yeomanry in that part of the country he could not praise. It was supposed to have been kept up for purposes not of protection, but of oppression. He submitted that it was a description of force which might be well spared. In the province of Connaught, where the population was almost entirely Catholic, the amount of Yeomanry was but an unit. In the province of Munster it was only a decimal in the province of Leinster it was a hundred; but in the province of Ulster, where the population was chiefly Presbyterian, it was a thousand. If the Yeomanry were diminished there, the Army might be diminished too; for the presence of the Army was wanted for no other object than to protect the people against the outrages of the Yeomanry. For these reasons he should move that this Vote be reduced to 50,812
l
s
d
Sir G. Hill
said, if the Yeomanry force could be spared, he should have no objection to the proposed reduction. He could not, however, submit to the insinuation of the hon. and learned Member for Clare, that disturbances had originated in Ireland from the conduct of the Yeomanry corps. As a proof that the Yeomanry corps in the north of Ireland had merited well of their country, he would merely state that the Insurrection Act had travelled through every country in Ireland, save the nine counties in the province of Ulster.
841
Mr. S. Rice
supported the Amendment, on the ground of economy, and of the internal tranquillity of Ireland. He believed that the existence of the Constabulary force, which was in itself a Military force, was sufficient to justify a diminution of the Yeomanry force.
Lord F. L. Gower
said, it was only doing bare justice to the hon. and learned Member for Clare, to declare that he had touched upon the subject of the Irish Yeomanry with a moderation which must be highly serviceable to his. view of the question. He was of opinion that any inconsiderate meddling with that body at the present moment would produce an irritation of feeling in Ireland, which it was desirable to avoid. He admitted that the time had at last arrived when this question ought to be looked at. He should be sorry if the hon. Member for Clare pressed his Amendment, for he had no objection to take the subject matter of it into immediate consideration.
Mr. Rice
said, that after such an admission from the organ of the Irish Government, he should suggest to his hon. and learned friend, the propriety of leaving the reduction in the hands of the Ministry.
Mr. Brownlow
could not intend any tiling disrespectful to the Yeomanry, in whose ranks he had had the honour of serving, but he thought that the time had at length arrived when, in point of economy, they ought to be disbanded.
Mr. O'Connell
was most ready to withdraw his Amendment, and would prefer the proposition for the Reduction of the Yeomanry coming from the other side of the House rather than from himself. He denied every intention to traduce the Yeomanry of Ireland. When he was first called to the bar he was one of their number, and had moved that they should extend their services to every part of Ireland. He hoped that nothing which bad fallen from him that night would have the slightest tendency to embitter the quarrel between the two parties in the north of Ireland.
Mr. Trant
desired the Government to be cautious how they reduced a force in Ireland which had rendered such inestimable services to the country.
Mr. Hume
submitted to the right hon. Secretary for the Home Department the propriety of reducing the amount of the English Yeomanry. Let them either be
842
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, that in the speech which the hon. member for Aberdeen had delivered on a former evening, he had accused him of acting in contravention to the rule which Lord Lansdowne had laid down for the reduction of the Yeomanry corps. He appealed to his hon. friend the Member for Limerick, whether he had not strictly followed up the rule which had been left in the office by his noble predecessor. When Lord Lansdowne left office, the expense of the Yeomanry force amounted to 66,000
l,
Mr. S. Rice
said, that in his opinion there was no item in which reduction would be more justifiable than that now before the Committee; therefore, without dissenting from his right hon. friend as to the expediency of retaining these corps at the time he was in office, or without differing with the right hon. Secretary as to the high character of this body, he would yet vote for any reduction suggested by the hon. Gentleman.
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, he certainly was not prepared to assent to a reduction to the proposed amount. He begged to remind the House that breaches of the peace did in the manufacturing districts occasionally take place, under the pressure of distress; and therefore it was exceedingly necessary to maintain those corps in such neighbourhoods. With respect to the Cavalry corps, he thought they were, perhaps, the more efficient of the two.
Mr. R. Gordon
said, that in his opinion, the Yeomanry corps were the worst possible corps that could be employed for putting down disturbances, and he entertained this feeling the more strongly when he looked back to what had taken place at
843
Mr. Peel
, in reply, said, he had a much higher opinion of the Yeomanry. There were many Yeomanry officers in that House who would bear out his belief, that those men were to be depended on. If, however, any case should occur in which a corps proved itself not trust-worthy, or in any way misconducted itself, that then a reduction of that body should be at once effected. But he really thought Yeomanry corps were as much to be depended on as any other branch of the Service; and he was quite sure, if they received his Majesty's commands to quell any popular tumult, not one of them would fly from his colours, [
hear
Mr. G. Lamb
agreed with the right hon. Secretary, that not one corps would misconduct itself, [
hear
l
Mr. R. Gordon
observed, that he understood the right hon. Secretary had, during his (Mr. Gordon's) absence, applied some severe language to the hon. Member for Montrose, for the appeal which that hon. Gentleman had made on behalf of the people to his Majesty's Government. The
844
Mr. Secretary Peel
repeated, that if the Yeomanry were called on in aid of the public peace, he should have as high confidence in them as in the regular troops.
The Marquis of Chandos
acknowledged and deplored the general distress; but he was quite sure that the Yeomanry would not misconduct themselves; he was himself a commander of one of those corps, and he could confidently assert that if called out there was not a man in it who would not do his duty.
Mr. Maberly
declared he was opposed to the grant. The necessity which occasioned the creation of those corps had passed away, the apprehension of foreign invasion having ceased to exist. He disagreed with the right hon. Secretary as to the expediency of maintaining them in manufacturing districts. A body of cavalry was generally stationed in those districts sufficient to put down all the rioters in England. He had no wish, however, to press the immediate reduction upon the right hon. Secretary, if he said he would take the question into consideration with a view to economy; if not, he should vote for the Amendment of the hon. Gentleman.
Mr. Hume
, looking round the House, said, he could not perceive one of six hon. Members who had declined supporting him in his Motion for a general reduction, pledging themselves that they would be present to watch the proceedings in the Committee upon each item of expenditure. He would not take it upon himself to say, whether these hon. Members had done their duty towards their constituents, but they certainly had not done their duty towards him; for, having promised him that they would attend, to judge on each individual vote, not one of them was to
845
l
l
l
s
d
The House divided, when there appeared for the Amendment 23; against it 83; majority 60.—The original Motion was then agreed to. The House resumed, the report was brought up, and ordered for consideration on Wednesday next.
GAME LAWS.]
The Marquis of Chandos
, in moving for leave to bring in a Bill to alter and amend the laws relating to the preservation of Game said, it was his intention to propose a repeal of all former laws upon the subject, with a view to their being embodied into one Act; it was also his intention to propose, that any occupier of a number of contiguous acres should be allowed to sport over them, on obtaining the permission of his landlord. He also wished that a conviction for poaching should take place before two Magistrates, instead of one, as at present; and, even then, he would afford the right of appeal to the Quarter Sessions. He would also permit the sale of Game, under the same provisions and restrictions as those suggested by the present Secretary to the Board of Control.
Mr. O'Connell
said, that whenever the Bill should be brought in, he should take the opinion of the House upon the question of abolishing the Game Laws entirely.
Leave was given, the Bill was introduced, and read a first time.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Tuesday, February 23, 1830.
MINUTES.] Lord MONSON took the Oaths and his Seat.— MR. R. GORDON, and other Members of the Commons, brought up the Pauper Lunatic Asylum Bill, which was read a first time.
846
DUTIES ON WOOL.]
The Duke of Richmond
presented a petition from one hundred and eighty-one farmers of Romney-marsh, praying for an alteration of the Duties on Wool. He took this opportunity of correcting a mistake which had gone forth respecting what he had stated on the first day of the Session. What he then stated was, that he did not intend to bring forward any resolution on the subject of the Duties on Wool, unless numerous petitions were presented, and unless he saw a better chance of success than on former occasions.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Tuesday, February 23, 1830.
MALT AND SPIRIT DUTIES.]
Mr. Western
presented a Petition from a parish in Suffolk, complaining of Agricultural Distress, and praying for a repeal of the Malt Tax.
Mr. Ridley Colborne
called the attention of the Chancellor of the Exchequer to a revision of the Licensing System, as a means of promoting the sale of Beer, and relieving Agricultural Distress. He was satisfied that the public and agriculturists would be more benefited by a judicious alteration of that system than by a repeal of the Malt Tax. If Spirits could be made to bear any additional duties, he believed that the effect of imposing such duties would also be highly beneficial, [
hear
s.
s.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, it was his intention to move, on a future day, for the appointment of a Select Committee to consider the existing state of the Licensing System, with a view of ascertaining how far it might be possible to allow a free sale of Beer consistently with, a proper attention to the morals of the people, [
hear, hear.
847
Sir J. Newport
observed, that he could not pretend to say what would be the effect of raising the Spirit duties in England; but the adoption of such a measure in Ireland would immediately revive illicit distillation, and along with it the disorders and disturbances which a few years ago it had been found so difficult to quell.
Mr. W. Smith
admitted, that the reduction of the Spirit duties in Ireland might have facilitated the collection of the Revenue, and done away with many local causes of disorder; at the same time he had no hesitation in saying that the reduction of the Scotch and Irish Spirit duties, and the competition thereby occasioned in the English distilleries, had driven beer out of the Metropolitan market, and deluged it with an abominable and pernicious beverage.
Mr. Hume
bore testimony to the good effects produced by the reduction of the Spirit duties in Scotland on the character of the inhabitants of the Western Highlands, who were formerly smugglers, but had now returned to peaceable and sober habits. He deprecated the outcry that had been made against the reduction of the Spirit duties: it was no reason because an article might be abused by some, that it should be rendered dear to all.
Lord Nugent
said, that in a few days he should lay a case before the House containing strong proofs that the bill of the hon. Member for Oxford, although good in some of its provisions, had in parts signally failed,—he alluded to the plan of appeals to Quarter Sessions.
General Gascoyne
was of opinion, that the people of England would receive the Chancellor of the Exchequer's intimation with gratitude. Let the right hon. Gentleman proceed unintimidated by the representations of Scotch and Irish Members, and he would have the House and the country with him to bear him out in his undertaking.
Mr. R. Gordon
admitted the propriety of decreasing the duty on Beer, but doubted the policy of increasing the Spirit duties. There was a great deal of spurious humanity abroad on this subject. Gentlemen liked to indulge in the luxury of wine, but viewed with severity the indulgence of the lower orders in spirits, the use of which was not merely a luxury and comfort, but
848
Colonel Davies
said, bull-baiting, cock-fighting, and the ring, were opposed, not merely because they tended to demoralize the lower ranks of society, but because they congregated together the worst and most dangerous characters. If the sports pursued at Newmarket—if fox-hunting produced similar results, he would be the first to assist in putting them down. He admitted all sumptuary laws were bad [
hear
Mr. Brownlow
observed, that by lowering the duties on Irish Spirits one-half, we had more than doubled our revenue.
Mr. Bright
recommended the taking off of the Hop duties altogether. This would enable every cottager to make his own beer.
WEST INDIA TRADE.]
The Marquis of Chandos
rose to present a petition from certain West-India Planters, praying for a Reduction of the Duties upon Sugar and Rum. He was happy to be the organ chosen by that body to lay the petition before the House. When the House considered the extremely low prices of Sugar and Rum, they would feel that the West-India merchants had an extreme case of distress for the consideration of the House. The duty on sugar was 27
s.
s.
s.
849
Mr. Keith Douglas
said, that upon a great portion of West-India produce no profits were gained, but, on the contrary, a great loss was sustained, and families formerly in affluence were now in the greatest distress. The shipping and property, and other commercial interests connected with the West Indies, amounted to about seven millions annually. Was it, then, to be believed that all this shipping and property might be swept away without inconvenience or injury to the general interests of the country? Of these interests, some were of a very peculiar nature; and they, he contended, were affected by that colonial distress which arose from excessive taxation, the foreign slave trade, and the introduction of Mauritius Sugar. In the year 1807 the slave trade had been put an end to in our Colonies, under the impression that, by its abolition, we should be paying a debt due to humanity, in allowing slaves to rise in the scale of society to the rank of freemen. Measures also had been taken by Lord Castlereagh to induce foreign countries to give up this traffic, but in vain; for the French appeared bent upon carrying it on, though it was deeply degrading to such a nation as France. Thus it happened that notwithstanding all our exertions and expense, seven hundred thousand slaves had, since the peace of 1815, been brought from the coast of Africa to foreign colonies, for the purpose of extending cultivation there; while our Colonies were deprived of all such advantages. Again, in 1823 the introduction of Mauritius sugar was permitted, the consequence of which had been that depreciation in the price of West-India sugar stated by the noble Marquis (Chandos). How, then, were the West India planters situated? There was a duty of 27
s.
s.
s.
s.
850
s.
s.
Mr. Hart Davis
concurred with the noble Marquis in all the statements he had made respecting the distressed state of the Colonies, and in all the opinions he had professed; but there were some points which the noble Marquis had omitted, and which he (Mr. Davis) was anxious to bring under the consideration of the House. He thought that it would be expedient to make some new regulation respecting the registering of slaves, and the removal of them from one colony to another; for cases of extreme hardship had fallen within his knowledge, of property rendered altogether useless, in consequence of the law which prevented slaves being sold or transferred from one island to another. It happened thus— the estate upon which a certain number of slaves were employed was worn out, and consequently, from the operation of this law, the property and the persons employed on it were both rendered at the same moment useless. Indeed, he knew a case in which a friend and constituent of his would derive the greatest benefit and profit, if he could only transport his slaves across a river.
Mr. Bright
observed, that the excessive duties on West-India produce were burthens laid on as war taxes, and ought long since to have been removed. The planters had, therefore, good reason to
851
hear
Mr. Bernal
said, that he had always abstained from unnecessarily troubling the House with his opinion upon this question; and having entertained the hope that something would have certainly been elicited from the right hon. Gentleman opposite, it was his intention to have remained silent upon the present occasion, but finding that the right hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer was about to permit the Petition to be laid upon the Table without comment or explanation, he felt himself bound to trouble the House with a few words. He thought the right hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer was called upon to say something; to state, for example, whether the, West-Indian body had
852
s.
s.
ad valorem
s.
s.
d.
s.
s.
d.,
s.
d.
bonus
853
primâ facie
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
begged to assure the noble Marquis (Chandos) and the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Bernal), that if he had forborne making any observations upon the subject of that petition, it was not from any want of respect towards them, or from any want of sym-
854
Mr. W. Smith
said, he had it in his power to controvert the statements which had been made; he would, however, postpone all observations for the present. The inquiry was one which ought to be entertained without passion or prejudice.
Mr. C. Grant
reminded the House that it had been his lot, for the last two sessions, to recommend for adoption a reduction of the duty upon Sugar. The opinions which he had then professed were abundantly confirmed by the statements he had heard that night—by the practical experience with respect to the price of sugar—and by the distress existing in the West-India Islands. He should however wait for the Chancellor of the Exchequer's explanation with respect to the financial state of the country, and the reductions that might be contemplated in taxation; before he would
855
Mr. Hume
was extremely surprised at the hon. Member for Norwich declaring that he could controvert the statements that had been made. The only statements which he (Mr. Hume) had heard were, that since 1792, the prices of sugar had been decreasing, while the duty was increasing—that the consumption had consequently been diminished, and that great distress prevailed in the West-India Islands —all which statements he believed were incontrovertible. With respect to the question before the House, he thought it should be taken up, not as a colonial but as a national question, for it was one in which the people of England were deeply interested. He had always been an advocate for colonial interests, but it was his opinion that those interests could best be promoted by the abolition of the monopoly now enjoyed by the West-India planters of the home market, for it was quite in vain to attempt to keep up the price of West-India sugar above the European average. The consequence of the attempt was, that the surplus supply for the home market, raised at a great cost, was obliged to be sent to Hamburgh at a great loss, for there it would fetch no higher price than the sugar from Cuba or the Brazils. The fact was, there was no hope of an improvement for the Colonies, unless there were a diminution of the expenditure. They could not have a monopoly—it was useless to others, and: injurious to the planters themselves. He would therefore advise the reduction of the duties both on East and West India sugars, and the free admission of both, whereby both would gain, as they would then have an
ad valorem
856
Mr. Huskisson
said, he should not feel himself then bound to follow the hon. Member for Montrose through all the points on which he had touched, but still it was quite true that this question did claim peculiar attention, and at a fit opportunity he should be prepared to show that by a long course of measures, Government and Parliament had given peculiar claims to the West-India proprietors to protection. He would state his conviction that great as might be the pressure and the difficulties upon other interests in this country, there was none labouring under more difficulties, and requiring more urgently that relief should be given to it, than the West-India interest.
The Petition was brought up and read.
The Marquis of Chandos
said, that as he had no wish to take the Ministers by surprise on this subject, he had informed them more than four months ago of the nature of the petition.
ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE IN THE
Mr. Brougham
wished to take the opportunity of asking the right hon. Gentleman opposite a question relating to the admission of Slave evidence in the Courts of Justice in our Colonies. He begged to remind the right hon. Gentleman, that when some time since he was about to introduce a Bill for that purpose, he was told that it would be unnecessary
857
Sir G. Murray
said, in reply to the question put by the hon. and learned Gentleman, that he had a perfect recollection of what had occurred on the occasion to which allusion had been made. He still entertained an anxious wish to bring forward the measure he then spoke of, as he was fully aware of its importance, not only with respect to the amelioration of the slaves in the West Indies, but of the colonists generally. He begged to assure the hon. and learned Gentleman, that he was ready to do all in his power to promote the object of the admission of slave evidence in the courts, as he felt perfectly satisfied of the benefits that must result from it. The only obstacle that at present existed was, the expense that must be incurred in affording compensation to the judges, for losses that would be occasioned, in consequence of the alterations proposed to be made on that account, and with a view to save expense, he had abstained from making out the appointments of the Chief Justice of Tobago, and Chief Justice of St. Vincent's; and he hoped that that delay would have the effect of reducing the amount to be paid by way of compensation. He hoped this statement would be considered a sufficient pledge of the intention of the Government to pursue the measures previously promised, [
hear, hear.
Mr. Keith Douglas
had understood from the right hon. Gentleman that the same reason existed last year for not then bringing forward this measure. The consequence of this had been that for two years the island of Tobago had been without a Chief Judge to administer the law. He thought that was an evil of no small magnitude, since there would then be no others to administer justice to the inhabitants but the resident proprietors. In his opinion the benefit of the saving by no means compensated for the evil of thus leaving the Colony without a proper judicial officer.
Sir G. Murray
felt called upon to say a few words in consequence of what had just fallen from the hon. Member. The
858
Lord Nugent
thought the evil of having no other persons but the resident proprietors to administer justice was greater than the benefit obtained by the saving of the compensation referred to; and he trusted the delay would soon be terminated. He wished to ask whether the evidence to be given by the Commissioners, as to the state of the Colonies, had closed?
Sir G. Murray
said, the Commission had ceased, and there was no other obstacle to carrying the Report of the Commissioners into effect but the expense.
Lord Nugent
conceived the expense to be so necessary, that he for one would not oppose its being incurred.
The Petition was then received, and ordered to be on the Table.
REPRESENTATION OF MANCHESTER, BIRMINGHAM, AND LEEDS.]
Lord John Russell
said, that before he proceeded with the Motion of which he had given notice, he wished to lay before the House a Petition which had been committed to his care from the inhabitants of the extensive and important town of Sheffield. The Petitioners complained, that several large, populous, and wealthy towns were at present excluded from the exercise of the Elective Franchise, whilst in very many instances that privilege was enjoyed by the inhabitants of small places of no importance, and was often exercised in an unworthy manner. The Petitioners therefore prayed that the Franchise might be extended to their town, and to such other populous, wealthy, and intelligent places.
Mr. Marshall
expressed his cordial concurrence in the prayer of the petition.
Mr. Stuart Wortley
said a that he would
859
The petition was then brought up and read, and ordered to be printed.
Lord John Russell
moved that the three Orders of the Day, of March 19th, 1821, June 22nd, 1827, and 31st March, 1828, relative to Bills to transfer the Elective Franchise from Boroughs convicted of corruption, to Leeds, to Birmingham, and Manchester, should be entered as read. This was done, and his Lordship then addressed the House as follows:—Although I feel not, Sir, the smallest doubt both as to the justice and as to the expediency of the propositions which I am this night about to submit to the House, yet I do feel a considerable degree of apprehension that these propositions may not meet with that success which I should wish to see conferred upon them by a majority of this House. I am aware that there are many persons who are actuated by perfectly conscientious motives, but who have such a dread of Reform, to which the old and accustomed epithets of "wild and visionary," have often been attached, that they view with suspicion any Motion which has Reform for its object. To them I will only say, that if ever there was a proposition for Reform that was not wild and visionary, but that was practicable in its object, practicable in the grounds on which it went, and practicable in its results, it is that which I am about this night to propose to the House. [
hear, hear.
860
861
862
863
hear, hear.
864
l.
l.
l.
l.;
l.
865
866
867
868
869
l.
l.
hear
870
hear, hear.
Mr. Wilbraham
seconded the Motion. He said, that he considered those who im-
871
872
873
874
Lord Sandon
said, that he was embarrassed by the Motion of the noble Lord, for while he admitted that some Reform was desirable, he thought the means taken to obtain it by the present Motion not very safe, the question then proposed for them was second in importance to none which had come before the House, since the great question of Catholic Emancipation. He could never suppose that our ancestors who were anxious to see every town represented would have been contented to allow towns superior to the London of their day, to be without a voice in Parliament. He admitted too that any measure extending the basis of Representation, was planting the Constitution more firmly in the minds of the people. Still he did not think the measure proposed by the noble Lord a safe one. It had been observed by an hon. Member "that all Reform should be founded on such principles as to present a distinct and visible limit to its operation, and be so planned as carefully to avoid leading by any necessary consequence to the adoption of other measures, and leaving all future questions of a similar nature to be discussed on their own intrinsic merits." The condition announced in this observation he should have desired to find in the Motion of his noble friend, he wished to see in it some principle of limitation beyond which it would not force the Legislature to proceed. He found in it, however, an unlimited principle of augmentation. His noble friend proposed to augment the present number of Members of the House of Commons by six, and if once the Legislature departed from the limited number established by solemn treaties, those of the Union with Ireland and Scotland, where was it to stop? Granting the Franchise to the three towns included in the Motion of his noble friend, on what grounds could the House refuse a similar privilege to many other Towns that had almost an equal claim? Looking at the Motion as tending indefinitely to augment the number of Members of that House, and as altering, if carried, the proportions now established between the Representatives of different parts of the country, he was bound though with great pain to resist the Motion of his noble friend. He would fain adopt a middle course, and in his wish to find one, he
875
Mr. Twiss
said, he could not agree either to the Motion or the Amendment that, had been presented to the House, not that he was disposed to set himself in opposition to every species of reform, but because he felt that he could not adopt either of the courses proposed without compromising his own judgment. With respect to the Amendment that had been offered to the notice of the House, it was not pretended by any of the hon. Members who had preceded him, that there was any great or crying grievance to be met at this moment, and he therefore did not see why that House should pledge itself to any particular course in future. As the law of England now stood, there was not any one in this country who could not have the privilege of the Elective Franchise if he chose; and, therefore, he did not see hat this question presented the great difficulties which had been attendant upon the Catholic Question. According to the arrangement which had been made at the end of the seventeenth century, it appeared to him that the Crown could not
876
s.
877
hear
878
879
Lord Morpeth
said, the hon. Member for Wootton-Basset (Mr. Twiss) began by declaring that he thought the Government and the House were fully justified in making concessions to the Roman Catholics, because great danger was to be apprehended from refusing them; and that he was not disposed to make the concessions now required by the Reformers, because the same danger did not demand the same sacrifices. Now he (Lord Morpeth) was quite prepared to admit that the same danger was not to be apprehended from a refusal of the noble Lord's Motion; but he really must contend that there might be very great danger in refusing to take the claims of the people into consideration. The state of the country had undergone a great change within the last few years. The people were every day acquiring intelligence, and with that intelligence they obtained moral power; but it was the misfortune of the time, that while a great portion of the country was thus advancing in moral power, it was retrograding in physical power. The people were becoming more enlightened, but they were at the same time becoming more distressed; and when the House saw the population of Sheffield petitioning, and the inhabitants of Birmingham associating, he thought these were signs of times in which it was not quite safe to resist the just wishes and reasonable remonstrances of those who, being numerous and possessing wealth and Influence, now claimed a participation in the advantages of a free Representation. A noble relation of his had proposed an Amendment to the same effect as that which had been carried in the year 1819. But the moment he heard those Resolutions mentioned he felt satisfied that they presented in themselves an insuperable objection to their being adopted. Since the time they; were passed, the Legislature had disfranchised Gram pound and Penryn, and was tardily proceeding to legislate With respect to East Retford; but ten
880
—
In decimum vestigia rettulit annum,
Lord Valletort
began by observing, that he looked at men as well as measures [
hear, and a laugh
some impatience was manifested on the Opposition side of the House.
881
hear
Dr. Lushington
said, that an experience of twenty-four years in that House had strengthened all his early impressions respecting the propriety of Parliamentary
882
883
884
hear.
Lord Valletort
said, in explanation, that words had been put into his mouth, which he had not used, and that he meant to impute no improper motives to the noble Lord.
Sir George Murray
said, he would not detain the House long. He was sure they would agree with him that, however various opinions might be with regard to the principles advocated by the noble Lord whose Motion was under consideration, the tone and temper with which the noble Lord had brought the subject forward could not be too highly praised, nor too frequently imitated. He was obliged, however, to differ from the noble Lord's conclusions,
885
hear
886
General Gascoyne
said, that he had, last Session, voted for a proposition, similar to the one then before the House, and he had not heard anything since that time to induce him to alter his opinion. He certainly did not agree with the proposition to confer the Elective Franchise at once upon the towns in question; but if the Bill were introduced in the Committee, the Franchise of East Retford might be given to one of the proposed towns, and the others might obtain the Franchise, as boroughs, against which corruption was proved were disfranchised. He was quite opposed to the principles which the hon. Member for Aberdeen and other hon. Members had broached, with respect to Universal Suffrage and Radical Reform; but were it only to avoid such rash innovations, he would recommend a concurrence in the noble Lord's Motion. It was undoubtedly notorious that if any interest in the country were worse represented in that House than any other, it was the manufacturing. Large towns ought unquestionably to have distinct Representatives. In the thirteen years during which he had been returned for the place which he had the honour to represent, he had brought in and carried above two hundred local Bills. He might confidently refer to his right hon. colleague that the representation of a populous town was no sinecure. All the great questions which his
887
Lord Sandon
observed, that the recommendations to him to withdraw his Amendment, had proceeded on such inconsistent grounds, that he did not feel it to be his duty to concede to the recommendations.
General Gascoyne
said, he merely gave his opinion but the noble Lord must use his own discretion.
Sir G. Murray
explained, that he by no means pretended to depreciate the objects either of the noble Mover, or the noble Lord who had moved the Amendment.
Mr. Wynn
regretted, that notwithstanding the temper and moderation with which the noble Lord had brought forward his Motion, he must vote against it. He was obliged to look not only at the immediate object of the Motion, but at its remote and inevitable consequence, and if he consented to it, he did not know how much further he might be obliged to go. If he acceded to the Motion, he should accede to a Motion for increasing the number of Members in that House without limit. Such a measure would be highly dangerous. The country might never be satisfied, and never convinced that the House of Commons should not consist of as many Members as any Gentleman should choose. He thought, therefore, that it would be less inconvenient to postpone the introduction of additional Members for these populous places, than to open the door to an indefinite increase of the number of Members of that House. The actual increase proposed was only six Members added to six hundred and fifty eight, and was not in itself important; but how could he, how could the House, resist the next Session any Gentleman who might propose that Sheffield or Halifax, which was more populous than Leeds, should be represented—how could he then resist such
888
889
Mr. Huskisson
said, he would detain the House for a very short time on this occasion. He did not wish to go at length into the discussion of the question; at the same time he could not give a silent vote on the Motion. His noble friend who proposed the Amendment had said, that he had come to the view which he had taken on the subject, with considerable difficulty and after much consultation with his friends. He (Mr. Huskisson) would also say, that in like manner he had come to the view which he had taken on the subject after considerable deliberation and reflection, and he was sorry that he did not take the same view of it as that adopted by his noble friend the mover of the Amendment. His noble friend's Amendment, if he (Mr. Huskisson) understood it, went, in the first place to state that it was most desirable that these great manufacturing districts should have a direct Representation in this House. His noble friend thus commenced by admitting the existence of the grievance; and so far he (Mr. Huskisson) went along with him in his view of
890
891
892
hear, hear.
893
894
895
Lord W. Powlett
said, that having always voted against Reform, he was anxious to state the reasons why he should vote for the Motion of his noble friend. A distinct grievance had been brought before the House for which a remedy was proposed that was at once safe and in accordance with the spirit of the Constitution. Mr. Justice Blackstone stated, that as trade is of a fluctuating nature and not long fixed in a place so
pro re
896
nata
Mr. Bright
said, that though he had always opposed every project of general Reform, he had always felt that when any case of practical grievance in the representative system was brought under the notice of the House, it was the duty of the House to endeavour to apply a remedy to it. He contended that the plan of amending the Representation, which had that, night been proposed by the noble Lord, was no innovation on the Constitution, but in strict conformity with the plan upon which the House of Commons had been formed, and by which the number of its Members had been gradually increased
897
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, that he should follow the example of the noble Lord in that path in which alone he knew that he should be able to follow it successfully— he meant the moderation with which the noble Lord had approached the discussion of this important Question. The noble Lord had brought it forward with a temperance and ability which were calculated to conciliate assent to a doubtful proposition in as great a degree as it was possible to conciliate it. Long as he had been in Parliament, and frequently as he had been present at discussions upon Parliamentary Reform, it so happened that it had never been his lot upon any occasion to take any part in the great debates to which he had listened upon it. He had
898
899
900
901
902
Mr. O'Connell
.—No, no; there is in that country a slave population.
Mr. Peel
apprehended that every freeman in Georgia had a right of voting, and there fore, as far as the whites were concerned, the Legislative Assembly of Georgia owed its origin to Universal Suffrage. Now, making all allowances for the feelings which were naturally generated by the possession of slaves, he did not think that any House of Commons elected under the present system would, even if it had possessed a slave population, have passed an Act which contained two such clauses as were now in the Act passed by the Georgian legislature. It was enacted, "That if any slave or free person of colour should circulate, or cause to be circulated, or should aid in circulating or in causing to be circulated in the State of Georgia, any written paper exciting slaves to insurrection, that person should be punished with death." That enactment was extraordinary enough; but the second enactment was still more extraordinary. It enacted, "That if any negro, free person of colour, or white person, should teach any negro to read or write any character, either printed or written, the said negro, free person of colour, or while person, should be deemed guilty of a misdemeanour, and punished by fine and whipping, or by fine or imprisonment, at the discretion of the Court, the fine not to exceed 500 dollars, but the imprisonment to be at. (he discretion of the Court." Making every allowance, he repeated, for the feeling which in Georgia must naturally he excited by the possession of a slave population, he must again repeat that he did not think that we, with our election system, and without any system of Universal Suffrage, should ever have passed a law which would sentence to fine and whipping those who might have been kind hearted enough to teach a negro to read. No; that, could never be the case, even in our own West-Indian Islands. On these grounds, looking both at the "ancient constitution of the House and at the practical effects produced upon the country by our existing Representative system, he could find no reason for running the risk of losing the actual advantages which we
903
904
cries of "Oh no!" and laughter
905
906
cuique suum;
907
Mr. Brougham
commenced by declaring himself highly gratified by the candid and manly manner in which the right hon. Secretary had addressed himself to the discussion of the Question. He hailed it with delight, as a circumstance auspicious to the great cause he had so long advocated, that he had heard a Minister of the Crown give his sentiments with a degree of candour and temper which he had never before witnessed coming from that quarter on such a question, [
hear
908
hear
loud cheers
909
hear, hear
910
hear, and laughter
911
l.
s.
d.
hear, and laughter.
912
913
914
salus populi,
915
loud cheering.
As soon as the honourable and learned Gentleman had resumed his seat, the cry; of "Reply!" arose; but it was quickly drowned in the still stronger cry of "Divide, withdraw!" and the Gallery aging been cleared, the House divided,; when there appeared—
For the Motion 140; Against it 188; Majority 48;—Adjourned.
List of the Majority and also of the Minority.
MAJORITY.
Alexander, J.
Clive, hon. R.
Alexander, H.
Clive, H.
A'Court, Captain
Cotterell, Sir J.
Astley, Lord
Calcraft, hon. J.
Astley, Sir J.
Corry, Hon. H.
Apsley, Lord
Corry, Lord
Antrobus, G.
Campbell, A.
Atkins, Alderman
Campbell, J.
Arbuthnot, hon. C. L.
Cole, Sir C.
Arbuthnot, Colonel
Cartwright, W.
Acland, Sir T.
Cocks, J.
Belfast, Lord
Chaplain, Colonel
Bankes, H.
Chaplin, C.
Bankes, W.
Chandos, Marquis
Bankes, G.
Croker, J. W.
Beresford, Sir J.
Cooper, H. B.
Beresford, M.
Downie, R.
Balfour, J.
Dundas, Hon. W.
Bastard, Captain
Douglas, W. K.
Bastard, E.
Doherty, J.
Beckett, Sir J.
Darlington, Lord
Byron, T.
Dick, H.
Baillie, Colonel
Dowdeswell, J. E.
Burrell, W.
Downes, Lord
Barnes, Col. M.
Dalrymple, Colonel
Brudenell, Lord
Dottin, A. It.
Bell, M.
Drummond, H.
Barclay, D.
Dawkins, H.
Boyle, hon. J.
Daly, J.
Baker, E.
Eastnor, Lord
Bridges, Sir J.
East, Sir E. H.
Castlereagh, Lord
Eliot, Lord
Cholmondeley, Ld. H.
Encombe, Lord
Courtenay, rt. hn. F. P.
Estcourt, T. H.
Cecil, Lord W.
Estcourt, T.
Clerk, Sir G.
Ellison, C.
Cockburn, Sir G.
Egerton, W.
Calvert, J.
Fane, J.
Carrington, Sir E,
Farquhar, J.
Capel, J.
Freemantle, Sir T.
916
Foster, L.
Peel, W.
Fane, General
Perceval, S.
Fleming, J.
Petit, L.
Graham, Marquis
Philipps, R. B.
Graham, Colonel
Phipps, hon. Gen.
Goulburn, hon. H.
Powell, Colonel
Gilbert, D.
Prendergast, M. G.
Grant, Sir A.
Pringle, Sir W. H.
Gower, Lord L.
Palmer, R.
Hardinge, hn. Sir H.
Rae, Sir W.
Hastings, Sir C.
Rogers, E.
Hay, Lord J.
Ross, C.
Hay, A.
St. Paul, Sir H.
Merries, rt. Hon. J. C.
Sanderson, R.
Hill, Lord A.
Sandon, Viscount.
Hill, Sir R.
Scott, H.
Hill, hon. Sir G.
Seymour, hon. —
Hodgson, F.
Spottiswoode, A.
Holmes, W.
Shirley, J. E.
Hope, H. T.
Sidney, P. C.
Hulse, Sir C.
Somerset, Lord G.
Innes, Sir W.
Somerset, Lord It. E.
Irving, John
Sotheron, Admiral
Jones, J.
Stewart, J.
King, Sir J. D.
Stopford, Lord
King, hon. R.
Sugden, Sir E.
Knox, hon. T,
Thompson, G. L.
Knox, hon. J.
Thynne, Lord J.
Leake, W.
Thynne, Lord W.
Lindsay, Colonel
Thynne, Lord H.
Lowther, Viscount
Townshend, hn. J. R.
Lucy, G.
Trench, Col. F.
Lushington, Col. J.
Twiss, H.
Lygon, hon. Colonel
Ure, M.
M'Kenzie, Sir J.
Valletort, Lord
M'Cleod, J. N.
Van Homrigh, P.
Maitland, hon. Capt.
Vernon, G. G.
Manners, Lord C.
Wallace, T.
Manners, Lord R.
Walpole, hon. Col.
Martin, Sir T. B.
Walrond, B.
Moore, G.
Ward, W.
Morland, Sir S. B.
Warrender, rt. hon. G.
Mundy, F.
Wigram, W.
Murray, hon. Sir G.
Williams, T. C.
Meynell, Captain
Willoughby, H.
Noel, Sir G.
Wilson, Col. J.
North, J. H.
Worcester, Marquis of
Norton, G. C.
Wortley, hon. J.
Northcote, H. S.
Wynn, Sir W.
O'Brien, L.
Wynn, rt. hon. C.
O'Hara, J.
Wood, Colonel
Owen, Sir J.
Owen, W.
TELLERS.
Peachy, General W.
Dawson, G. R.
Peel, rt. hon. R.
Planta, J.
PAIRED OFF.
For
Against
Harvey, D. W.
Fane, J.
Cruden, hn. Col.
Arkwright, R.
Lushington, Dr.
Nicholl, Sir J.
Western, C. C.
Peel, Colonel
Baring, A.
Smith, Alderman
Rickford, W.
Cust, E.
Manning, W.
Newport, Sir J.
Macqueen, T.
Portman, E,
Whitbread, S.
Trevor, R.
917
MINORITY.
Althorp, Lord
Huskisson, rt. hon. W.
Batley, C. H.
Hume, Joseph
Baring, Sir T.
Hoye, J. B.
Baring, B.
Hutchinson, hn. C. H.
Baring, F.
Howick, Lord
Birch, J.
Jephson, C. D. O.
Bright, H.
Kemp, T. R.
Bradshaw, Capt.
Kekewich, S.
Brownlow, C.
Langston, J. H.
Blandford, Marquis
Leslie, B.
Burdett, Sir F.
Littleton, E.
Beaumont, T. W.
Labouchere, H.
Byng, G.
Lennard, T. B.
Brougham, H.
Lambert, J. S.
Brougham, J.
Lamb, hon. G.
Bentinck, Lord G.
Martin, J.
Benett, J.
Morpeth, Lord
Blake, Sir F.
Maberly, J.
Buller, C.
Macdonald, Sir J.
Bernal, R.
Macauley, T. B.
Callaghan, G.
Marshall, J.
Clive, E.
Marshall, Wm.
Carew, R.
Marjoribanks, S.
Corbett, P.
Marryat, J.
Colborne, R.
Milbank, M.
Crompton, S.
Monck, J. B.
Cradock, Col.
Nugent, Lord
Calthorpe, Col. A.
O'Connell, D.
Calvert, N.
Old, W.
Calvert, C.
Pendarvis, K. W.
Carter, B.
Protheroe, E.
Cavendish, Henry
Palmerston, Lord
Cavendish, Wm.
Ponsonby, hon. G.
Davenport, E.
Ponsonby, W. F.
Denison, W. J.
Philips, G. R.
Dundas, hon. Sir R.
Poyntz, W. S.
Dundas, hon. G.
Palmer, C. F.
Duncombe, T.
Pallmer, C. N.
Davies, Colonel
Powlett, Lord W.
Dawson, A.
Robinson, Sir G.
Ewart, W.
Rice, T. S.
Easthope, J.
Ramsbottom, J.
Ebrington, Lord
Robarts, A. W.
Euston, Lord
Robinson, G.
Fazakerley, J. N.
Rumbold, C. E.
Fortescue, hon. G. M.
Stewart, Sir M. S.
Fergusson, Sir R.
Smith, hon. R.
Fergusson, C.
Sefton, Earl of
Fitzgerald, M.
Sykes, D.
Fitzgibbon, hon. R.
Slaney, R. A.
Tyler, T. B.
Smith, W.
Gascoyne, General
Smith, V.
Greene, T. G.
Sebright, Sir J.
Gordon, Robert
St. Paul, H.
Guest, J. J.
Stanley, Lord
Grant, rt. hon. C.
Stanley, E.
Grant, R.
Tennyson, C.
Guise, Sir W.
Thomson, C. P.
Graham, Sir J.
Thompson, Aid.
Heneage, G. F.
Townshend, Lord C
Hobhouse, J. C.
Vernon, G. R.
Heron, Sir It.
Villiers, T. H.
Howard, R.
Waithman, Ald.
Howard, H.
Williams, J.
Honywood, W. P.
Westenra, hon. H.
918
Wall, B.
Wells, J.
Whitbread, W.
Wilson, Sir R.
Whitmore, W. W.
Warburton, H.
Wrottesley, Sir J.
Wood, Ald.
TELLERS.
Wood, J.
Russell, Lord J.
Wood, C.
Wilbraham, G.
Wyvill, M.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Wednesday, February 24, 1830.
MINUTES.] Mr. DOHERTY gave notice, that his noble friend, the Chief Secretary for Ireland, would to-morrow move for leave to bring in a Bill to alter and amend the Laws for regulating Juries in Ireland.—The Consolidated Fund Bill was read a second time.—The Property in Infants I Bill, the Lunatics Property Bill, the Liability of Real Property Bill, and the Contempt in Equity Bill, were [severally passed through a Committee.
DRAMATIC WRITINGS.]
On the Motion of Mr. Lamb, the Bill for Amending the 54th Geo. III., c. 156, relating to Dramatic Writings, was read a first time.
ILLUSORY APPOINTMENTS.]
On the Motion of the Solicitor General, the House resolved itself into a Committee on the Illusory Appointment Bill.
Mr. Bernal
, after complimenting the Solicitor General on the trouble he had taken to reform this part of the Law, said, that he thought a measure so important as one affecting the whole landed interest of the country which that did, ought not to be hastily passed. One of the topics which would come under the consideration of the Commissioners appointed to inquire into the state of the Law, was this of Appointments, and it would be better to wait till they had finished their laborious task; they should recommend something different from the Bill of his hon. and learned friend, and to place the House in a situation of embarrassment, and bring the Law into additional confusion. His hon. and learned friend proposed to assimilate the rule of Equity, to the rule of Law. A person might give property, over which he had a power of Appointment, as he chose, giving 100,000
l.
919
The Solicitor General
observed, that the Bill then before the Committee had been introduced to the House last Session, but it had been allowed to stand over, and owing to that circumstance it had become generally known, and he was happy to say was generally approved of. It had been his object not unnecessarily to alter the Law, but to give facilities for administering it. At present if a man left 1000
l.
l.
l.
Mr. Trant
objected to the measure being pressed forward in so thin a House, and recommended the hon. and learned Gentleman to postpone it to some other day.
920
Mr. Tennyson
said, he approved of the measure being then discussed, and expressed his approbation of the exertions of his hon. and learned friend in giving up so much of his time to effect improvements in the law,
Mr. Doherty
also recommended that the measure should be immediately proceeded with, as all those were present who were at any time likely to take part in the discussion.
Mr. O'Connell
said, that he had an Amendment to propose. They were then speaking in a language that was not generally intelligible; and as the law was made to be obeyed by all, he thought that the first reform ought to be in its language, so that all might understand it. He should be glad, therefore, that what was meant by a substantial share, and an illusory share, both in Equity and Law, should be more clearly denned. Passing from that, however, the Amendment he had to propose, would prevent any person having the power to make an Appointment after the passing of the Act, unless he gave to every child a substantial share. His object was, to make it obligatory on the father to provide for each of his children. It might be said, that he was taking from the parent the power of distributing his property, and he admitted that he meant to limit that power, because he knew that it was sometimes put up to auction, as it were in families, and otherwise much abused. He should prefer seeing it so settled on the child, that this could not occur. He was aware that he should differ on that point from the hon. and learned Gentleman, who was probably attached to the law of primogeniture, but he believed that the public would go along with him, in desiring rather to see an equal diffusion of wealth, than an accumulation of it in enormous masses. He gave the hon. and learned Gentleman credit for his intentions, but having himself reflected much on the subject, he was convinced of the propriety of his own Amendment, and he should propose it, though it might not be carried, in order that it might be entered on the Journals of the House, as he thought it well calculated to put an end to needless litigation.
Mr. Courtenay
said, the clause of the hon. and learned Member compelling, as he understood it, a parent to divide all his
921
Mr. O'Connell
admitted that the inconvenience stated by the hon. Gentleman would sometimes occur; but he thought there was only a choice of evils, and that the Amendment he proposed by getting rid of much litigation, would be the least evil of the two.
The Solicitor General
said, he disapproved of the hon. and learned Gentleman's Amendment which would take away all power from a parent. His own Bill allowed the parent to give either a large or a small sum. One child might be sickly or a cripple, and therefore requiring a larger provision than others. Another might be already provided for by other means, and the clause of the hon. and learned Member would prevent the parent from providing for the wants of his feeble offspring, and would compel him to add to the wealth of a child already rich; because a power of disposing of property might be abused by individuals that was not a sufficient reason for depriving all men of its enjoyment. The same argument would justify every possible restriction, for there was no liberty or power which a man might not and which some men did not abuse. Believing that to adopt the Amendment of the hon. and learned Member for Clare would be a great calamity, he should resist it.
Mr. O'Connell
said his object was to prevent abuse by giving aliquot portions of property to each child.
Mr. Tennyson
agreed with the Solicitor General. He supposed, he said, that the hon. Member for Clare wished to assimilate our law to that of France, which he believed would be a great and even vital injury to the people of this country. There could, perhaps, be no greater evil than to make children independent of their parents. The latter might sometimes abuse their power, but it was the gift of nature and ought not to be destroyed by the law. The Amendment proposed would destroy
922
Mr. Trant
again objected to their proceeding with so important a measure.
The Attorney General
supported the Bill, and said he was convinced that no Gentleman acquainted with the subject could object to the Bill.
Mr. Alexander Dawson
also supported the Bill. He said he considered it as tending to remove doubts without making any alteration in the law. At present a lawyer could take his fee, but he could not give an opinion on a case of powers which was entitled to any confidence. It was high time, therefore, that the law should be defined and settled, and in doing that, he did not know that it would be of much importance to the community, whether property were equally or unequally divided. The measure merited his support, because it went to remove the doubts in which the subject was involved, and he, in common with others, felt that the country was deeply indebted to the hon. and learned Gentleman who had brought in the Bill.
Sir Charles Wetherell
said, that he thought the Solicitor General had pursued a most praiseworthy course by bringing in a Bill to remedy a particular evil, and not proposing any sweeping measure of Reform. The Bill only went to fix the
minimum
l.
minimum
923
Mr. O'Connell's
Amendment, was then put and negatived.
Mr. O'Connell
then proposed another clause as an Amendment, leaving half his property at the free disposal of a parent, and compelling him to divide the other half in aliquot parts among all his children. He did not wish, he said, to deprive a man of the power of disposing absolutely of property which he had acquired by his industry. His plan, however, was consistent with the ancient custom of Gavel-kind, which he considered to be a very rational practice. Nor did he think that the inconveniences dreaded by the hon. Member for Bletchingley (Mr. Tennyson) from the equal distribution of property would be very great. Already a large portion of the property of the country was personal, which was generally so distributed and no inconvenience arose.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Thursday, February 25, 1830.
THE JEWS.]
Lord Bexley
said, he had been requested to present to their Lordships a Petition from certain British-born subjects, called Jews, praying to be relieved from the disabilities under which they at present laboured. The Petitioners represented that in loyalty and good conduct they yielded to no portion of his Majesty's subjects. The noble Lord observed, that in ancient times, under several Christian monarchs, a system of persecution and cruelty had been adopted against the Jews, in which our ancestors had their share. For three centuries they were nominally excluded from this Island. When they were allowed to return, they did not, it was true, suffer the same degree of persecution as before, their condition was gradually ameliorated, but they still laboured under this diffi-
924
WELSH JUDICATURE.]
Lord Dynevor
presented a Petition from certain Freeholders, and other inhabitants of the County of Carmarthen, against the proposed alteration of the Welsh Judicature.
Lord Cawdor
said, he would take that opportunity of alluding to a subject which concerned himself personally. Since his arrival in London, he had seen some observations in the last number of a Review, of considerable circulation, with reference to a statement contained in a letter which he had written to the noble Lord on the Woolsack. The noble Lord then proceeded to explain the circumstance to which he alluded, but in so low a tone that he could with difficulty be heard. As far as we could collect, the matter stood thus:—He had written to the Lord Chancellor to inform him that no money had been paid into the hands of the Accountant General of the Exchequer, under the provisions of an Act which had been passed for the purpose of improving the Courts of Judicature of Wales. His ground for making that statement was, that he had moved for a Return of the money which had been paid under those circumstances, and the Return, when presented, was
nil
925
The Earl of Eldon
said, that no person who was acquainted with the noble Lord's fairness and integrity upon all occasions could for a moment suppose that he had entertained any wish to deceive. His object in rising was to call the attention of their Lordships seriously to what were called the Improvements of the Welsh Judicature. He was the rather induced to do so, because he had had very great experience with respect to the administration of justice in this country. He believed, then, that it would be a very great grievance to the inhabitants of Wales to take away from them their Equity Courts. He would mention some facts which would make their Lordships understand how he came to entertain that opinion. The inhabitants of Wales had, if they chose to avail themselves of it, the opportunity of coming to the Court of Chancery of England and instituting their suits there. It would, he believed, be found on examination, that during the twenty-five years in which he had had the honour to hold the Great Seal, the inhabitants of Wales had not thought it expedient to apply very frequently to the English Court of Chancery. They also had the opportunity of appealing to their Lordships if they thought the decisions of their own Courts wrong; and he thought it would be expedient to have an Account laid before their Lordships of the number of Appeals which had proceeded from the Welsh Courts of Equity. How many Appeals did their Lordships suppose there had been in the course of twenty-five years? He spoke from memory which, perhaps, was not so good as it had been some years since, but he recollected only one appeal during that time, and on that occasion the judgment of the Court below was affirmed. As temporary Chancellor for the county of Durham for a short period, he had obtained some experience on the matter, and he was persuaded, that to destroy the Equity Courts of Wales, and of the counties of Chester and Durham, would be productive of great mischief.
TERCEIRA.]
The Marquis of Clanricarde
said, he wished to ask a question of the noble Duke at the head of his Majesty's Government. The other evening,
926
The Duke of Wellington
said, that he certainly was in possession of the opinion which on a former evening he stated to have been given to Government on the subject to which the noble Lord referred; but he believed it was the invariable practice of Ministers not to place such opinions before Parliament.
Lord Holland
observed, that, if it were the invariable practice of Ministers not to furnish Parliament with certain official papers, it was equally the invariable practice of every Minister not to quote such papers. He did not understand what the noble Duke meant. He came down with a legal authority—an official document, the purport of which he stated to their Lordships, but now he told them they must not judge of all the bearings of that document, because it was the invariable practice of Ministers not to furnish Parliament with such documents. He was not certain that the practice was as the noble Duke represented—at all events, he could state an exception to it. It would doubtless be in the recollection of the noble Duke, that about eight or nine years ago Lord Sidmouth, then Secretary of State for the Home Department, issued a Circular, which excited considerable sensation at the time. When his Lordship was called upon for an explanation of his conduct in regard to that Circular (motions were made on the subject), he laid on their Lordships' Table the opinions of the Attorney and Solicitor-General in support of what he had done. In conclusion he must repeat, that if the document could not be produced, it was unfair to quote it in order to influence their Lordships' minds.
927
The Duke of Wellington
said, he was entirely responsible for his own acts, and the other members of his Majesty's Government were equally responsible for their acts. He had stated in argument that he considered the acts of the Government justified by the legal opinion which Ministers had received on the subject, and which of course they had felt it their duty to call for. The noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack knew perfectly well what the practice was on the subject, and he appealed to him whether it were not the practice to refuse to give up the opinions which the law-officers of the Crown had, when called upon, communicated to the servants of the Crown. The servants of the Crown must take on themselves the responsibility for their own acts.
The Lord Chancellor
said, that whilst he had the honour to hold the offices of Solicitor and Attorney General, his attention had been at different times directed to this point, and though he did not mean to say, that in no one instance had the opinions delivered confidentially by the law-officers of the Crown been communicated to Parliament, he had always understood that it was not the practice to apply for such opinions, nor to lay them before Parliament when applied for. They were considered to be confidential communications from the law-officers of the Crown to the members of Government, for the purpose of guiding their judgment on matters of state. With respect to the particular instance to which his noble friend had alluded, he believed that the opinions of the law-officers were communicated to Parliament by Lord Sidmouth without any application from any Member of either House of Parliament. It was his voluntary act, and he not only made the communication to Parliament, he circulated those opinions through the country at large for the purpose of regulating the conduct of the people.
Lord Holland
said, he understood from the explanation of the noble and learned Lord, that these confidential papers might be communicated to the public, but not to Parliament. This certainly was the most extraordinary description of confidential papers he had ever heard of. [
a laugh
928
The Earl of Eldon
could state, without any difficulty, that thirty years ago, when he had the honour to hold the office of Attorney General, it was not the practice to lay before Parliament the opinions given by the law-officers of the Crown. He remembered it being related of Sir Fletcher Norton, when Attorney General, that in consequence of a motion for the production of an opinion which he had given to the Government, he declared that he would never give a written opinion again, as long as he was Attorney General. If a motion were made for the production of the opinions in the present instance, he would vote against it. But he thought if papers were not to be produced, they ought not to be quoted. That the opinions of the law-officers of the Crown must have considerable influence with the House, was beyond all question. The practice he believed to be, that these opinions ought not to be called for, and that being the case, that they ought not to be quoted. He hoped what had passed would put a stop to the practice of quoting opinions of this nature.
STATE OF THE NATION.]
Earl Stanhope
said, that in rising to submit to the consideration of their Lordships the Motion of which he had given notice some days ago, he deeply regretted that the task had not been undertaken by somebody better qualified to do justice to the subject. It would have been more satisfactory to him, and he was sure more agreeable to their Lordships, if the subject had been brought before them by some person whose abilities, eloquence, information, and experi-
929
930
931
ad infinitum
s
932
s
l
933
*
d
*
934
s
s
d
935
936
s
937
938
s
s
The Duke of Wellington
.— No; for such is not the fact.
Earl Stanhope
contended, that if the statements which were periodically published of the Revenue were to be depended upon (and the noble Duke knew better than he did whether they were to be depended on or not) there was a falling-off of the Revenue of the last year as compared with that of the former, of 1,300,000
l
939
940
941
942
de omnibus rebus et quibusdam aliis
943
944
Viscount Goderich
: In the opposition which I shall have to make to the Motion of the noble Earl I feel that I have to perform an ungracious, and, perhaps, an unpopular task; and certainly I am under no obligation to be the first to offer any remarks in opposition to this Committee, as that would rather be expected to be the part of some member of the Government. If I had consulted my own ease, I should have abstained from the course which I am pursuing; but if, before the House entered on the consideration of this measure, I felt considerable doubt as to the propriety of concurring in the proposition of the noble Earl, I must confess that the speech we have just heard has most materially confirmed that resolution. I must confess, also, that I did not at all expect that the noble Earl would have confined himself on this occasion to the description of a state of things which no one can attempt to deny—I mean the general distress which prevails in the country, and the duty which lies on your Lordships to do the best in your power to alleviate and relieve that distress. I expected that he would have proceeded to slate something as to the causes which, in his view, had
945
Earl Stanhope
: I beg pardon. I particularly said, that for such an inquiry as that into the affairs of India, a Select Committee might do.
Viscount Goderich
: Just so; but then the noble Earl proceeded to describe the proceedings of such a Committee in a somewhat contemptuous style; and though he has complained that the conduct of this House is not such as to command the respect of the country, I must say that the noble Earl's own description is not calculated to raise us in the estimation of the public. It, however, strikes me that it would be easy to describe the proceedings of a Committee of the whole House in terms as ludicrous as those which have fallen from the noble Earl with respect to a Select Committee. It has not been my fortune, since I have been a Member of this House, to attend a Committee of the whole House on any important subject; but do not the King's Ministers sit in a Committee of the whole House? Are not the followers of Government on the same benches, then, which they always occupy? In short, I have heard no objection against a Select Committee which may not be urged with ten times the force against the plan proposed by the noble Earl. Surely, then, no imputation of want of feeling is to be brought against any one for objecting to the mode of proceeding proposed by the noble Earl. According to my view of the case, it has one remarkable objection. He tells you that a Select Committee would go into minuteness of detail, but that a Committee of the whole House would only look at general features. But if we suppose that the people of England are to be satisfied with such a superficial
946
947
948
The Duke of Wellington
: My statement of the amount was independent of what was retained by the Bank.
Viscount Goderich
: I am glad to hear that, for I then have to give the Bank credit for a more judicious management than I otherwise think it would have deserved. But, setting aside that part of the question, I think that the currency is not only insufficient, but that it is unnecessarily limited, and that it might be increased without the slightest danger to the country. I know no criterion by which we are so well to judge of the proper amount of the circulation as by the state of our foreign exchanges. For the last eighteen months those foreign exchanges have been highly in favour of this country, and till the exchanges shall be against us, it appears to me that the currency cannot be too full. The maxim we should adopt on this head ought to be, to keep it, "without o'erflowing, full," and I think that it is desirable to have in this country as large a supply as may be consistent with this principle. The view which I take of the distresses of the country leads me, I confess, to the opinion that those distresses are in part to be attributed to the imperfect system of banking which prevails out of the metropolis. In my judgment, the issues of the country bankers are not regulated by those principles which are likely to prove advantageous to themselves or beneficial to the country. When times of difficulty arrive, the issuers of the country paper immediately take alarm, and contract their circulation with a timidity unfounded and ruinous; and when the prospects of the commercial world undergo a change they immediately begin to issue on a scale so extended as well deserving to be described as rash. If I am asked what remedy I would recommend for this evil, it is this, give increased facility to the establishment of banks. It must, of course, be in the recollection of your Lordships, that after the panic in the year 1826—a panic, the grounds of which were much exaggerated, and the effects not fairly represented—I
949
950
951
l
l
l
l
952
ad libitum
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
953
l
l
l
l
l
l
hear, hear, hear! from the Duke of Richmond, and one or twoother Peers
l
954
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
955
s
s
l
l
956
l
957
The Duke of Richmond
, after apologising to the House for addressing them at so early a period of the Debate, said he had never heard a more convincing speech than that of the noble Earl by whom the present Motion was brought forward. He would not follow the noble Viscount who had spoken last through all the minute details into which he had entered, but he would beg the House to remember that that noble Viscount had admitted the general pressure of the distress, though the Speech from the Throne, on the first day of the Session, had distinctly stated that that distress was partial. Taxation was a self-evident cause of the distress, and the distress was acknowledged to be universal; yet the very noble Lord by whom that universality was admitted told Parliament, in 1825, when he was Chancellor of the Exchequer, that the financial condition of the country was placed upon a rock, the foundation of which could not be undermined. He was very glad to find that the noble Viscount had gained something by experience. The Government did not seem to have profited in the same manner; for it seemed even yet not to believe that the distress was felt in every part of the country in every branch of business, and felt with unparalleled severity. He thought, for his own part, that the distress was very general, and he was convinced that
958
d
d
959
hear
960
961
l
l
s
s
s
d
s
d
962
963
The Earl of Rosebery
felt it necessary to say a few words upon the subject of the present distress, which, if not equally general as that in 1816, was somewhat of the same character, and existed under a similar combination of circumstances. How it happened that, in 1815, 1816, in 1821, 1822, in 1826 and in 1829—great and general distress had occurred in this country, was a question that, no doubt, had much occupied the attention of Ministers and was one to which it would be of great importance to give a clear solution. That during a period of fifteen years of profound peace, times of distress should so often have occurred, was most painful; and the first care of the Legislature was to inquire into the causes of their recurrence; and the first duty, both of the Government and the Parliament, was if possible to provide for it a remedy, or at least a corrective. To him the most painful circumstance in the recurrence of the state of distress during peace, was its frequency. It was like the return of a wasting disease, which undermined the constitution, and at each attack left the body with less strength to resist the next occurrence of the disorder. He would first enumerate the causes which, in his opinion, had brought this country into its present state; and next he would refer to those remedial measures which were within the sphere of the Legislature to apply. He must begin that enumeration with the question of the currency. Though like the noble Viscount he was in favour of a metallic currency, yet he could not disguise from himself the fact that much of the evils now existing had been produced by the
964
965
966
967
hear, from the Duke of Wellington
968
The Earl of Eldon
hoped their Lordships would excuse him if he requested the favour of a hearing for a short time. The question before them might, he thought, be compressed into a very small compass. He was not able to come down on the first day of the meeting of Parliament, else, perhaps, he should not have trespassed on their patience at this late period; he could assure their Lordships, however, that he would not detain them long from enjoying the advantage of those views and information which they were likely to receive from the noble Lords who would follow him. He confessed that there was no passage of his life, personal or political, which he regretted more than his absence, all involuntary as it was, on the first day of the Session, when such an extraordinary course of proceeding was adopted by his Majesty's Ministers. He said this, mean-
969
970
971
The Earl of Rosebery
explained, that he should be ready to support any motion for inquiry, brought forward in what he considered a definite and practicable form.
The Earl of Eldon
resumed: He had done his noble friend injustice—not willingly. But he would wish to have this practicable mode of inquiry pointed out; he did not recollect if the noble Lord had told them his mode. Certainly his noble friends had between them suggested fifteen ways of affording ample relief. He would not have spoken that night, were it not for the purpose of recording his opinion, that their Lordships' House was bound to make some inquiry. As to the plans laid before them by his noble friends, he begged to say that nobody would be more willing to defer to their opinions than himself; but he thought, when they possessed the right and power of collecting the opinions of the House of Lords as a House, that this would be a most desirable mode of conducting their inquiry. He therefore would not take a decision upon trust from his noble friends, either as to the causes or the remedies, but he would have it in
972
The Earl of Rosebery
explained.
973
The Duke of Wellington
said, he would proceed to notice what had fallen from the noble and learned Lord that had spoken last, and to set the noble Earl right with reference to his misconception of his Majesty's Speech, delivered by the Lords Commissioners, but he would in the first instance beg leave to advert to something which fell from the noble Earl that made the Motion, and from the noble Duke that had spoken in the course of the debate. The noble Earl, although he had stated that it was not his intention to make his Motion personal against him (the Duke of Wellington), yet he certainly did contrive, somehow or other, in most part of his speech to introduce matters entirely personal. The noble Duke had done the same, although he apprehended that the noble Duke especially could not have any personal feelings against him or against the Ministers. He had, however, brought forward an occurrence in a county in which he (the Duke of Wellington) was the Lord-lieutenant, when the noble Duke forgot that he himself was in the neighbourhood, in another county, in which a similar misfortune had occurred. It was their Lordships' duty he admitted, to do all in their power to alleviate the existing distress, but he was sure that no benefit could be derived to the community at large from personal attacks in that House, and from impeaching individuals. The object they must all have was to endeavour to discover the causes of the distress, and to ascertain the means which could be devised to alleviate it. The noble Earl who commenced this debate began by stating that the agricultural population of the country was in a state of the greatest distress, and he was followed in the same strain by the noble Duke opposite. No man felt more confident on that subject than himself, and on the first day of the Session (although his noble friend was not present), he had stated what he now repeated, that he did not entertain the slightest doubt of the distress; but when the noble Duke called upon the House to appoint a Committee of Inquiry into the agricultural distress, he should recollect that the usual course on similar occasions was, to state what substantive measure he intended to propose. Did the noble Earl mean to propose a repeal or an alteration of the Corn Laws? For if he did, he would at once tell him he would oppose him. The Corn Laws could not be repealed without injury
974
cries of no, no.!
975
s
d
s
d
s
d.,
d
l
s
l
s
s
d
s
d
s
d
s
d
s
d
s
d
s
d
s
d.;
s
d
s
d
s
d
d.,
d.,
d
s
d
s
d
l
s
d
l
s
d
976
l
l
l
l
l
977
Viscount Goderich
said in explanation, that he had included the Dead Weight, for he knew it came eventually from the public—not from the Bank.
The Duke of Wellington
, in continuation said, his noble friend would find, if he included all these items, that instead of a surplus Revenue over expenditure of three millions, there would be only a million and a half, and that would be its utmost amount, even after all the savings, it was the wish of his Majesty's Government to carry into effect as far as possible. It should be remembered that the savings were not all clear gain to the public; and, moreover, if the savings were not made where they would not fall on individuals, they would do more injury than good. When offices became vacant, the Government always considered whether the public service could not go on without filling them up; and if this were not the case, the next point was to consider whether the place could not be filled by some persons who already received half-pay or pension, so that the half-pay or pension might be saved to the public. They had tried to reduce the list of pensions of the Army and Navy, by not keeping men in the service the full time they ought to serve, according to the original institutions in the Army. As the men were generally willing to take their discharge the amount of their pensions was lessened. He should deceive the House by telling them that savings would be beneficial if they were made at the expense of individuals who must be thrown on the public as soon as the savings were made. With inference to the question of the Silver Currency, which had occupied a large portion of the noble Lord's speech, he should prove that the noble Lord was entirely mistaken. In point of fact, both the metals, silver and gold, circulated now on the same principle on which they had circulated previously to the year 1797. But it was well known that our silver coinage, previous to the war, was much deteriorated by wear and other causes, and was then only a legal tender by tale to the amount of 5
l
s
d
978
979
The Earl of Eldon
, in explanation, observed that it seemed to be supposed that he had objected to the small-note circulation; but he had no hesitation in declaring it to be his opinion, that, under proper regulations, the small-note circulation ought to be restored. As to what the
980
Viscount Goderich
wished to say a few words in explanation. The noble Duke supposed that he had erroneously stated the surplus Revenue of the last two years. What he had stated was, that he found the surplus of the year 1828, after deducting, on the one hand, the payments by the Bank on acccount of the Dead Weight, and, on the other, the payments to the Trustees, was 3,232,000
l
l
l
l
l
Revenue
£50,786,000
Expenditure
49,075,000
£1,711,000
l
l
l
l
The Duke of Richmond
, in explanation, said that the noble Duke must know but little of him if he could suppose that anything which he had said had been dictated by personal feeling. He had served under the noble Duke's banner, and bad passed some of the happiest days of his life with him; and if he were to act as his personal feelings dictated, it would be in every case to support the noble Duke. He had alluded to an occurrence in a county in which the noble Duke had a preponderating influence, only to corroborate his assertion, that the English peasantry were
981
The Marquis of Salisbury
bore testimony to the severe distress existing in the country. Would their Lordships suffer the agricultural population to be borne down as they were at present? Hundreds of able-bodied labourers were compelled to have recourse to a pittance derived from the parish for their existence. It had been said that there was a greater currency at present than in former years. He would ask if there ever existed the same distress for want of currency? He did not mean to compare the two countries, but the distress at present existing in this country was similar to the distress which existed in France immediately before the Revolution. With respect to the motions before their Lordships, he certainly did not think the proposition for an inquiry at the bar of the House a wise one. In his opinion, it would do more harm than good. He thought the best course would be, to refer different subjects to Select Committees; and he called on the noble Duke standing by the fire (Richmond)—for no one could do it better—to move for the appointment of a Select Committee to inquire into the cause of the distress under which the labouring population were suffering. If the inquiries in Select Committees failed, then a more general inquiry might be instituted by all their Lordships at the bar of the House.
The Earl of Radnor
expressed his surprise at the speeches of the noble Viscount who had followed the noble Mover, and of the noble Duke at the head of his Majesty's Government; and his still greater surprise at the conclusions to which they had arrived. The noble Duke had begun his speech in a spirit not called for by any thing which had occurred. He had lost his temper; and charged the noble Earl, and the noble Duke who had spoken so ably on the question, with personality; although there was nothing in the speeches of the noble Earl and the noble Duke to justify the accusation. As to the general tenour of the noble Duke's speech, nothing could be more in favour of the Motion, except the tenour of the speech of the noble Viscount. The noble Duke not only dropped the word "inquiry" several times in the course of his speech, but actually concluded his speech by urging their Lordships to investigate and inquire. No doubt every noble Lord had inquired, and would inquire
982
983
984
Viscount Goderich
declared that he had never used such an expression; although
985
The Earl of Radnor
observed, that with respect to the passages which he had quoted from the noble Viscount's speeches in 1824 and 1825, he had refreshed his memory by a reference to the recorded reports of those speeches; but he had not had an opportunity of doing so with reference to the last-mentioned expression. He would not positively assert that the noble Viscount had used that expression; but unless his memory greatly failed him he believed that he had clone so. The one-pound notes were the solid basis of the prosperity of the country, on which the noble Viscount, when Chancellor of the Exchequer, congratulated the country. The solid basis of our prosperity was putting forth filthy rags. What he blamed the noble Duke for was, not for doing what every body said ought not to have been done—he meant the measure for putting an end to the circulation of the rags; but, when this measure was adopted, there were other measures that ought also to have been adopted at the same time, to prevent the consequence of putting an end to the paper money. He would not then discuss those other measures; but he thought their Lordships would act wisely in going into a Committee to inquire into what measures might yet be taken. Nobody now doubted the distress; the noble Duke and his colleagues did not doubt the distress; and as they had already changed their opinions on some most important points, he did not doubt that ere the close of the Session the House would yet see greater changes even than before in their opinions. He could bear witness that the distress in that part of the country where he acted as a magistrate was very severe, so severe as to be indescribable. But there was something beyond the pecuniary distress which demanded their Lordships' attention; out of that distress there had arisen a most acrimonious and hostile feeling, a feeling which he was afraid was increasing, and threatening the destruction of society. Only a few years ago there was a social intercourse between all the different classes in the country; it extended downwards, from the farmer through the labourer, and upwards, through the landowner to the Peers, and the highest person in the realm. At present this connexion was entirely destroyed, and
986
987
The Marquis of Lansdown
could assure the noble Earl (who had submitted the Motion to their Lordships with that degree of earnestness which the subject well deserved), that if he could persuade himself that assenting to the Motion would further the object of enlightening that House and the country as to the causes and cure of that state of difficulty in which he felt as much as the noble Lord that the country was fallen—if he thought that the inquiry would enable them to ascertain what the wisest among them did not then know, how much of the distress arose from permanent, and how much from temporary causes—if, duly contemplating the importance of the inquiry, he could persuade himself to adopt the mode of inquiry recommended by the noble Lord,
988
989
Delicta majorum immeritus lues
990
The Duke of Wellington
said, that the noble Marquis had altogether misunderstood him. He had stated the fall in the price of the raw material as an evidence, not that we were suffering, for this very fall in the price of the raw material, he admitted had been productive of benefits to our own manufacturers, but he stated it as a proof of those changes in prices which Parliament could not control. He had, indeed, also stated that the fall in the price of the raw material would account for the fall in the price of the manufactured article.
The Marquis of Lansdown
was glad the noble Duke had corrected the error into which he had unintentionally fallen. The fall in the price of the raw material, then, through this series of years, had been beneficial to the country. There was another point to which he was anxious to advert, he meant the currency. With the late Earl of Liverpool, of whom he could never speak without respect and the most kindly
991
l
l
l
l
The Duke of Wellington
. — Yes, but in weight.
The Marquis of Lansdown
. —No doubt, in weight; and was not weight every thing? The coin, it was well known, was continually liable to deterioration from wear, and for that reason, coin was a legal tender to the amount of only 25
l
992
993
994
995
Lord King
said, he arose at that late hour of the debate, for the purpose of proposing an amendment to their Lordships. At the same time, he could assure their Lordships that he felt no disposition to attempt to embarrass the Government by any vote of his, or by proposing the adoption of any particular measure of his own, far less by supporting the noble Earl's Motion, which contained more than met the eye, and came upon the House
cum quibusdam aliis
996
d
997
l
l
l
998
l
s
d
l
s
d
The Marquis of Bute
was of opinion, that there were not sufficient grounds for inquiry; and stated, on his own actual knowledge, that the distress was only partial. He was not insensible to the distress, and had done what he could to alleviate it. During the last two months, he considered that a good deal of improvement had taken place among the manufacturing and ship-building interests. He reposed the utmost confidence in the present Government, and gave them credit for a desire to relieve the country to the utmost of their ability. He wished those taxes which pressed the most heavily on the poorer classes to be taken off: he might mention the taxes upon hops, beer, and coals carried coast-ways. The noble Marquis concluded by expressing his determination to oppose both motions for inquiry.
Lord Melville
said, that the noble Baron had selected rather invidiously the name of an individual for remark, though he knew that other individuals were in a
999
Lord King
observed, that to the names of the persons whom he had mentioned, no number of years of service whatever was attached.
Lord Wharncliffe
would vote against the original Motion and the Amendment, because he expected no relief from the means proposed to be adopted. The noble Duke (of Wellington) had stated that the agricultural distress could not be so great, as meat and timber now bore nearly as high prices as at most other periods. He denied the correctness of the noble Duke's statement as to timber; he (Lord Wharncliffe) could now only get 2
s
d
s
d
l
The Duke of Wellington
observed, that what he had said was, that at present meat and timber both brought prices nearly equal to those which they produced when taxes were much higher.
The Earl of Darnley
said, that if he thought any advantage were to be expected from the inquiry which it was proposed to institute, he should vote for it; but he was not of opinion that this was the case. He contended that the distress was not so great as had been supposed by some; and expressed his conviction that we were arrived at the lowest point of depression, and that both in agricultural and manufacturing affairs we might even now see cause for sanguine hopes of a return to a better state. He gave the Government credit for sincerity in their attempts to carry reductions into effect, but thought that they might be carried much farther, Sir H. Parnell had stated,
1000
l
l
l
Lord Teynham
expressed the great satisfaction he felt at hearing the luminous speeches of the noble Mover, and the noble Marquis (Lansdown), but as he thought no good could result from so wide and indefinite an inquiry, he begged the noble Earl to withdraw his motion.
Earl Stanhope
, in reply, stated that he had not brought forward his Motion, of which he had given due notice from the love, as the noble Duke insinuated, of making a fine speech. He declared that he had no love for talking, but he would at all times freely and unreservedly state his opinion on public affairs. He conceived it was the duty of the people to remonstrate, and of the Peers who felt their grievances to echo their complaints; and if they were not allowed to do so, he should be at a loss to discover the difference between a government practically despotic and theoretically free. The distress of the country was he believed rapidly increasing, and he could look forward to nothing but calamity from neglecting to remedy it. He trusted that he knew what was his duty to his country under such circumstances, and that he should always have the courage to perform it.
Lord King
, by permission of their Lordships, withdrew his Amendment.
Their Lordships
then divided on the Original Motion: Content 15 present, proxies 10; Total 25: Not Content 67 present, proxies 51; Total 118; Majority against the Motion 93.
List of the Minority
Dukes.
Earls.
Richmond
Carnarvon
Newcastle
Stradbroke
Marquis of
Bradford
Ailesbury
Barons.
Earls.
Churchill
Eldon
Rivers
Stanhope
Northwick
Tankerville
Redesdale
Ferrers
Grantley
Romney
Teynham
Radnor
Wodehouse
Digby
Walsingham
Winchilsea
Stowell
Falmouth
Kenyon
Against this vote the Earl of Eldon entered the following; Protest,
1001
"Dissentient,
"First, Because we are convinced that the distress which prevailed in this Kingdom at the time of the commencement of the present Session of Parliament, and which his Majesty must have been induced to believe, and have been advised to represent to Parliament as partial, was at that period most severely felt in almost all parts of the Kingdom, and that it has since increased and continues to increase.
"Secondly, Because it has been stated to Parliament that the distress so represented to be only partial was to be attributed to the seasons, and to other causes not under legislative control, and the representation so made whilst it states a self-evident truth respecting the seasons, omits all mention what the other causes of distress are, and Parliament therefore has not the means of ascertaining, without further inquiry, whether such causes are or are not under legislative control.
"Thirdly, Because we think that it is the duty of this House not to rest satisfied with respect to matters of such importance without instituting a solemn inquiry, in order to ascertain what are the causes which have produced extreme distress throughout the Kingdom, or the greatest part thereof; and whether that distress can by any and what legislative measures be removed or alleviated; and because it is we conceive, the duty of Parliament, without any delay, to the utmost of its power, by all just means to endeavour to alleviate it.
"Fourthly, Because we think that if it should be found upon satisfactory inquiry that the causes of the distress cannot be removed, or the distress be alleviated by the Legislature, his Majesty's subjects will not fail duly to appreciate the earnest endeavours of Parliament to relieve them, and then they will cease to labour under an aggravation of their distress, occasioned by their present belief that if the distress cannot be wholly removed it may be materially alleviated; an aggravation of distress from which it may be in the power of Parliament to relieve them, by ascertaining what are (other than the seasons) the causes of the distress, and whether such other causes are or are not under legislative control.
(Signed) ELDON."
The following Peers afterwards signed the Protest:—
1002
Stanhope, Northwick, Churchill, Teynham, Richmond, Lennox, and Radnor.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Friday, February 26, 1830.
FOREIGN CORN.]
Earl Stanhope
moved for the return of Foreign Com imported since the 15th of July, 1828, with the weekly averages—Ordered.
BRITISH TIMBER.]
The Marquis of Salisbury
moved for a return of the quantity of Oak of British growth, purchased for the use of his Majesty's Dock-yards, with the price paid for it, since the year l809.
Earl Stanhope
said, that if the noble Lord's object in moving for the Return, was to show that British timber had suffered a great depreciation of price, the motion was unnecessary, because the fact of the depreciation was notorious.
The Marquis of Salisbury
said, he was aware of the notoriety of the fact, but as it had been denied last night, he wished to have official proof of it.
The Return was ordered.
STATE OF THE POOR.]
The Duke of Richmond
gave notice, that he would move that their Lordships be summoned for Tuesday week, on which occasion he would move for the appointment of a Select Committee to take into consideration the State of the Labouring Classes of the Country. He would not state the precise words in which his motion would be framed, until he had an opportunity of consulting other noble Lords whose opinion he valued. On the present occasion, therefore, he would merely give a general notice to the effect he had stated.
Lord Teynham
observed, that he had given notice of a motion on the subject, and he would then state that the object of that motion would be, to appoint a Select Committee to inquire into the office and duties of Overseer of the Poor. He knew that great cruelties were practised on paupers in various places, that they were shut up in pounds, and otherwise treated in a manner that was most oppressive. He wished the Committee to ascertain by what law the overseers exercised this sort of power.
The Duke of Richmond
begged to state, that in the motion which he intended to submit, he should cast no censure on the overseers of the poor
1003
The Bishop of Bath and Wells
rose to present a Petition from the inhabitants of the town of Frome, in Somersetshire, complaining of distress. The right rev. Prelate said, that the state of misery to which the labouring part of the population was reduced, was unparalleled in the history of the country. What he should state he had seen. He did not derive his information from what he had read, but from what he had seen. He would not speak of things which he did not know to be true, but of things which he had seen with his own eyes.
—quæque ipse miserrima vidi.
1004
CORN LAWS.]
Earl Stanhope
presented a Petition from Mr. John Wright, a coal and iron master, near Nottingham, praying for such a revision of the Cornlaws, as would increase the duties on foreign corn. The petitioner, observed the noble Earl, did not belong to that class of people considered favourable to the landed interest, nevertheless he was well persuaded of the impolicy of the present Corn Laws.
s
s
SALARIES AND PENSIONS.]
The Marquis of Lansdown
(after stating that there was no objection, he understood, on the part of the noble Duke at the head of his Majesty's Government to the production of the returns sought) moved that "there be laid before this House an account of the Pensions granted under the 57th Geo. 3rd cap. 65.; also an account of all Salaries granted by the Acts passed the same year."—Ordered.
EAST INDIA COMPANY'S CHARTER.]
The noble Marquis then presented two Petitions against the renewal of the East-India Company's Charter, from Manchester and Hull. The petitioners of the latter-named town suggested that the notice which the law requires should be given to the East-India Company by Government, respecting the termination of their Charter. He had been requested to state this by the petitioners; but he supposed, as a matter of course, that due notice had been given by the Government.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, February 26, 1830.
MINUTES.] The Select Vestry Amendment Bill of the united parishes of St. Giles and St. George's Bloomsbury, was read a first time.—The following Members were sworn in to form a Committee to inquire into the Cork Election
1005
EDUCATION IN IRELAND—LAND REVENUES.]
Lord F. L. Gower
presented a Petition from Bishops professing the Roman Catholic religion in Ireland, on the subject of Education in that country.
Mr. Rice
said, that if the usual items for Education appeared in the Irish Estimates this year he should bring the matter before the House, with a view to an inquiry into the subject.
Mr. D. W. Harvey
rose to renew the notice of his Motion, which was to have been made yesterday, respecting the Land Revenues of the Crown, for the 30th of March. He took this opportunity of observing, that the Revenues of the Crown Lands, in the Duchy of Lancaster, were not brought into any of the Public Accounts, and as it would greatly forward the object he had in view, he begged to ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster if he had any objection to furnish him with information on this subject.
Mr. Arbuthnot
said (as we understood him), that the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster had nothing to do with the Crown Lands.
ARTICLED CLERKS.]
Mr. J. Wood
presented a Petition from a number of Articled Clerks in the profession of the Law, complaining that although they had paid the heavy stamp duty, and served five years in the profession, yet, having omitted to enroll their articles, they were debarred being admitted as attorneys, and became liable to serve five years over again, or pay an additional stamp duty.
The Solicitor-General
supported the petition, and observed that, as the Revenue would not be affected, and it was a case of great hardship, he hoped the prayer of the petition would be acceded to.
The petition was read. It prayed that the petitioners might be indemnified against the consequences of their omissions.
DISTRESSED WEAVERS.]
Mr. J. Wood
presented a Petition from the Cotton-Weavers, &c. of Preston, complaining of the very depressed state of their trade. The Petition, the hon. Member stated, was signed by 7,000 weavers, and he felt great pain in presenting it, because,
1006
1007
Mr. Hume
wished to say one word on this petition. So far from believing that the plan recommended by the petitioners would afford relief, he was quite satisfied that what they asked would only add to their difficulties. A great number of persons were maintained by the manufacture of Cotton Twist for exportation, and if a duty were laid on that article on its being exported, all those individuals would be thrown out of employment. He was not however surprised that those petitioners complained and recommended as a remedy that which would only do mischief. When he heard men in the city and elsewhere,—men holding high rank and station, and who ought to be better informed, inveighing against the exportation of Cotton Twist as a dreadful evil to this country,—when such men made complaints of that nature, the House need not be surprised at the mistake into which the weavers had fallen. In one point, however, he agreed with the petitioners. He thought that the raw material ought to be introduced into this country at as cheap a rate as possible. In that principle he was satisfied, they were right; though the price of cotton was not now high, yet, if it were lower, it would increase the quantity of employment.
The Petition was laid on the Table,
1008
AGRICULTURAL DISTRESS.]
Mr. Chaplin
presented a Petition from certain inhabitants of the county of Lincoln, complaining of Distress and Taxation. The Petition was signed by 7,000 persons. He trusted that Ministers would take the condition of the labouring classes into consideration, and shift the load of taxation from their shoulders upon those of a portion of the community better able to bear it. He was glad to hear that the Chancellor of the Exchequer intended to do something with respect to the sale of beer; and trusted that the Beer-tax, which fell so heavily upon the lower orders, would be modified.
Colonel Sibthorp
confirmed the statements of distress contained in the petition; it was general, not partial. A statement had gone abroad, that the price of timber was but little, if at all, reduced; he begged distinctly to contradict that statement, and to add, that timber had fallen half its former price.
MALT AND BEER DUTIES.]
Sir R. Hill
presented a Petition from certain inhabitants of the county of Salop, complaining of the heavy duties on Malt and Beer.
Mr. Slaney
said, the petition was signed by 1,200 persons. He had proved last year that the duties imposed on Malt liquor, in various shapes, amounted to 200 per cent. He had been informed, and was glad to hear, that Government intended to do something to facilitate the retail supply of Beer to the working classes. He wished to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if it were his intention to move for a Committee to inquire into the licensing system of public-houses? Having himself given notice of a motion relative to the burthens and restrictions on the manufacture and supply of Malt liquor, which comprised that among other objects, he should be glad that the matter should fall into better hands. If it turned out that he had been correctly informed as to the right hon. Gentleman's intention, giving Government full credit for a sincere wish to relieve the labouring classes, he should postpone his notice of motion, hoping, as he did, that Ministers would do their utmost to relieve the public burthens; and that though a revision of the licensing system might be the beginning, it would not prove the end of remedial measures.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said,
1009
Colonel Davies
hoped that some county Member would take up the motion which the hon. Member's new-found confidence in Ministers had induced him to defer.
Mr. Slaney
was not indifferent to the subject, but wished to give Government time to act for itself.
LEATHER DUTIES.]
Mr. O'Connell
moved for a return of the produce of the Excise Duty on Leather, from the 1st of January, 1829, to the 1st of January, 1830—of the number and amount of penalties levied, and of the costs incurred thereby—of the expenses of collecting the duties on Leather—and of the number and nature of the oaths taken by manufacturers of Leather.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
observed, that with respect to the Oaths, they were imposed by Acts of Parliament, and could be easily ascertained, without the cost and trouble which must attend a return.
Mr. O'Connell
said, that as he meant to bring the subject before the House, and as the Oaths were so numerous, he was not inclined to trust to any return of his own, because he would have no dispute upon facts. It would be very troublesome for gentlemen to look through all the Acts, and more troublesome to ascertain how many of those Acts had been repealed.
Mr. O'Connell
moved for similar returns respecting the Excise Duties on Paper.
DUBLIN JURORS.]
Mr. O'Connell
moved for a return of the number of Inquests and Commissions which had been summoned under the Act for the Improvement of the city of Dublin for the last ten years; also, for a return of the number and names of the persons who had sat as Jurors on such Inquests, and of the amount of the sums which had been paid to them.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, he had no objection to these Returns being granted, except on the score of the expense of printing the names of these persons,—an expense which he thought ought not to be incurred, unless the hon. Member first made out a case of probable benefit.
Mr. O'Connell
said, that in the first
1010
TRUCK SYSTEM—REVENUE, &c.]
Mr. Hume
said, that the hon. Member for Staffordshire (Mr. Littleton) had given notice, that on Wednesday, the 17th of March, he should move for leave to bring in a Bill to render more effectual the laws for the Payment of Wages in Money. He wished then to give notice, that he should move, as an Amendment to that Motion, for leave to bring in a Bill to repeal all laws which inflicted penalties on Masters for paying wages in goods. He hoped he should be able to put an end to the delusion that prevailed on that subject. He would also then move for a Return of the number and names of each post town in which an extra charge, beyond the rate of postage fixed by Act of Parliament for the delivery of letters, had been made; together with a statement of the authority on which such extra charge had been made;—also, for a return of the number and names of places which had been relieved from such extra charge during the last three years—also, for a return of the gross amount of Excise Duties collected in Great Britain in the year ending the 5th of January, 1830; distinguishing the amount paid for collection, and the amount actually paid into the Exchequer—also, for a similar return respecting the Duties of Customs, and the Land and Assessed Taxes. The hon. Member said, he would take this opportunity of stating, that if the Ministers did not propose any further reductions, he should, as soon as the Estimates were over, submit a motion on the subject of the Collection of the Revenue. After the able manner in which an hon. friend of his (Sir H. Parnell) had exposed, in his late publication, the abuses of the mode of collection, and the saving that
1011
SUPPLY OF WATER TO THE METROPOLIS.]
Mr. C. Pallmer
called the attention of the House to a Petition which he considered to be of considerable importance to the health and comfort of the inhabitants of this great metropolis. It came from certain individuals living on the south side of the river Thames, in the county of Surrey. The petition stated that they applied on behalf of the inhabitants of nearly 70,000 houses, and that if time had permitted, there would have been 100,000 signatures to the petition. The petitioners stated, that they were many of them master bakers by trade, and that they were supplied by no other water than that pumped out of the River Thames, which was of the most impure and inferior quality, and particularly ill-adapted for the purpose of making wholesome and palatable bread,—that the water was disgusting to the eye, nauseous to the taste, and injurious to the health. They had entertained hopes from what passed in that House in the year 1827, that something would have been done to remedy the evil complained of; and they prayed that relief might be speedily afforded to them. He trusted that the hon. Baronet, the Member for Westminster (who had taken this important public interest under his able protection) would not neglect it, and that the Secretary of State for the Home Department would consider the subject as eminently entitled to his earliest and most serious attention.
PRIVILEGE—PARLIAMENTARY AGENCY.]
Sir E. Knatchbull
said, he rose to present a Petition which had very lately been put into his hands, and which related to a motion about to be brought forward that evening. As it was respectfully worded, he bad not refused to present it. The petitioner was a Mr. Sydney, who took notice of a motion which was to be brought forward by the hon. Member for Staffordshire (Mr. Littleton), in which motion the petitioner thought that his interests were involved, and he prayed to be heard at the bar respecting the said motion. He begged to move that the petition be brought up.
Mr. C. W. Wynn
begged to ask of the Speaker if it were consistent with the
1012
The Speaker
said, that there was certainly no precedent, that he knew of, in favour of receiving such a petition. He thought it well worthy the consideration of the House, whether they would allow a motion respecting the conduct of their own Members to be thus noticed.
Mr. Hume
believed that a petition had, the other evening, been presented against the present petitioner, and he begged to know of the Speaker, if it were contrary to usage, in such a case, to hear a man at the Bar in defence of himself.
The Speaker
said, that the hon. Member was putting to him an hypothetical question, which did not bear in the most remote degree upon the present case. The petition to which the hon. Member alluded, and which had been presented by the hon. Member for Staffordshire, was not against the present petitioner. It was the petition of a person who thought it derogatory to the dignity of the House that one of its Members should be engaged in partnership with others, out of the House, who were the paid agents for conducting Parliamentary business; and the petition prayed that such a practice might be put an end to. That petition, therefore, could not be said to be a petition against the present petitioner.
Mr. Hume
said, he might have been misinformed, but he understood that the present petitioner was mentioned in that petition; and if so, he thought it hard to refuse the petitioner a hearing.
Sir E. Knatchbull
said, that if it were the wish of the House, he should certainly withdraw the petition. [
Cries of "Withdraw."
The Petition was then withdrawn.
Mr. Littleton
said, that he rose pursuant to the notice he had given, to move a resolution, declaring it to be contrary to the law and usage of Parliament for any Member to engage, either by himself or partner, in the management of private bills for pecuniary reward. He hoped he should receive credit for sincerity when he said, that it was with real pain and regret that, having presented a petition, he felt himself obliged to follow it up by a
1013
1014
Mr. Littleton
, in continuation said, that the Resolution which he should propose would only follow up the declaration. It was this:—"Resolved, That it is contrary to law, and to the usages of Parliament, for any Member either by himself or partner, to engage in the management of any private bill for any fee or reward." He was at a loss to conceive any objection there could be to passing this Resolution; but he could easily conceive that there were many grounds sufficient to call for its adoption. He would direct the attention of the House to the arguments which, on a former night, had been used by the hon. Member for Colchester upon this subject, and to the answers which he should give to them. In the first place that hon. Member justified himself on the fact, that other solicitors, Members of that House, had adopted the same course of proceeding, and that they had been allowed to engage in professional practice upon bills under discussion before the House. He presumed that the hon. Member believed he had stated only circumstances that were well founded; but, after a very exact inquiry into the matter, he had not been able to discover a single instance in which a solicitor sitting in that House engaged in professional practice upon private bills. The hon. Member for Colchester had to establish two points:—First, that there were instances in which solicitors, who were Members of that House, forgetting themselves and their duty to the House, had engaged in such practice; and next, that they had done so with the cognizance of that House. Unless he could succeed in establishing these two points, his facts and his arguments were worth nothing, and on these points he might fairly be challenged to prove that any one had done so without having been visited by punishment by that House. It was not strictly his duty to offer any comment upon the conduct of his departed and lamented friend, Sir James Graham; but he felt called upon by his respect for that gentleman to do so, and he would assert his utter disbelief that that gentleman had ever practised in the way sup-
1015
1016
1017
1018
Colonel Dalrymple
said, he had made the fullest inquiry into the subject, and could declare that Sir James Graham had retired from Parliamentary business before he became a Member of that House, and never engaged in any business from which he could derive profit while he continued a Member.
Mr. D. W. Harvey
said, if, Sir, at the time of my engaging in the partnership which is now the subject of discussion, I had had the slightest impression that what I was doing was contrary either to law, or to the usages of Parliament—had I even thought that it would have occupied so much of the valuable, the very valuable time of this House, as I now find it has done, I should not have engaged in it; that thought alone would have deterred me from forming such a connection, and I do most sincerely regret the time that has been consumed in hearing a discussion on
1019
No, no.
1020
1021
s
d
l
s
s
d
1022
l
d
d
l
1023
l
nolens volens,
l
1024
Mr. Hume
said, he should willingly second the hon. Member for Colchester, as he had already testified his opinions upon the subject by proposing two resolutions in a former Session, precisely of a similar nature to the Resolution proposed as an Amendment by the hon. Member. He was by no means favourable to the principle of selecting particular cases for the interference of the House while the grosser and more important evil remained entirely unnoticed. The House would assuredly do honour to itself and add materially to the dignity of its character, if it uniformly made it a practice to challenge any of its Members who should take a part in the proceedings on a bill in which he was found to be in any degree individually interested. For several successive years he had endeavoured to impress upon the House the necessity of adopting such a course, but he had been invariably answered that it was better to leave the whole matter to the sense of honour entertained by the Members themselves, trusting to their feelings and perception of propriety. He was not a friend, however, to any measure which tended to cast blame where no blame could be justly imputed. How could a solicitor exercise an undue or sinister influence over the conduct of a Committee, when he was not a Member of
1025
Mr. Brougham
thought, that the hon. Member for Staffordshire placed his Motion on a considerably lower ground than it ought to occupy, when he founded it upon the Resolution of 1696. He marvelled to hear it made a matter of doubt whether an individual, being a Judge of one of the Courts at Westminster, a Justice of Quarter Sessions, or even a member of any inferior judicature, exercising deliberate functions, could practise in those Courts, Sessions, or Judicatures, as Counsel, Agent, or Solicitor. It was a proposition utterly repugnant in itself, and which required no argument to establish its absurdity. The same rule must apply to the Members of the House of Commons. But the hon. Member for Aberdeen had expressed himself of opinion, that no abuse could result from a Member of that House acting as a solicitor in cases of bills, provided he did not sit on the committee. He had inquired how a Member under such circumstances could possibly exercise undue influence to promote the success of the bill in which he was professionally interested. This question, he apprehended, would be best answered by propounding another, which he would thus put to that hon. Gentleman. Suppose he were himself personally concerned in the fate of a private bill, and that he was given the option between two solicitors, Mr. A. and Mr. B., whose services were respectively suggested. Mr. A. happens to be merely a professional man, but Mr. B. is a Member; and he now put it to him, as a sound man of business, whether he would hesitate a single moment in his choice—whether
1026
ceteris paribus
1027
1028
a fortiori
1029
1030
l
s
d
s
d
1031
s
d
a laugh
s
d
s
d
l
s
s
d
s
d
l
s
1032
The Attorney General
said, that he could bear testimony to the correctness of the explanation of his hon. and learned friend of the circumstances relative to the late Sir James Graham. With regard to the fees supposed to be received by the law officers of the Crown for their professional duties in that House, all he could say was, that he had devoted much of his time to one particular bill, and it had never entered his head that he was to be compensated for his labours in that instance. He had never heard of any of the emoluments of the law officers being connected with or arising out of any bill in that House.
Sir Charles Wetherell
said, that, so far as he was informed, and having been a law officer of the Crown, he was enabled to state the practice to the House, the fact was beyond dispute, that no law officer of the Crown ever received from the Government any fee for preparing, or for supporting in that House, any measure which it was found expedient to bring before Parliament. He was satisfied that the hon. Member for Colchester did not mean any indelicacy, but it really was not altogether delicate to suppose that because the law advisers of the Crown were called upon to support particular bills—a call to which they were sometimes obedient, and sometimes disobedient—to think that they were such servile characters that they received a fee upon every bill which the Government brought in. Now, he said not only that they took no such fees, but further, if any measures were proposed which might be contradictory to duty, to honour, or to principle, a man to whom those considerations were valuable would reject not only the fee but the office too. He was not offering these remarks on behalf of himself, but on behalf of his predecessors in office, and of those who might be their successors; and he repeated, that a man of honour, under such circumstances, would reject not only the fee, but the office too, which was something more valuable. He hoped, therefore, that the hon. Member for Colchester would not cast upon Gentlemen
1033
Mr. Baring
said, the hon. Member for Colchester had been quite mistaken in the whole of his statement respecting Sir James Graham, who, from the moment of entering the House, disclaimed all participation in the profits of the partnership alluded to. The same he knew was the case with Mr. Smith, who, though Solicitor to the East-India Company had never been concerned as a parliamentary agent in any business whatever. It was the less necessary, he thought, to enter into a resolution of the nature then before the House, as it had all along been distinctly understood, that whenever any Member had a direct interest in any thing coming before a committee, he immediately withdrew from it. On that ground he did not see the necessity of the House coming to any resolution such as that which had been proposed.
Mr. Hobhouse
could not see how there could be two opinions on the subject of the Resolution. He confessed that he thought the House was indebted to the hon. Member for Colchester for bringing the question to such a form, as that it resolved itself into this—Was the practice alluded to carried on openly or otherwise?
1034
1035
1036
Sir M. W. Ridley
observed, that the question was not whether hon. Members having a direct or an indirect interest in questions before committees ought or ought not to sit upon them; the question was, whether the House should or should
1037
The Solicitor General
repeated that the question was as had been stated by the last speaker, and expressed his strong disapprobation of the circular letter which had been mentioned—he never read anything more objectionable. The conduct of all professional men ought to be above reproach, and he considered that it was extremely unfair in Members of that House, by themselves or by their partners, to become solicitors or agents for one party or the other.
Sir C. Burrell
pressed the hon. Member for Westminster to explain the allusions to members of the committees and chairmen of committees, contained in his speech. He was perfectly aware that it would not be consistent with the forms and the usages of that House for him to mention the names of the parties to whom he alluded, but he could state the occasion, the period, and such other particulars as could leave no doubt who were meant. It was only right that the House should receive some explanation, and it was only fair that the parties should have an opportunity of defending themselves, if any defence they had.
Mr. C. W. Wynn
said, that the rule was perfectly clear, that parties interested should not sit upon committees, and there were more abuses of a similar description which called for the interference of the House. Let those cases be brought forward separately, and he, for one, would most readily lend his assistance in abolishing the evil. Nothing could be more distinct and explicit than the proceedings
1038
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, he had listened with great attention to the present discussion, and he had come to the decision of voting with the hon. Member for Staffordshire, for which he should give three reasons—and in a sentence; first, because it was consistent with the uniform practice of the House, that lawyers should not take any part, as members of Parliament, in any proceedings wherein they were professionally engaged, and he thought the same rule should apply to Solicitors.—Secondly, that any Member taking pecuniary rewards for his services, did that which was incompatible with the discharge of any parliamentary duty. Thirdly, the practice referred to gave Members of Parliament an undue preference over the other members of their own profession, and thereby it should not be sanctioned by that House. And here he was bound to say, that the hon. Member for Colchester had made what he thought an undue use of the privilege of franking, in sending his circulars, under the sanction of his parliamentary privilege, free of postage. He did not conceive that voting for the proposition of his hon. friend, the Member for Staffordshire, conveyed any blame upon the conduct of the hon. Member for Colchester, for he might certainly have taken a different view of the subject from that which other hon. Members were in the habit of taking. As to the other Resolution, he thought it ought not to be taken in connection with that of his hon. friend; each ought to stand on its own merits, and be decided after a separate discussion. The utmost difficulty, he apprehended, would be found in any attempt to exclude from committees Members having indirect interests in the matters at issue [Mr. D. W.
Harvey
1039
Mr. D. W. Harvey
said, not wishing to disturb the unanimity of the House, he would vote for the Motion of the hon. Member for Staffordshire. What he complained of was, that that Motion did not go far enough; and the object of his Amendment would be, to carry it to the extent which he thought the necessity of the case required. With that view, he proposed to add it in the form of another Resolution. He had, at no time, the least idea that he was acting in any manner contrary to the laws or usages of Parliament; indeed, the very manner in which he proceeded was an evidence that he did not conceive he was doing anything wrong. To that he had only to add, that, so soon as he became aware of his error, no one could be more ready to yield than he had been; and, as a proof of the sincerity of his declaration, the next
Gazette
1040
l
l
Mr. Lamb
said, he had been disposed to congratulate the House on the temper in which the discussion had been carried on, but the last speech of the hon. Member for Colchester had taken away all reason for congratulation. He had severely arraigned the conduct of the hon. Member for Knaresborough, though he had done well for himself to defer his attack till that hon. Gentleman had quitted the House.
The Amendment was withdrawn, and the original Motion carried nem. con.
Mr. Harvey
then proposed his Amendment as an original Motion. He said he had not intended to make any attack on the hon. Member for Knaresborough; but had only cited that case to show what was the usage of Parliament.
Mr. Hume
seconded the Motion.
Mr. Littleton
moved, as an Amendment, that the other Orders of the Day should be read.
Mr. Alderman Waithman
supported the Motion, because he thought the Resolutions of that House on such a subject could not be too strong and too comprehensive.
Mr. O'Connell
hoped, that it would not go forth to the public that they had been two hours by the clock straining at a gnat, after so often swallowing, not only a camel, but a whole caravan of camels.
Mr. Sadler
supported the Amendment, on the ground that the Journals of the House were already over-loaded with rules.
Mr. Wynn
said, that the Motion of the hon. Gentleman was already a rule of the House, and that it was quite unnecessary to enforce that rule by any further declaration, unless some specific cases were brought before Parliament. At present there was nothing but unsupported accusations.
Mr. W. Smith
could not concur in the Motion.
Mr. Croker
said, that the law of Parliament always was, that a Member interested could not vote; and, therefore, the hon. Gentleman's Motion was worse than nothing, because it restricted that non-voting to committees up stairs only.
1041
The House then divided, when there appeared for Mr. Harvey's Motion 26; against it 174. Majority against the Motion 148.
List of the Minority.
Baring, Sir T
Stewart, J.
Blake, Sir F.
Sebright, Sir J.
Bernal, R.
Taylor, M. A.
Cave, O.
Tennyson, C.
Duncombe, T.
Trant, W. H.
Denison, W. J.
Thomson, Powlett
Dawson, A.
Waithman, Ald.
Grant, R.
Whitbread, H.
Hobhouse, J. C.
Warburton, H.
Howard, H.
Wood, J.
Maberly, J.
Wood, Ald.
Marshall, W.
TELLERS.
O'Connell, D.
D. W. Harvey
Sykes, D.
Joseph Hume.
COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY.]
The Order of the Day being read for the House going into a Committee of Supply,
Sir T. Byam Martin
, on the Motion for the Speaker leaving the Chair, expressed his regret at being under the necessity of trespassing for a short time on the attention of the House, and detaining it from going into a Committee. He had to complain that an hon. Baronet opposite (Sir H. Parnell) had, in a book on Financial Reform, thrown out imputations against him and against the Navy Board, which were totally unfounded, and decidedly contrary to the evidence given before the Finance Committee, on which the statements were alleged to be founded. The hon. Baronet asserted, that the Navy Board appeared by that evidence to have been mainly instrumental in preventing the execution of those measures of economy and retrenchment proposed by the Admiralty. He denied this most positively. He denied that any portion of his evidence, or of the; evidence of any other person before the Finance Committee, would bear out such a conclusion; and he called on the hon. Baronet to declare to the House that he had been instrumental in propagating a reflexion on the character of the Board which was not borne out by the facts. Had the Navy Board acted in the manner described by the hon. Baronet, it would have been unworthy of the confidence either of the Admiralty or the country. The hon. Baronet says, "According to the evidence given before the Finance Committee by Sir G. Cockburn,
1042
1043
1044
l
1045
1046
Sir H. Parnell
thanked the hon. Member for the discretion he had shown in bringing this subject before the House, and for his kindness in communicating to him his intention to do so. He would commence by observing, that it was the right of every individual to discuss those matters which were connected with the administration of public affairs; and to a Member of Parliament that right became a duty which was almost imperative. It was, he confessed, extremely difficult, in writing on such subjects, to avoid falling into expressions that might be too strong for the feelings of individuals, although in point of fact, he had taken the utmost care to shun every offensive word. He was not now, however, prepared to state that the impression he had received on the subject of the Navy Board had been altered; and a conversation which he had held with a noble Lord (Althorp), since he received the hon. Member's Letter yesterday morning, tended to confirm his first impression. His impression respecting the evidence on the subject of the Navy Board certainly was, that the Board had opposed itself to the views of the Admiralty on the subject of retrenchment. He recollected well, indeed, the reply made by Mr. Barrow, when questioned on that subject. When asked if he knew the reason why the reductions proposed had not taken place? Mr. Barrow answered in a tone and manner which struck him at the moment, and which he well remembered, "that the Navy Board could answer that question much better than he could." His impression then, as now, from that evidence, was that which he had stated in the pamphlet. With respect to the hon. and gallant Officer, he disclaimed any personal motive in what he had said respecting him. He was convinced that there was not an individual in the public service who did
1047
Sir O. Cockburn
thought it but just to his hon. and gallant friend to say, in the first place, that it was the duty of the Navy Board to state to the Board of Admiralty any observations which appeared to them to be advantageous for the public service; and, in the second place, that whatever was actually ordered by the Admiralty, was always executed by the Navy Board with zeal and dispatch. It was certainly true, that if the Navy Board had entirely concurred with the Admiralty, things would have gone on faster. But when objections to any proposition were made by practical men, it was the duty of the Admiralty to consider those objections maturely before they rejected them. He repeated, however, that whatever the Board of Admiralty finally decided should be done was done immediately.
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, he was rejoiced to find that the discussion had terminated in a manner so creditable to all parties. The hon. Baronet, asserting his just right to comment on the conduct of any public department, had yet, with great candour, allowed that, on mature reflection, there were points on which he had come to a hasty conclusion; and he had also given his hon. and gallant friend full credit for zeal in the discharge of his duty. It appeared to him, therefore, that the discussion had been creditable to both parties.
1048
Sir Byam Martin
felt himself bound to acknowledge the very handsome and honourable manner in which the hon. Baronet had expressed himself. He hoped, however, that if the hon. Baronet published a second edition of his pamphlet he would correct the errors into which he had fallen, [
a laugh.
Mr. Maberly
was sure that his hon. friend never intended any thing personal against the hon. Baronet. The right hon. Gentleman had observed that his hon. friend had conceded two points. That was true, but they were minor points. On the principal question—namely, whether the Navy Board had done its duty or not—his hon. friend's opinion remained unaltered; and he entirely concurred with him. The hon. Baronet had read a portion of the evidence given before the Finance Committee, but if he had the whole of Mr. Barrow's evidence he would have confirmed the statement of his hon. friend, that the Navy Board had, between the years 1815 and 1821, opposed reduction. Mr. Barrow's evidence, which he would read, was as follows:—"Has not the Admiralty Board a general superintendance over the whole of the department?—Unquestionably; but until the war was finished the Lords of the Admiralty could not very well be spared to go down; and shortly after the war was finished a visitation made some slight reduction, but not to any great extent. It was not till 1821 that the Board was at liberty to examine more strictly into the state of the dock-yards and cause greater reductions to be made.—Since 1821, why were not those reductions made which appear to be necessary, and which you now have carried into effect?—
1049
l
1050
l
l
l
l
1051
l
1052
1053
Mr. Hume
observed, that if ever evidence was satisfactory, it was that which established the fact that the Admiralty were anxious for a reduction of expenditure, and would have reduced it but for the indisposition of the Navy Board to concur in the measure. In support of this opinion he would refer to the evidence before the Committee; and especially to that of one of the Lords of the Admiralty (Mr. Keith Douglas), who expressed his wish that the Committee would strengthen the hands of the Admiralty by some vote declaratory of its opinion that the Admiralty ought to carry its own views into effect. His evidence, as quoted by the hon. Member, was as follows;—"Have you any thing to suggest to the Committee as to the directing and supervising authority of the Admiralty over those Boards?—I think that the Admiralty have exercised so strict a superintendence by their visitation, that they are perfectly competent to suggest any alterations that may be necessary in the subordinate departments of the Admiralty, probably in the most efficient and satisfactory manner, for they have looked into the details; which it is important to know, and they learn from the correspondence which is constantly carried on, how the business is working. Having the knowledge which they possess, I am certainly of opinion, that if this committee were to strengthen the hands of the Admiralty by conveying to them a strong recommendation that they should carry their own views of improvement into effect, that it is in this manner that the most safe and effectual reforms can be effected.—Do you con-
1054
1055
On the Motion for the Speaker's leaving the Chair being again put,
Mr. E. Davenport
observed, that he understood that in his absence the hon. Member for Hertfordshire had postponed the further proceeding on the East Retford bill to Friday. Now as that was the day on which he (Mr. Davenport) had given notice of a motion on the State of the Nation, he put it to the hon. Member for Hertfordshire whether he would not postpone the proceeding with his bill to a future day.
Mr. N. Calvert
said, he had fixed Friday because he knew that many hon. Members were anxious for the progress of the bill. He was, however, entirely in the hands of the House.
Mr. Tennyson
said, he had been a party to fixing the measure for that day, but knowing that the still greater question of the State of the Nation occupied the public attention, he would not stand in the way of his hon. friend the Member for Shaftesbury. The hon. Member also expressed a hope, that his next effort to divide the House, with a view to transferring the franchise from East-Retford to Birmingham, would be more successful.
Mr. Western
allowed that the bill was important, but he thought that his hon. friend's motion was still more so, as the country was suffering under great distress.
The House then resolved itself into the Committee.
Sir Henry Hardinge
proposed that the
1056
l
Mr. Hume
said, before he proceeded to consider the subject of that vote, he wished to call the attention of his Majesty's Government to the state of our army in India. He knew that there were letters in town giving a most alarming description of the condition of that army, as to its state of subordination; but he understood that no official information had been received. As to the vote then before the Committee, he thought, considering the state of the public feeling, it was time that the Government took into its serious consideration the propriety of reducing this establishment. He begged leave to ask, why gentlemen intending to enter the military service should not pay for their own education, when there were one hundred applicants for every commission? He noticed, too, that the Lieutenant-governor had received a pension of 800
l
l
Sir Henry Hardinge
would first state why the Military College should not pay its own expenses. There were three classes of students. The first were the orphans, whose fathers had been in his Majesty's service, and they were educated gratuitously; the second class, each of whom paid 20
l
l
l
l.;
l
1057
Colonel Davies
thought, that, in the circumstances of the country, this grant was most extravagant. He doubted the utility of the education the young men received at the Military College; and if it were continued, it certainly ought to be on a more limited scale than at present.
Lord Euston
also objected to the grant, in the state of the country, and he should feel himself called on not to support it. The present was not a time to make young soldiers; there was no want of them, and there was plenty of old officers. He did not know that he should find a seconder, but he certainly felt inclined to move that the vote be stopped altogether.
Mr. Hume
said, the noble Lord should not want a seconder. He wished to know how many of the young men educated so superiorly at the College had been given to his Majesty's service?
Sir H. Hardinge
said, nearly forty commissions had been given away in the course of the last year, to the cadets.
Mr. Hume
still objected to the expense. He thought that those who desired to enter the service might educate themselves. As to the orphans, he thought they would be better taken care of by their parents (he should have said) their guardians. Still, whether advisable to educate such persons or not, he must say that the whole Estimate was too extravagant, and ought to be limited. If the noble Lord would propose that the vote should be limited to six months, he should have great satisfaction in supporting him. If the noble Lord would allow him, he would propose that the vote should be 3,800
l
Mr. Jephson
approved of the view taken by Mr. Hume, in which Lord Euston also professed his concurrence.
Sir George Murray
thought, that the system of our military education would be very defective if the College were done away. It was not intended to educate Staff-Officers only, as was supposed, but to diffuse through the whole army a better educated description of officers, and in this respect it had answered its purpose remarkably well. It had been, he believed, infinitely beneficial.
Colonel Davies
said, the education given at the College was very inefficient; he had
1058
a laugh
Sir Henry Hardinge
said, he was sorry to hear the gallant Officer had derived so little advantage from the College, but he believed that the same result did not take place with other pupils.
Mr. Warburton
contended that the expense was enormous, and that the forty commissions they offered a-year was a prodigious prize offered to these young men.
Colonel Dawkins
acknowledged his obligations to the College. He had derived great benefit, from his instruction there, and looked back at the time he had spent there with pleasure. He thought the College could not be dispensed with, and, though he was as anxious as any person to relieve the public distress, he would vote for the grant.
Mr. Hume
was glad to hear the hon. Member had profitted so much by his education; he was only sorry that he had not paid enough for it. It was the duty of that House not to vote one shilling of the public money that could be dispensed with. It was in this light he looked at the vote the Committee was called on to give. He wished, indeed, he saw the Members present who had presented petitions complaining of distress; but though they complained they took care not to attend to vote against themselves. He was not sure that it would not be a better way to allow the Chancellor of the Exchequer to take as much as he pleased, without opposition, for opposition obtained no success. He would not give himself the trouble to oppose the votes, were it not that the people out of doors might think that nobody in the House paid any attention to their interests. He would move that the vote be diminished one-half. The hon. Member then submitted that the sum of 3,800
l
l
The House then divided—for the Amendment 17, Against it 85; Majority against the Amendment 68.
The original Motion was then put and carried without a division.—The House resumed, the Chairman reported progress, and asked leave to sit again on Monday next.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Saturday, February 27, 1830.
MINUTES.] The HON. GEORGE WELD CECIL, FORESTER took the Oaths and his Seat for the Borough of Wenlock.
1059
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Monday, March 1st, 1830.
MINUTES.] On the Motion of the Marquis of CLEVELAND, the return of the quantity of foreign lead ore imported into England from the 1st of January, 1825, to the 1st of January, 1830, was ordered to be laid before the House forthwith.—The Duke of RICHMOND postponed the Motion for an Inquiry into the State of the Country, from Tuesday-week to Thursday-week, on which day he should, he said, move "That a Select Committee be appointed to take into consideration the internal state of the country, so far as relates to the working classes, and the effect of taxation as regards productive industry."— Sir A. GRANT and others from the Commons brought up the Consolidated Fund Bill, which was read the first time, and ordered to be read the second time to-morrow— Adjourned.
NATIONAL DISTRESS.]
The Earl of Winchilsea
said, he had to present a Petition from a number of owners and occupiers of land in the county of Kent, complaining of the Distressed State of the Agricultural Interest, and praying for relief. It was not his intention to make any observation on the subject at present, as an ample opportunity would be afforded him for the expression of his sentiments when the motion of the noble Duke (of Richmond) was brought forward. He regretted that he had been prevented, by peculiar circumstances, from laying this petition before their Lordships, prior to the motion of a noble Earl (Stanhope) which had recently been discussed; because he believed, that from the wealth, intelligence, and respectability of the parties from whom it came, it would have commanded some degree of attention. Being on his legs, he wished to ask the noble Duke whether it was the intention of his Majesty's Government to renew a committee which had been appointed two Sessions ago, for the purpose of inquiring into the finances of the country? The report of that committee had been received with very considerable satisfaction by the people at large, especially as Ministers had declared their intention to reduce the public expenditure to the lowest
1060
The Duke of Wellington
admitted the necessity of reducing the taxes as far as possible. He agreed in the propriety of that proposition, but he could not be expected, at a moment's notice, to enter into a discussion on the subject of the reduction of taxes and of expenditure. The noble Earl had asked, whether it was the intention of his Majesty's Ministers to revive the Finance Committee. On that point he had only to answer, that Ministers had no such intention.
The Earl of Darnley
said, that in the county with which he and the noble Earl were connected, and he spoke more particularly of his own immediate neighbourhood, it appeared, from whatever cause the circumstance might arise, that there was no want of work. The labouring population were tolerably well employed, and the poor-rates had not increased very much. In some parishes in which he was interested, they were only four shillings in the pound. He admitted, with the noble Earl, that there was great distress, very deep distress indeed, in parts of the county of Kent; but he did not think it was so great as it was supposed to be; and he believed that, generally speaking, though wages were low, there was no want of employment.
The Petition was laid on the Table.
CONDUCT OF RUSSIA.]
The Marquis
1061
said, he wished to take the opportunity, seeing the noble Earl, the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs in his place, of asking a question, which, as he conceived, was nearly connected with the honour of this country. In the year 1828, his Majesty's Speech to Parliament announced, "that his Imperial Majesty the Emperor of Russia had consented to waive the exercise, in the Mediterranean Sea, of any rights appertaining to his Imperial Majesty, in his character of a belligerent power." Such was the declaration of his Majesty in February, 1828; but, in the month of October following, they were informed, by a letter from Lord Dunglass, a nobleman holding a situation in the Foreign Office, that his "Imperial Majesty intended to establish a blockade of the Dardanelles, which blockade would be limited to the prevention of vessels bound to Constantinople, and laden with provisions, or articles contraband of War, from entering the Straits; and that, in the opinion of his Majesty's Government such commercial enterprise of his Majesty's subjects, as might have been already undertaken, upon the faith of his Majesty's declaration in Parliament, would not be liable to be affected by that blockade." Nothing could be more inconsistent than these two declarations. Individuals were first induced to act on the assurance given in the Lords Commissioners' Speech, and then came this letter, declaring that a blockade was intended. This was a most extraordinary instance of a rapid change of sentiments; and he wished to know—
The Lord Chancellor
,interrupting the noble Marquis, said, would the noble Marquis allow him to suggest that there was no motion before the House?
The Marquis of Londonderry
said, he had but a few observations to offer, which would prevent him from introducing the subject hereafter. He wished to ask the Secretary of State for the Foreign Department, whether he was willing to lay before Parliament the correspondence growing out of this transaction which had taken place with Russia, in order that he might be enabled to judge whether the power and dignity of Great Britain had been properly upheld on that occasion.
The Earl of Aberdeen
assured the noble Marquis that he should receive the most ample information on the subject; and he hoped the noble Marquis would find that the honour of this country had
1062
AFFAIRS OF GREECE.]
Lord Holland
wished to know, as there appeared to be a final settlement of the affairs of Greece, whether the noble Earl, in consequence of that, would be ready to lay before the House, at an early period, all the documents connected with it.
The Earl of Aberdeen
answered, that he feared those documents would not be ready so soon as the noble Baron or as he himself wished. It was not in his power to state exactly when they would be ready to be submitted to their Lordships; but the noble Baron might rest assured, that to soon as they could with propriety be laid before the House, they would be forthcoming.
Lord Holland
.—I suppose I may expect them on the Greek calends, [
a laugh.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Monday, March 1, 1830.
MINUTES.] Mr. PLANTA moved for a new writ for the borough of Gatton, in the room of the hon. William Scott, who had accepted the Chiltern Hundreds—Sir R. HURON gave notice for Wednesday of a Motion for copies of the warrants by which the hon. ROBERT DUNDAS was appointed a Commissioner of the Navy, and the hon. W. L. BATHURST, a Commissioner of the Victualling Boards—Colonel SIRTHORP postponed his Motion for the repeal of the Standing Orders relative to the non-admission of strangers to the gallery of the House of Commons, (as far as regards the reporters of proceedings in the House, and for the accommodation of the same,) from the 3rd to the 12th of March. An Address was ordered to be presented to his Majesty, for a return of the number of Pro-bates of Wills and Letters of Administration granted in the principality of Wales during the last five years: also for a return of the number of suits in Equity commenced in the principality of Wales for the last ten years.—An Address was also ordered to be presented to his Majesty for a copy of the 21st Report of the Commissioners to in-quire into the public revenue arising in Ireland.—On the Motion of Mr. G. DAWSON, the Consolidated Fund Bill was read a third time and passed.—Mr. S. RICE gave notice of his intention to move for leave to bring in a Bill to remove certain civil disabilities still existing against Roman Catholics in the Corporation of Gal way—Mr. O'CONNELL postponed his notice of Motion respecting the Law of Libel, from to-morrow, to the 29th of April.
SAINT KATHARINE'S DOCKS.]
Mr. Alderman Thompson
moved the second reading of the St. Katharine Dock Company's Bill.
Mr. C. Culvert
wished the hon. Member to postpone the second reading of
1063
Mr. Alderman Thompson
said, the Bill had been printed more than ten days, and to the best of his knowledge all persons interested had received copies. The object of the Bill was simply to enable the St. Katharine's Docks Company to borrow a sum of money; it conferred no new powers upon them. If the second reading were postponed, several days would be lost, and the parties put to much inconvenience; he must therefore decline acceding to the suggestion of the hon. Member for Southwark.
Mr. Ward
confirmed the statement of his hon. colleague; the Bill was only intended to carry into effect powers already possessed by the Company, upon whom it conferred no new powers whatsoever.
Mr. C. Culvert
did not divide the House, and the Bill was read a second time.
WOOL TRADE.]
Sir E. Knatchbull
presented a Petition from certain inhabitants of Romney Marsh, complaining of great depression in the Wool-Trade, and praying for the imposition of duties on the importation of foreign Wool. The hon. baronet observed, that he could testify, from his own knowledge, that the depression of the Wool-trade was very considerable, and that great losses had been sustained by the growers, in consequence of the low price of that article.
Sir C. Burrell
said, when the Duke of Richmond brought forward a motion on the subject of the Wool-trade last Session, he was met by the assertion of a noble Lord, that the distress was not general but partial. He did not mean to say that the noble Lord had descended to a misrepresentation; no doubt he had been misinformed, and was not acquainted with the true state of the country with respect to the Wool-trade, any more than with respect to other matters of equal interest and importance. At the very time that this statement was made, it appeared that the price of long Wool, which used to be 1
s
d
s
d
d
1064
l
l
Mr. Irving
observed, that foreign Wool was necessary to the prosperity of our manufactures, and if we laid heavy taxes upon foreign Wool, we should exclude our manufactures from the foreign market.
Colonel Sibthorp
said, the farmers had been fed on hope so long, that they almost had become skeletons, and would speedily be starved to death, if they were not relieved.
Mr. H. Davis
said, there was less foreign Wool in the country now, than at the same period of the year during the last thirty years. He was opposed to laying duties upon the importation of foreign Wool, which would be very injurious to our manufactures.
Sir E. Knatchbull
was afraid that the noble Lord, who had been alluded to by his hon. friend the Member for Shoreham, (Sir C. Burrell) did not always obtain the best authority for his statements. Improvements were spoken of; he hoped they might not turn out to be fallacious, like some of the statements of the noble Lord. One thing was certain, that the petitioners saw no signs of amendment.
TRUCK SYSTEM.]
Mr. Littleton
presented three Petitions from Staffordshire against the payment of labourers' wages otherwise than in money. The first Petition was from the Chamber of Commerce of the Staffordshire Potteries, stating that in their district no fewer than thirty thousand persons were employed in the manufacture of china and earthenware, and that the depression arising from other sources was much augmented by the practice of paying wages partly by Truck. The barter was not conducted upon equal terms. The masters obliged their workmen to take such articles as they pleased at their own price, and the latter were frequently compelled to sell these at a considerable
1065
ABSENTEES.]
Colonel Sibthorp
moved for an account of the number of Passports granted to persons to go abroad in the years 1826, 1827, 1828, and 1829, specifying the number issued in each year, the names of the parties, and the countries for which the passports were made out. The hon. Member took occasion to complain of the evils of absenteeism, and expressed his conviction of the propriety of imposing a tax upon absentees. If such a tax were properly imposed it would cause 4,000,000
l
Lord Lowther
said, there were only two quarters to which application could be made for the Returns desired by the hon. Member,—the Home-office, and Foreign Embassies. Supposing the accounts to be obtained from the former, he was not aware upon what principle we could tax the courtesy of the foreign ambassadors to furnish this species of information; over these parties the House had no power.
Sir M. W. Ridley
said, that not one out of twenty persons going abroad went to the Foreign-office, since the ambassador's passport was more cheap and more useful.
Mr. Peel
said, that to call for the names of all persons who had gone abroad during these four years, was, in his opinion, a most unwarrantable interference with private affairs, He had no objection to a return of the amount of fees received at the Foreign-office, and of the total number of passports granted; but, to a return of the names of the persons he decidedly objected; not for any public reason, but because it was an interference with private affairs, which could not be justified unless it conduced to the attainment of some public benefit.
Sir C. Burrell
hoped his hon. friend (Colonel Sibthorp) would see the justice of the right hon. Gentleman's objection, and. not press the motion.
1066
Sir G. Warrender
said, that the higher orders of persons never went to the Foreign-office, but to foreign ambassadors, and this return, therefore, would be an unfair one. It would include only a certain class of persons, whom he thought it unfair to show up.
Colonel Sibthorp
said, that at the suggestion of the hon. Baronet (sir C. Burrell), but not at the suggestion of his Majesty's Ministers, he would withdraw his motion. He had no wish, to use the words of the other hon. Baronet, to "show up "anybody.
BEER DUTY.]
Mr. Burrell
presented Petitions from several parishes in the counties of Kent and Sussex, praying for the repeal of the Malt-tax.
Sir C. Burrell
took this opportunity of observing, that if the Chancellor of the Exchequer intended merely to make a small remission of the duty on Beer, he was afraid his committee would do no good. Unless the tax were taken off Malt, the Ministers would give no relief. He begged to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if such were his intention?
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that with respect to the committee for which he meant to move to-morrow, the hon. Baronet had mistaken the object of it. The object of that committee would be merely to inquire how far it was possible to give greater freedom to the trade in Beer, and would have no reference to the tax on Malt.
WEST-INDIA TRADE.]
Mr. H. Davis
presented a Petition from the West-India Merchants and Planters of Bristol, complaining of severe distress, and praying for a reduction of the duties on Sugar and Rum. The hon. Member said, that much as the House had heard of distress from various parts of the country, there was no pressure so severe as that which was felt in the West-India Colonies. This subject had been so forcibly and clearly explained by the noble Lord, who had on a late occasion presented a similar Petition from the West-India Planters and Merchants of the Metropolis, that he (Mr. Davis) was relieved from a considerable part of that duty which he should otherwise have felt himself called upon to perform: still there were many points which he must briefly refer to in order to explain the evils under which the petitioners were suffering, and the remedies which they
1067
s
s
s
s.
s
d
l
l
1068
l
Mr. C. Pallmer
said, that in deference to the anxiety of the House to proceed to the appointed business of the evening, he should forbear to offer to its attention some facts and observations which he had found no opportunity of doing upon a former evening upon this truly important subject—one, which he was prepared to prove was of vital interest, both to the Kingdom and the Colonies. As a right hon. Gentleman below him had given notice of a motion on that subject, he should reserve to that opportunity his humble but earnest endeavours to persuade Parliament to save the Colonies from ruin, and itself from the merited charge of the most infatuated policy and the most fatal injustice.
The Petition was then read.
MISREPRESENTATION.]
Mr. O'Connell
presented a Petition from the Roman Catholic inhabitants of the island of Grenada, praying for the removal of all Colonial Disabilities.
On the Motion that the Petition be read,
Mr. Brougham
said, I do not rise, Sir, to oppose the Motion, nor to enter into a discussion upon the merits of this Petition, but as it relates to a colonial subject, it gives me an opportunity of correcting a misrepresentation arising, no doubt, from misapprehension, but at the same time a misrepresentation than which any one more gross or more unfounded it has never fallen to my lot to hear of, with respect to the conduct of public men. I am quite sure that neither of the hon. Gentlemen who took part in the discussion of Friday
1069
1070
1071
l
l
1072
l
l
l
l
l
l
1073
Mr. D. W. Harvey
said, that the hon. and learned Member who had just addressed the House had but done him justice in saying that he had no intention of attacking any particular individual. He had no such intention; but he would not
1074
1075
s
d
s
d
Mr. Brougham
affirmed that the hon. Member was still in error as to the facts, as much as the petition alluded to had been, with respect to the charge of bribery against Lord Charles Somerset. The hon. Member alluded to the locality of his (Mr. Brougham's) position in the House, which he observed had become changed about that time. Now it did so happen that in this he was altogether wrong. The transactions respecting the petition were in 1825. They were begun, continued, and ended in eight days, in the month of May or June in that year. It was a great mistake, therefore, to connect his change of position in that House with the circumstance, for that change did not occur until long after. He repeated, that he would never again trouble the House on this subject, for he had given the same explanation two or three years before.
DEPUTY SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF LORDS.]
Mr. C. Fergusson
in moving for certain Returns from the Court of Session in Scotland, took the opportunity of asking the right hon. Secretary of State a question, in relation to the late learned Lord Chief Justice of the Court of Common Pleas. That learned Lord had retired, and had, as he believed, obtained a pension on the ground of infirm health. By the 29th of Geo. 3rd., his Majesty was empowered to grant to the Judges of the Courts of Westminster Hall certain annuities, upon their retiring from the Bench. That power was limited to cases in which these learned persons had been fifteen years upon the Bench, with the excepted case of persons who retired from permanent infirmity. The question he put was;
1076
Mr. Peel
said, that the Government had it not in contemplation to make any special appointment of Deputy Speaker. The Chief Baron of the Exchequer, by virtue of his appointment as such, and the Master of the Rolls in the same manner, would sit in the House of Lords in the absence of the Lord Chancellor. There was no intention of making any special or individual appointment; there would be a general appointment; but in any? event, whether Lord Wynford was appointed or not, there was no intention whatever of attaching any salary to the office.
MALT DUTIES.]
Mr. Slaney
presented a Petition from one thousand persons, comprising the principal land-owners of three hundreds in the county of Salop, praying for the repeal of the Act relating to the Duty on Malt.
Mr. Portman
reminded the Chancellor of the Exchequer that, early in last Session, he agreed to bring in a bill to regulate the Malt Duty. He had not yet pressed the right hon. Gentleman to perform that promise, because he wished and expected that the delay would induce him to change a bill to regulate the Malt into a bill to repeal the Malt Duty altogether.
DISTRESS IN DROGHEDA.]
Mr. O'Connell
presented a Petition from certain inhabitants of the town of Drogheda, complaining of great distress. The petitioners stated, that there were 16,000 inhabitants in the town, 8,000 of whom were so destitute of food, clothing, or fuel, as to be dependent on a subscription for their relief, the amount of which did not exceed 25
l
1077
l
BOROUGH OF NEWARK—DUKE OF NEWCASTLE.]
Mr. Poulett Thomson
rose to present a Petition from the inhabitants of the borough of Newark. The subject involved a question of great importance, and he therefore hoped for the patient indulgence of the House to the few observations which he should feel it his duty to make on it. He regretted that the subject had not fallen into other hands, and the more so as it would be his duty, before he sat down, to state certain matters inculpating the conduct of a noble Lord, who, though he could not be said to be unrepresented in that House, was not present to defend himself. If the charges which he had to make on behalf of the petitioners should receive a sufficient answer by those who might address the House on the part of the noble Duke, it would give him great satisfaction to acknowledge his error, and to retract any thing in which he might find he had been misinformed. He hoped the House would do its duty by supporting the Motion which he intended to found upon the petition, as that Motion would rest, not so much upon the inculpation of the noble Lord as on general principles. He would now briefly state the substance of the Petition. The borough of Newark consisted of 2,000 houses, and about 10,000 inhabitants. Considerable property in the town was possessed by the Duke of Newcastle, to whom 200 houses belonged. Large portions of property, in some instances amounting to eighty or ninety houses, belonging to other individuals. The property belonging to the Duke in the town was not of itself sufficient to give him a commanding influence in the town, though he held the manor with copyhold right, the market, and the tolls on that and the bridges. His principal influence was derived from being the lessee of a portion of land, amounting to 960 acres, which formed a sort of belt surrounding the town for about three fourths of its circumference. This property included the land in the
1078
1079
1080
1081
1082
1083
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
1084
"To the Right hon. the Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, in Parliament assembled.—The humble Petition of the undersigned Inhabitants of the Town of Newark-upon-Trent, in the County of Nottingham.
"Showeth,—That Newark is a Borough Town, containing two thousand houses, or thereabouts, with a population of nearly ten thousand; and
1085
"That the town possesses considerable commercial advantages, and from its being surrounded by the best markets for grain, and from having the facilities which good water carnage affords, it has, during the last few years, very greatly increased in wealth and population, and is become one of the principal towns in the kingdom in the manufacture of malt and of meal, largely supplying Manchester, Sheffield, and other manufacturing towns with those commodities:
"That there are not appertinent to, or in the neighbourhood of, Newark, any town lands or open pastures for the accommodation of the freemen and other inhabitants of the town.
"That his Grace the Duke of Newcastle possesses a lease from his late Majesty (granted by the advice of his Privy Council) of the manor of Newark, with all the quit rents and copyhold rents, and of the markets, the bridges, the tolls, and fairs therein, and of the rights of fishing in the river Trent, and the rivers and streams within the manor; and also of several houses situate within the town, together with upwards of nine hundred and sixty acres of land, lying-in and contiguous to the Borough, and almost encircling the same, the whole being within the township of Newark, and the several parishes of Averham, Stoke, Balderton, and Farndon:
"That the family of his Grace first became possessed of the said property in the first year of his late Majesty (1760), when a lease was granted by the Crown; which, by the recital therein contained, appears to have been granted by the advice of the then Duke of Newcastle (who was at that time First Lord of the Treasury) to the then Earl of Lincoln, he having married a sister of his Grace:
"That in the year 1815, a lease of the said property was granted to the present Duke of Newcastle, for a term which will expire in the year 1836:
"That the houses and lands comprised in the said lease are occupied by tenants at will, and the land (with the exception of two of the most distant farms, held by influential families) is let in small allotments to persons residing, and having votes and interest, within the Borough, as yearly tenants; and although the same is let at what would, under other circumstances, be deemed full average rents, yet, from the exclusive possession by the Duke of the whole of such land, and from the peculiar pursuits of the principal trading population, he is enabled, by means of the great accommodation it affords, to exercise, and he does actually exercise, an absolute control over the votes of a great portion of the inhabitants:
"That the political control of the Borough is of much more value to his Grace than any advantage he could derive from the improvement of the Crown lands; and, therefore, in order to preserve such control, the said Crown
1086
"That the evil of such system has not been limited to the injury of the Crown lands, but has extended its pernicious influence to the town, as the lands form a complete girdle round the town, and the system referred to necessarily prevents those local improvements which the increasing wealth and advantageous position of Newark would otherwise give rise to; and your Petitioners humbly show, that, but for the contractive operation of this system, the growing population of Newark would naturally have spread itself over a considerable portion of that part of the Crown land which immediately adjoins the town; whereas, the poorer class of the people have been compelled to reside in confined and unwholesome courts and alleys (a large portion of the tenements in which belong to the Duke's private estate, and are thus enhanced in nominal value), while the more opulent inhabitants are deprived of those essential comforts to which their situation entitles them, and of those conveniences which their increasing commerce imperiously demands; and even the limited accommodation at present afforded to some of the inhabitants, by a temporary and uncertain occupation of the land, they can only obtain by the surrender of their political independence, and by what his Grace terms "entire confidence and a grateful co-operation" with him in his political views, and in the election of those Members for the borough who are nominated by himself:
"That although your Petitioners admit, that the possession by his Grace the Duke of Newcastle of the property hereinbefore mentioned as forming his own private estate would naturally confer upon him a large portion of that influence which ordinarily results from the relation of landlord and tenant, yet your Petitioners humbly represent, that it would be wholly insufficient to control the election of Members of the said borough, unaided by the enormous unconstitutional power over the voters, which his Grace has acquired by the possession of the Crown lands, and by his system of managing the same:
"Your Petitioners humbly show to your honourable House, that such Crown lands are of very great value, a large portion thereof abutting on the principal roads adjoining to the densely-populated parts of Newark, and being applicable to building purposes, and, in point of situation, of equal value to contiguous land (also within the borough), which has realized upwards of 800
l
"Your Petitioners further humbly show, that
1087
"That, in the month of February last, Sir William Henry Clinton, who had been returned under the influence of the Duke to sit for this borough, accepted the Stewardship of the Chiltern Hundreds, when Michael Thomas Sadler, esq. who had previously been unknown to the inhabitants, became a candidate for the vacant seat, and was taken round the town by the agent of the Duke and receiver of his rents, and introduced to his Grace's tenants as the successor of the retired Member:
"That at that particular period there were many momentous questions pending in both Houses of Parliament, deeply affecting the tranquillity and prosperity of a large portion of his Majesty's subjects; and his Grace the Duke of Newcastle, as your Petitioners have been informed, was most anxious for a dissolution of Parliament, in order, as he represented, that the wishes of the people might be ascertained from the return of the Members to your honourable House:
"That Mr. Serjeant Wilde likewise became a candidate to represent this Borough at the same election:
"That Mr. Sadler was returned by the Mayor as duly elected:
"That the return of Mr. Sadler was obtained by means of the prevailing belief, founded upon the experience of former elections, that such of the Duke's tenants as should vote against his Grace's nominee would be expelled from their tenancies; and many of the voters who polled for Mr. Sadler avowed that but for the fear of such result they would have polled for the other candidate:
"That although many of the Duke's tenants, under the influence before-mentioned, did vote for Mr. Sadler, yet there were many others who, choosing to exercise their elective franchise independently, gave their votes to the opposing candidate:
"That since the said election, every one of the tenants of his Grace who so voted for Mr. Serjeant Wilde has received notice to quit his holding, whether the same was house or land; and whether it constituted a part of the estate of the Crown or the private property of his Grace:
"That a large portion of the electors, as well of those who had, as of those who had not, received notice to quit their lands and houses, convened a public meeting of the inhabitants, to
1088
"The persons concerned in convening the said meeting deemed it expedient, as well as respectful, to inform his Grace by letter of their intention to hold the same, to announce its object, and to invite his attendance thereat; to which his Grace replied, neither denying the act of giving such notices, nor disavowing the motive, but justifying the same, upon a claim of a right 'to do what he would with his own.'
"Your Petitioners do, however, humbly submit to your honourable House, that, whatever right, or rather whatever power his Grace may have 'to do what he will with his own' private estate, he has not the right, and ought to be deprived of the power, of using the property he holds as lessee of the Crown to the injury of the Borough, the oppression of the inhabitants; and that the said lease ought not to be renewed, by reason that for election purposes his Grace has used the same in a manner that has diminished the present and reversionary value of the public property; impeded the progress of local improvement; repressed the growing prosperity of the town, and controlled the reasonable comforts and enjoyments of the inhabitants; and further, that by the possession of such lease, his Grace has been enabled to keep alive, from year to year, the most odious distinctions, and to foment feelings of dissension and party spirit; and finally, he has employed the power it conferred to overawe the inhabitants, control the election, and thus secure the return of his own Members to serve in your honourable House; all which facts your Petitioners are ready, and pray leave, to prove at the Bar of your honourable House, or in such other manner as to its wisdom may seem meet.
"Your Petitioners do therefore most humbly pray your honourable House to take into consideration the matter of this Petition, and to address his Majesty, that no further lease may be granted to his Grace; but that the Lords Commissioners of his Majesty's Land Revenues may be directed to sell or let the same in suitable lots, whereby the revenue will be increased, the property improved, the town enriched, and the inhabitants restored to the free and independent exercise of the inviolable right of electing Members of their own choice to represent the Borough of Newark in your honourable House."
Lord Lowther
said, he must declare in the outset that the allegations in the petition, as he had been able to collect them, if not gross misstatements were at least perversions of fact. He should not think it requisite to go through the speech of the hon. Member in detail, but would rest
1089
l
l
l
l
l
1090
Mr. F. Clinton
begged leave, as one acquainted with all the details of the transactions which had given birth to the present petition, to say a few words in explanation of those transactions. He confidently assured the House, that there was never submitted to its notice a petition more full of misrepresentations, and of most unfounded insinuations, than that just presented by the hon. Member for Dover. The noble Lord who presided over the Woods and Forests, had so fully and satisfactorily explained the circumstances connected with the original granting and subsequent renewal of the Crown-land lease held by the Duke of Newcastle, that he need not say another word on that part of the subject. He would merely ask the hon. Member for what purpose he had entered into a statement of that lease having been granted in the first instance in the time of George 2nd, to the Earl of Lincoln, the nephew of the then First Lord of the Treasury, unless for the purpose of insinuating something by which he perhaps might hope to win a cheer? The hon. Member was in error as to the facts connected with the last renewal of the Duke of Newcastle's lease, which took place in 1806, and not in 1815, as the hon. Member had stated. The noble Duke's rent on that occasion was raised 2,000
l
1091
l
1092
1093
1094
Sir F. Burdett
said, he could not subscribe to the doctrine advanced by the hon. Member who had just addressed the House, that referring the petition under consideration to a select, committee would be either unprecedented or unconstitutional. He was not wanting in respect to the hon. Member or to the noble Lord who had preceded him; but still he thought that the House was bound not to make their statements, or the statements of any individual, the ground for not referring a petition like the present to a select committee. He said, the House was bound to determine for itself how far the allegations of the petitioners were or were not borne out by fact, and this it could best do by the proposed inquiry. "But before I enter," said the hon. Baronet, "into a detail of the grounds on which I shall vote for referring the petition before the House to a select committee, I beg leave to say a very few words on a subject, which personally affects myself, and which, though not directly connected with that before the House, is not, perhaps, altogether out of place. The noble Duke who has been so frequently alluded to in the course of the present, discussion, has done me the honour of addressing me a letter, with reference to a statement which he charges me with having made in this House a few evenings since. The letter to which I allude, was addressed to me through the medium of one of the public journals. I by no means complain of this circumstance; indeed, I have no complaint to make of
1095
1096
l
quocunque nomine gaudet
1097
Fiant electiones liberœ, procul e causa timoris
'haut homme'
1098
'haut homme'
Articuli Ecclesiœ,
1099
Mr. D. W. Harvey
said, that as he had already given notice of a motion for the 30th of March, to bring the state and value of the Crown-lands before the House, he would not trespass then long upon its attention. With the constitutional branch of the subject, which had been so ably dwelt upon by the hon. Baronet, he should have nothing to do; for indeed he saw no difference between the conduct of the Duke of Newcastle in turning his property where he could into borough-representation profit, and that, of any other noble Lord, or hon. Member, who indulged in similar speculations. Indeed, be should avoid studiously the hypocrisy of taking partial views with reference to such transactions. But it had been asked, did they mean to interfere with the rights of the Crown, or to dictate what ought to be the condition or disposition of the rents of the Crown? To this he would at once reply, Yes. This was not the property of the Crown—on the contrary, it had been bought at a high and perilous price for the people. Ever since the time of Queen Anne the people had been paying 600,000
l
l
1100
l
l
l
l
l
1101
Mr. Sadler
said, although this subject, in the event of a select committee being granted, would again come under discussion, yet he did not think that he should be discharging his duty if he suffered the present occasion to pass without endeavouring to explain the circumstances which had been so misrepresented. And in the first place he begged to ask the hon. Member for Dover whether the petition he had presented was carried at. a town's meeting, and whether the full notice of that meeting had been given.
Mr. P. Thompson
said, the petition was carried at a public meeting, convened after full notice, not only to all persons residing in the town, but one of the notices was even sent to the hon. Gentleman himself. The letter, however, which contained it, travelled in the most extraordinary way about the country, and it was not till long after, that the hon. Gentleman wrote a letter to the Chairman of the meeting, stating that he should have written before on this subject had the letter come to him sooner.
Mr. Sadler
said, the hon. Gentleman, in his opinion, had not given a specific answer as to whether the petition emanated from a public meeting. It was of importance to ascertain this point, be-cause the principal part of the voters of Newark had already expressed their opinion of the petition, as he looked upon it to be, to all intents and purposes, an election petition. As the hon. Gentleman, in his answer to the question just put, had alluded, and somewhat facetiously, to the circumstances by which the notice was prevented reaching him (Mr. Sadler), he would say a word or two on that subject. All the travel that that letter had had was entirely owing to accidents; and had it reached him in time he should have had no hesitation in answering it in the negative; and he should have done this because he had already waited upon his constituents since his election, and when circumstances called him to a distant part of the country he did not see that he was bound to return to Newark, after having so recently visited it. Besides which, he said, that he should have had to appear before a committee, every one of whom had been his opponents at the election. The letter, however, as he had already stated, was delayed by some mistake; not that he made any accusation against the Post-master, But first it had gone to
1102
ex post facto
1103
1104
1105
Lord Howick
said, he only rose for one moment, lest his silence should be misconstrued, as he conceived there was no appearance of the Ministers opposing the present Motion. He should only, therefore, notice the observation of the hon. Member who spoke last, that it would be in vain to deprive the Duke of Newcastle of his influence in the town of Newark. He honestly and candidly confessed, that during the continuance of the present system, were he a borough proprietor, he should avail himself unscrupulously of that interest for himself or his friends: therefore he did not complain of the Duke of Newcastle doing the same; but they did not want to deprive the Duke of his fair influence in the existing state of things at Newark. All they asked was, that he should not be privileged to exercise a right which he derived from the country, against the true interests of that country, and that he should not have the means of preventing the improvement of the national revenue, and of violating the Constitution. Let the House inquire into the facts stated by the petitioners, and see whether there did not exist abuses which were capable of due correction.
1106
prima facie
Cries of 'Question.'
prima facie
Mr. Hobhouse
observed, that it appeared to him that the hon. Gentleman who had spoken last but one, and the noble Lord (Lord Lowther), had left the question exactly where they found it. He was induced to think, from the early part of the speech of the hon. Member for Newark, that that hon. Gentleman was about to proclaim that he was setting up for himself; but at the latter end of the speech he had fairly confessed that he came in on the interest of the Duke of Newcastle, confessing at the same time that he was sitting there in defiance of all the rules and regulations of Parliament. The hon. Gentleman had been sent there by a Peer, and had avowed it. Did not the hon. Gentleman tell the House that he had received his seat from a Peer of Parliament?
Mr. Sadler
. —I did not say so.
Mr. Hobhouse
. —I will make bold to ask the hon. Member, Is it so? Did not the hon. Member say, on a former occasion, that his Grace the Duke of Newcastle had allowed him to vote as he pleased. What was the inference (Mr. Hobhouse con-
1107
ex officio
de-
1108
prĉudi miserum est
1109
Quam vellem nescire literas
1110
*
*;
1111
1112
Cries of "No, no," from Mr. Sadler
1113
"They affirm that seventy of your honourable Members are returned by thirty-five places, where the right of voting is vested in Burgage and other tenures of a similar description; and in which it would be to trifle with the patience of your honourable House to mention any number of voters whatever, the elections at the places alluded to being notoriously a mere matter of form. And this your petitioners are ready to prove.
"They affirm that, in addition to the seventy honourable Members so chosen, ninety more of your honourable Members are elected by forty-six places, in none of which the number of voters exceeds fifty. And this your petitioners are ready to prove.
"They affirm that, in addition to the one hundred and sixty so elected, thirty-seven more of your honourable Members are elected by nineteen places, in none of which the number of voters exceeds one hundred. And this your petitioners are ready to prove."
l
1114
Mr. Sadler
said, in explanation, that he had never denied that Peers might exert influence over some of the Members of that House; but the allegation that the noble Duke in question had exerted influence over him, he positively denied.
Sir R. Wilson
supported the prayer of the petition. He said that, upon a former night, he had alluded to this transaction, and if his feelings of disgust had been strongly excited by it then, they had been still more increased by the facts that had come out during this discussion. He saw persons avowedly sent to that House as representatives of the Peers who sent them there, and who were compelled to give their votes as the persons by whose influence they had been elected chose to order them. If the present system were continued, it would make the people all slaves instead of freemen. The hon. Member for Newark had denied the influence of the Duke of Newcastle over him; but was it not true that forty persons had been turned out of their homes because they had given their votes for the other candidate? It was said, that one of the electors explained that he had given his vote for the wrong candidate by mistake, and that then the Duke's agent told him that the notice to quit was also a mistake. The hon. Member said no coercion had been used; but if that were the case, how came he to be Member for Newark? The hon. Member had written a book from which a quotation had already been made, but one was to be found equally applicable to the hon. Member and his patron in a great dramatic writer:—
You have among you many a purchased slave,
Which, like your asses and your dogs and mules,
You use in abject and in slavish parts,
Because you bought them. Shall I say to you
Let them be free?
Why sweat they under burthens? Let their beds
Be made as soft as yours, and let their palates
Be seasoned with such viands.
1115
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, that the first question the House had to decide was, should the petition be brought up? the next question was, should it be referred to a committee? The discussion had better be confined to the first question; and he should so confine it, as conforming to what he thought was the general sense of the House. His principal object in rising was, to prevent its being supposed that he supported the petition. He meant to decide the question without making it a political question. He had read the letters of the noble Duke, and he saw no reason why, from the profession of the noble Duke's political tenets, he should be favourably disposed towards him; but he saw no reason, at the same time, why the petition should be considered in a different light from other similar petitions, and he should go to a vote on it on the principles of common sense and reason. There were two questions involved in the petition in relation to the Crown-lands— one, whether a case had been made out to call for the interference of Parliament; and the other, if the House, after establishing the interference of the Duke, should take any other step: and with respect to the Crown-lands, the case was, he thought, a complete failure. The hon. Member who had said he was vehement because he represented a populous place, had admitted that he had found all the Commissioners of Woods and Forests courteous and attentive. [Mr.
Hobhouse
1116
l
1117
1118
hear
1119
hear
1120
The Petition was brought up and read.
Mr. P. Thompson
, in moving that it be referred to a Select Committee, said, he should not, after the discussion the subject had already undergone, trespass for any time on the attention of the House. He had heard but one word which could induce him to think the Motion might be spared; but on consideration he did not think even that word would prove sufficient. The noble Lord (Lowther) and the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Peel) had assured the House that the Government had no intention at present to renew the Crown-leases granted to the Duke of Newcastle. He thanked them for the announcement, and rejoiced at it; but it did not give any security to the people of Newark. The present Government might, be determined not to renew the leases, but the Duke of Newcastle was at the head of a considerable party in the State—he might come into power, and, by means of that power, procure to himself a grant of the leases which the present Government might be inclined to withhold. The right hon. Gentleman said the committee would be a committee appointed to inquire into motives. He would say, it was a committee to inquire into facts. If, as he thought it would prove, that these facts were correct, then the House was bound to interfere, not to punish the Duke of Newcastle, however oppressive might have been his conduct; not to shake the last election; but to prevent the renewal of leases which have proved injurious to the properties of those who live under them, and which are calculated to support a violation of the spirit of the
1121
List of the Minority.
Althorp, Lord
Davenport, W.
Baring, F.
Easthope, J.
Baring, Sir T.
Ewart, W.
Brownlow, C.
Guise, Sir B., Bart.
Burdett, Sir F.
Graham, Sir. J.
Brougham, H.
Grant, hon. C.
Bright, H.
Grant, R.
Beaumont, T. W.
Howick, Lord
Calvert, C.
Honywood, W. P.
Clive, E. B.
Harvey, D. W.
Cavendish, W.
Heneage, G. F.
Cave, O.
Hume, J.
Denison, W. J.
Kemp, T. R.
Dawson, A.
Littleton, E. J.
1122
Lumley, J. S.
Russell, Lord J.
Lambert, J. S.
Robinson, Sir G.
Marjoribanks, S.
Sefton, Lord
Maberly, J.
Stanley, E. G. S.
Marshall, J.
Slaney, R. A.
Marshall, W.
Smith, W.
Monck, J. B.
Smith, V.
Morpeth, Viscount
Taylor, M. A.
Martin, J.
Wilson, Sir R.
O'Connell, D.
Warrender, hon. G.
Osborne, Lord F.
Wood, Alderman
Palmerston, Viscount
Warburton, H.
Poyntz, W. S.
Wilbraham, G.
Palmer, C. F.
Webb, Colonel E.
Pendarvis, E.
Ward, C.
Philips, G.
TELLERS.
Price, R.
Mr. Poulett Thomson
Protheroe, E.
Mr. Hobhouse.
Robarts, A. W.
COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY.]
Sir G. Clerk
moved the Order of the Day for the House to resolve itself into a Committee of Supply.
Sir James Graham
said, that in consequence of a new arrangement which he understood had been made, respecting the salary attached to the office of Treasurer of the Navy, he should withdraw, for the present, the motion on that subject of which he had given notice. In so doing, he reserved to himself the right of renewing his motion, if the new arrangement did not satisfy him, whenever the vote for the salary of the Treasurer of the Navy should come regularly before them in the Navy Estimates.
Mr. Hume
said that, as new arrangements were forming by the Ministry, he trusted that some new arrangement would be formed by which the millions of revenue arising from the Customs and Excise, now under the separate control of Government, might be placed under the more immediate control of the House of Commons.
The House then resolved itself into a Committee of Supply.
NAVY ESTIMATES.]
Sir George Clerk
then addressed the Committee, but in consequence of the low tone of voice in which he spoke was frequently inaudible in the gallery. He was understood to say, that had it not been for the observations which had just fallen from the hon. Member for Cumberland, he should have confined himself to a simple enumeration of the number of men and the amount of wages which would be wanted for the
1123
l
l
l
l
l
1124
l
l
l
l
l.,
l
1125
l
l
l
l
l
l.,
1126
d
d
d
l
l
l
1127
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
1128
Sir J. Graham
said, he did not think the hon. Baronet had made out a satisfactory case for the recent appointment to the office of Treasurer of the Navy. The hon. Baronet said it was intended to retain both the offices of Treasurer of the Navy and the Paymaster, until an opportunity occurred for abolishing the latter. That seemed to be an admission that both the offices were useless. In his opinion, the Treasurership of the Navy might have been attached to some other office held by a privy councillor, by which the entire salary would have been saved. The recent junction of the offices of President of the Board of Trade and the Master of the Mint, afforded a precedent which might have been followed with regard to the office of Treasurer of the Navy. He did not however intend to enter at length into discussion on the point. He would take an opportunity of consulting his friends around him, and if he perceived that he was likely to be supported, he would on some future occasion, before the vote passed with respect to the Treasurer of the Navy, move the resolution of which he had given notice.
Mr. Hume
asked the hon. Baronet to state the aggregate amount of the Estimates.
Sir G. Clerk
said, the aggregate amount of the Estimates was 5,595,000
l
l
Mr. Hume
thought the whole establishment most extraordinary, and considering the changes that had been made, the Estimates appeared to him nearly the same as last year, and the deductions were upon the large items. When he considered that the Chancellor of the Exchequer knew that it was almost the unanimous opinion of the Finance Committee that the payment of the Marines and Navy, and of all the officers of both should be consolidated, the vote was brought forward in utter disregard of that Committee, The hon. Baronet had said that great deductions had taken place since the war, but he (Mr. Hume) asked, were they not to expect deductions as soon as the country was in a state of peace? Notwithstanding the great credit which Ministers took to them-
1129
l
l
l
l
l
1130
1131
l
l
l
l
l
1132
Sir G. Cockburn
begged, as his evidence had been referred to by the hon. Member, to say a few words. The House must recollect that the hon. Member had said the same thing last year; and he had then been answered as now, that it was an unfair mode of stating that evidence. The question put to him was, what would be a proper peace establishment for the navy? He replied, that it was almost impossible to give an answer to the question, for it depended upon so many circumstances. Being then pressed by an hon. Member on the Committee to say something on the subject, he stated that he must know the exact state of things; that if we were at perfect peace without the slightest prospect or chance of war, and no power interfering with our commerce or any chance of it, he did not think we ought to have a man-of-war on the sea. The remark was, that that was not a proper thing; and then, at the request of the Committee, he had stated what he had thought was the lowest establishment for each station. That was the manner in which the evidence had been drawn from him; and he again said that it was unfair to use it as the hon. Member had done. Looking around, the Committee could not consider the country in a state in which his answer had supposed it. War had just closed between Rio Janeiro and Buenos Ayres, which had interfered with our merchants, who were still applying for a force to protect their trade on the South American station; and although the Burmese war had indeed closed, there were rising settlements in New Holland which required a naval force to protect them. With respect to doing away with half of our Marines, he (Sir G. Cockburn) had never argued that the number of Marines now voted was absolutely required. But they constituted a most valuable corps, and it was desirable to have such a body ready for duty in case of war, instead of taking raw men, who
1133
Sir G. Warrender
, even on the principle of economy, could not concur with the hon. Member (Mr. Hume) in his proposition for reducing the Marines, although there were other points in the Estimates on which he should agree with him in voting for a reduction. With respect to the Treasurership of the Navy, after a resolution passed by the House on the 12th of February, "that it is the opinion of this House, that in all the establishments of the country, civil and military, every saving ought, to be made which can be effected," he had not expected to see that office separated from other duties, for the first time, when a new writ was moved for Radnor a few days after. When he (Sir George Warrender) first came to the House, the Treasurership of the Navy was filled by Mr. Rose, who, though he disbursed 19,000,000
l
l
1134
Mr. Labouchere
felt considerable difficulty in voting upon this question on the spur of the moment, and without the opportunity of sufficiently investigating the Estimates. He could not go so far as the hon. Member (Mr. Hume) in contending that no pensions should be granted to public servants. He was not surprised, however, at his proposition, considering the extravagant principles acted on by the Government; though he could not concur in it. As to the example of America, he (Mr. Labouchere) had conversed with sensible men of that country who lamented the system, and he (Mr. Labouchere) had witnessed the most discreditable scenes in consequence of the adoption of that system. Individuals had retired from the public service into beggary. He disapproved of the American system with respect to pensions, which had been frequently commended by the hon. Member for Aberdeen, and was far from desiring its introduction into this country: at the same time he wished to have no pensions except such as the House might be disposed to grant. As he thought the reductions were not such as the country had a right to expect, he should support the Amendment of the hon. Member for Aberdeen.
Mr. Maberly
was desirous of noticing one point with respect to the superannuations, which amounted to 500,000
l
l
l
1135
1136
Mr. Peel
said, that he always felt pleasure in communicating any information he could, consistently with the proper performance of his public duty as a Minister of the Crown. The hon. Gentleman who had just sat down wished Government to make out a case for the increase in the number of men in the naval service in 1830, as compared with the number in 1817. It would be admitted that it might not be consistent with the interests of the country for Ministers to state in detail the particular reasons of a given increase in a particular year. Was it not obvious that there might exist reasons connected with our naval power, which would justify an increase in that department, and at the same time dictate silence on the subject? However, so far as his duty permitted, he would give the information required. The hon. Member took the year 1817, and asked why in 1830 should our naval force amount to 29,000 men, when in 1817 it was fixed at 19,000? This question imposed upon Government the task of accounting for an increase of 10,000 men. In 1830 we had 3,000 marines more than in 1817. The House had discussed the policy of keeping up an effective establishment of marines, and it appeared to be admitted that there was something so peculiar in the constitution and character of that force, that it was necessary to keep it up in its present state, if we wished to have an effective Navy. The Marines at present amounted to 9,000 men, of whom 4,500 were afloat, and 4,500 on shore. These divisions alternately replaced each other, and each thus became qualified for the full discharge of the peculiar duties of such a force. The 4,500 who remained at home were occupied in mixed naval and military duties; and it appeared that even those who were ashore were only two nights out of three in bed; so that their duties were not trifling. He felt the full force of observing principles of econo-
1137
1138
1139
prima facie
l
l
1140
l
l
l
l
hear, hear
Sir J. Graham
said, the right hon. Gentleman seemed disposed to taunt him for postponing his motion: he would shortly state his reasons for its postponement. When he first heard of the appointment of Mr. F. Lewis, he was forcibly struck by the discrepancy between the resolution proposed and carried by Ministers, as an amendment on his own motion, and their conduct in disposing of the Treasurership of the Navy. The resolution of Ministers was, "that it is the opinion of this House that in every establishment of the State every saving-ought to be made consistently with the due performance of the public service, and without the violation of existing engagements;" this was agreed to on the 12th of
1141
1142
l
Mr. Peel
said, he had never presumed to advise the hon. Baronet on the subject of his Motion. The hon. Baronet twice gave notice of his intention to move a resolution condemnatory of the mode in which Government had filled up the office of Treasurer of the Navy; and after hearing the explanation offered to-night in reference to that transaction, the hon. Baronet still persisted in his resolution, and pledged himself to bring the question before the House: let the hon. Baronet do so. He repeated, he gave the hon. Baronet no advice on the subject: he only expressed a hope that the hon. Baronet would persevere in proposing a resolution "condemnatory of Government." The hon. Baronet appeared to draw a distinction without a difference between a "condemnatory resolution" and a "vote of censure" upon the Government. For his own part he could see no difference. He had already expressed a hope that the hon. Baronet would bring forward his resolution, which had certainly been twice postponed, and was now glad to hear that the hon. Baronet intended to do so. In saying this he was far from attempting to dictate to him, he would not even presume to advise the hon. Baronet; he only expressed a hope that the motion would be brought forward, in order to obtain the opinion of the House on the subject of the conduct of his Majesty's Ministers.
Mr. Alderman Thompson
said, it would be destructive to the commerce of the country if our naval force were further reduced. He knew it to be a fact, that British merchant ships had more than once owed their safety to the protection of French men-of-war. It was disgraceful to the country.
1143
Sir R. Wilson
begged to slate his reasons for voting against the Amendment. While Spain was carrying on war against South America, he could not vote for reducing our seamen, because it would peril our commerce. Again, while Russia had a force of thirteen sail in the Black Sea, and of twelve sail in the Levant, and France was fitting out an expedition, he thought our Naval power would not bear reduction.
Sir John Wrottesley
contended, that the hon. Baronet opposite had not made out his case. He could not conceive any necessity for such a large force of Marines, for he knew that between 1790 and 1793 fifty regiments of the line had been embarked in the Navy, and he also knew that they had behaved in the most gallant manner. Sir G. Cockburn had only stated that Marines accustomed to the sea were better than land soldiers.
Sir G. Clerk
said that, with respect to the questions that had been put to him by the hon. Baronet (Sir James Graham) opposite, he begged to observe, that the annuities and allowances of reduced officers were regulated by act of Parliament. As to the commissioners of the Navy and Victualling Boards, they could not properly be said to hold their offices for life. They were appointed by warrant, though it was not customary to remove them; and they were entitled to retire on a superannuation allowance of three-fourths of the salary of 1,000
l
Mr. George Lamb
said, that he could not have voted for the proposition of reducing the number of men, nor could he support the proposition that the vote should be taken for six months only, because he was unwilling, under existing circumstances, to give foreign nations an idea that we thought of nothing but reducing our force.
The House divided. For the Amendment 47; Against it 148.—Majority for the original Motion 101.
The following is a list of the Minority.
Bernal, R
Davenport, E.
Benett, J.
Davies, Colonel
Baring, Sir T.
Ebrington, Lord
Baring, B.
Euston, Lord
Buck, L. W.
Fazakerly, J. N.
Carter, H.
Fyler, T. B.
Calvert, C.
Guise, Sir W.
Denison, W. J.
Gordon, R.
Dawson, A.
Graham, Sir J.
Duncombe, T.
Hobhouse, J. Cam
1144
Honywood, W. P.
Rickford, W.
Heron, Sir R.
Robarts, A. W.
Ingilby, Sir W.
Robinson, Sir G.
Jephson, C. D.
Sibthorp, Col.
Labouchere, H.
Townshend, Lord C.
Martin, J.
Wrottesley, Sir J.
Macdonald, Sir J.
Webb, Col.
Maberly, J.
Whitmore, W. W.
Monck, J. B.
Warburton, H.
Morpeth, Lord
Wood, C.
O'Connell, D.
Wood, Ald.
Philips, G.
Whitbread, W.
Palmer, C. F.
Pallmer, N.
TELLER.
Protheroe, E.
Hume, J.
Sir George Clerk
then proposed the following Resolution—That 980,200
l
l
s
Mr. Hume
objected to going on at that late hour.
Sir G. Clerk
understood that, as the number of men had been voted, the hon. Member could have no objection to pay their wages. He assured the hon. Member that to delay this Resolution would be an inconvenience to the public service.
Mr. Hume
had no wish to produce such an effect.
The Resolution was then agreed to, and the House resumed.
WAYS AND MEANS.]
On the Motion of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the House went into a Committee on the Ways and Means.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
proposed a Resolution, that towards making-good the supply granted to his Majesty, the sum of 12,000,000
l
Mr. Gordon
took this opportunity of asking the right hon. Gentleman if he intended to introduce a new set of Stamp Laws and to increase the Stamps on Legacies. He had heard in the legal profession that such was the intention of Government, and that it had already given rise to great speculation.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that for some time past, the consolidation of the Stamp-laws had been under consideration, and that he hoped shortly to be able to lay the result before the House. It was natural that, the consolidation of acts should give rise to speculation, but, as to debate the subject at that time would tend to increase that speculation, he should abstain from entering into further particulars.
1145
The Resolution was agreed to.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
then moved a Resolution,—That there should be issued and applied, for advances on account of Public Works, &c. any sums paid into the Exchequer by the 5th April, 1831.—Agreed to.
Mr. Hume
thought that the Bank ought to be paid less than it was at present for management.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that the charge for management was a matter of engagement which could not be broken through.
Mr. Maberly
thought it no more a matter of engagement than others which had been modified.
The Resolution was agreed to.
The next Resolution was, that towards making good the supplies granted to his Majesty, there be issued and applied the sum of 60,000
l
Mr. Hume
thought that the Company ought to pay more. They did not pay half enough.
The Resolution was agreed to.
The next Resolution was, that towards making good the supplies granted to his Majesty, there be issued and applied the sum of 80,785
l
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Tuesday, March 2, 1830.
MINUTES.] On the motion of the Earl of SHAFTESBURY, "an humble Address was ordered to be presented to his Majesty, praying that his Majesty will be graciously pleased to direct, that there be laid before the House the 21st, 22nd, and 23rd Reports of the Committee appointed to inquire into the collection and management of the Revenue in Ireland, and of the collection of Revenue arising from certain departments in Great Britain."—The Consolidated Fund Bill was read a second time.—The Clerks of the Peace Balances Bills went through a committee.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Tuesday, March 2, 1830.
MINUTES.] The House ballotted for a Committee on the Wexford (town) Election Petition. The following Members were elected and sworn;—Lord John Hay, Mr. Panton Corbett, Mr. Edward Webb, Mr. R. Howard, Mr. Philip Charles Sidney, Mr. Robert V. Smith, Mr. John East-
1146
Lord John Russell
said, that a petition had been put into his hands, some time since, complaining of the manner of voting in the town of Wexford. He had not thought it right to present it, fearing it might be mistaken for the Wexford Election Petition. If, after the Committee appointed to consider that election had formed their decision, he should bring forward the petition intrusted to his care, he hoped it would not be said that the petitioners had endeavoured, first to obtain their remedy by means of the Committee, and afterwards by another means; he had purposely withheld the petition.
SAINT GILES'S VESTRY BILL.]
Lord John Russell
moved the second reading of the St. Giles's Vestry Bill.
Mr. Hobhouse
said, he did not wish to divide the House on this bill, but begged the noble Lord to postpone his motion for the second reading till the parties interested had had an opportunity of knowing something of the bill. Besides, a public committee was now sitting upon Select Vestries, and it might be well to wait for their Report on the subject.
Mr. Ward
said, there had been a lawsuit in the parish, and it was necessary to determine upon some mode of settling these parochial differences.
Sir T. Freemantle
was of opinion that the state of the parish required the immediate interposition of Parliament. The parish was in debt to the amount of 10,000
l.
l.
l.
l.
1147
Lord J. Russell
declined postponing his motion, on the ground that the Bill would be advantageous to the parish.
The Bill was read a second time, and committed.
CURRENCY.]
Mr. Huskisson
presented a Petition from Henry Burgess, of Lombard-street, London, on the subject of the Distress of the Country. The right hon. Gentleman observed, that in the view which the petitioner took of the distressed state of the country he partly concurred, but he did not concur in the propriety of the remedy suggested by the petitioner, an issue of small notes, and extension of the Currency.
Mr. Western
confessed he did not approve, generally speaking, of individuals presenting their opinions to the House upon matters which did not particularly relate to themselves. However, he admitted that in some instances this course might be attended with advantage, and was disposed to consider this as one of those cases. He recommended the statements and arguments contained in the petition to the attention of the House. Last Session Mr. Burgess petitioned the House on the subject of the Currency; the Petition had been since published, and was well deserving of their consideration.
Mr. Huskisson
, in moving that the petition be printed, concurred with the hon. Member for Essex as to the general inexpediency of individuals presenting what might be called political treatises to the House in the shape of petitions; but he thought that justice should be done to the views of the petitioner; and although he differed from some of them, he considered it desirable to present the petition, without wishing thereby to encourage the practice alluded to.
Mr. M. A. Taylor
said, the petition was neither more nor less than a dissertation on the state of the country. He dared to say the petitioner might be a very respectable gentleman, but he must object to the expense of recording his lucubrations upon the Journals of the House.
The Petition was ordered to be printed.
1148
COMMISSIONS OF LUNACY.]
Mr. M. A. Taylor
said, he would only trouble the House for a short time upon the Motion of which he had given notice. He hoped hon. Gentlemen would give him credit for being influenced by no motive except the good of the country, and by no view except that of benefitting the public by remedying existing abuses. He begged to be heard. If the House supposed he was going to enter into the original question respecting the custody of lunatics by the Crown, they would find themselves happily mistaken. He would take up the subject upon other grounds, and very briefly. The expense of Commissions of Lunacy had struck the public eye, and affected the public mind forcibly. He would bring forward one or two cases, which would not trench upon the duty of the Commissioners. There was, for instance, the case of Lord Portsmouth. It was dreadful to contemplate the expense that had been incurred in this; it amounted to something about 25,000
l.
l.
l.
l.
1149
au fait,
nisi prius
viva voce
1150
nisi prius
1151
The Solicitor General
thought, that in the description which the hon. Member had given, he had taken the exception for the rule, and had supposed that these enormous expenses were incurred in all cases, instead of a very few. He lamented that they should be incurred in any case; but he must say, that in his opinion the hon. Member had over-rated the evil. In admitting that the expense was sometimes very large he must observe that the occasion on which large expenses were incurred ought to be recollected. It was generally a contest between near relations; and when that was the case, every body was aware that they were carried on in a more bitter spirit than contests between any other persons. But besides this, the question to be decided was always one of importance: it was not merely whether a man should be deprived of his civil liberty, but whether he should cease to be treated as a rational creature. For the purpose of proving or denying the imputation of insanity, clouds of witnesses were required, and surely no one could object to expenses incurred to put an end to so terrible a charge as that of
1152
nisi prius,
Mr. R. Gordon
believed that no one who remembered the cases of the Earl of Portsmouth and Mr. Davies could doubt that the present system was defective. He should propose to go further than the hon. Member, and inquire into the whole system. He thought that a committee should be appointed to inquire into the
1153
Mr. O'Connell
said, he was disposed to defer the discussion till after the Bill had been brought in. The appointment of practising barristers had been referred to as a cause of delay and expense. In one respect it might be so; and if they went further, and no barrister was appointed a judge, then we might hope to get rid of a portion of our present legal expenses, by getting rid of the technicalities which practising barristers were sure to acquire, and the love of which they carried with them to the bench. He agreed with the Solicitor General, that to attack a part, instead of the whole of the system, might prove an aggravation rather than a mitigation of the evil. If it were said that a difficulty existed in the law, requiring the inquiry to be carried on in the immediate neighbourhood of the alleged lunatic, the answer was, that the object of this Bill was to change the law, and of course to get rid of such a difficulty. It was of no use in such a question to talk of the hurry of
nisi prius.
Sir C. Wetherell
said, that the law had in different ages and times been the subject of attack; but in the direction of this branch of the jurisdiction of his Court, there never had been an impeachment on the honour and integrity or humanity of any Lord Chancellor. He, therefore, for one, would not consent to the revision of a system, against which there never had been any complaint; but he should be glad to discuss the question, whether there might not be some cases in which the Chancellor might, with advantage, submit the decision to a Judge, instead of sending it, as at present, to be adjudicated upon before Commissioners. So far he
1154
Dr. Phillimore
said, the present mode of conducting such inquiries had been successful in its results. None of the decisions of Commissioners and Juries had been reversed.
Mr. M. A. Taylor
, in reply, said he had no intention to intrench on the jurisdiction of the Chancellor, but to substitute what he thought would be a better tribunal than the present for the determination of lunacy cases. The excellent manner in which Lord Teynham's case was tried in three days instead of three weeks, satisfied him that the change he proposed would be a great improvement.
Leave was given to bring in the Bill.
MR. NASH—CROWN LANDS.]
Colonel Davies
rose, he said, in the fulfilment of a pledge he had given last Session, to bring forward an inquiry into the conduct of an individual against whom he was under the necessity of making a charge of the gravest nature, and which had already been the subject of inquiry before a Select Committee. He assured the House that he felt considerable pain in the discharge of this duty. The world was so apt to attribute motives of a private nature to an accuser, that their sympathies were generally excited against him, and in favour of the accused. If that were generally the case, his situation was tenfold more embarrassing, as he had, in some degree, to contend with the resolutions of a Committee, appointed at his own suggestion. Nothing but a sense of public duty and a feeling of the public interest, which was involved to a great extent in the present inquiry, could have induced him to proceed with such a charge. On that occasion too he had not only to accuse Mr. Nash, he had also to prefer a serious accusation against one of the principal Ministers of the Crown— the Chancellor of the Exchequer. In the Committee that right hon. Gentleman had exerted his talents and his influence to throw a cloak over the delinquencies of Mr. Nash; and, instead of discharging the duty of an impartial judge, he had assumed the character of a zealous partisan. The House would recollect, that last Session a Select Committee had been appointed to inquire into the conduct of Mr.
1155
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
1156
1157
1158
l.
s.
1.
l.
S.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
1159
s
l.
1160
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that last year the hon. and gallant Officer had made some hardy assertions, which were certainly not borne out by the evidence laid before the Committee; and by the results attendant upon those assertions they could judge how far his assertions of this year were to be regarded. Every man who attended that Committee must have seen how much at variance those assertions were with the facts. The hon. and gallant Member had thought proper to charge him with defending Mr. Nash at the expense of integrity, honour, and every principle which should govern the conduct of a public man. Yes, he told the House that he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) had throughout acted like a partisan, proceeding as if he were determined, right or wrong, to carry Mr. Nash through, and that in the most improper and corrupt manner; that was language which the hon. Member was not entitled to apply to him anywhere else, except in that House; but those who heard it would judge of it by the former unproved assertions of the hon. Member; and by those unproved statements of his they would judge how far it was likely that, if
1161
no, no.
1162
Mr. Arbuthnot
said, that the Member for Preston had drawn up the Resolution of acquittal; and knowing that, as well as the other proceedings of the Committee, he could not help feeling the utmost astonishment at the statement of the hon. and gallant Officer. He really expected from him something more of generosity candour, and good feeling, than he had manifested on that occasion. The hon. Member must have misunderstood or garbled the evidence, to come to so extraordinary a conclusion.
1163
Mr. Warburton
said, he was not present at the last sitting of the Committee, and probably he should not have arrived at the same decision as that of the majority of the Committee. He contended, that no lease should be given to a surveyor of lands which it should become his duty to set a value on; and he put it to the noble Lord, whether he had not refused lately to sign leases upon that very ground, until the Attorney and Solicitor Generals had given their opinion upon the subject; for there had been a recent attempt to set aside a lease, owing to the circumstance of its having been made to the surveyor. He called the attention of the House to the Resolution agreed to by the Committee, in which they stated "that although there was no evidence that any loss had accrued from the conduct of Mr. Nash, yet it was the opinion of the Committee that the Commissioners of Woods and Forests ought not to grant leases to surveyors or architects having any immediate interest, or being liable to be called on to give their opinions, until their duty, as surveyors or architects, had ceased." Thus, by implication, they did convey an opinion that Mr. Nash had an immediate interest in the lands which had been made the subject of observation. Besides, it was most important to observe, that the charges made last year would have been much more full and numerous had they not been brought forward at so late a period of the last Session. During the present Session there would be time enough to go through them all, and his hon. and gallant friend had pledged himself to bring forward further charges if the House would only grant him a fresh Committee.
Mr. Ward
said, he was a member of the Regent's Canal Committee, and there the conduct of Mr. Nash had been made the subject of discussion. The facts there brought to light were certainly such as enabled him to bear favourable testimony to the conduct of Mr. Nash.
Mr. Maberly
said, that having been one of the minority on that Committee he would support the Motion, and he contended that the transaction between Mr. Nash and Mr. Edwards looked very like a partnership concern, though he was bound to admit that no evidence proving that had been adduced before the Committee. What struck him as singular was that Mr. Edwards had accepted of Mr. Nash 4,500
l.
1164
l.
Mr. Calcraft
said, he would appeal to the House whether the Committee could have come to the resolutions they did on the case, as stated by the hon. Member? The fact was, that the gallant Member, in giving what he called a fair narrative of the case, quoted the answers given to his own questions only, and not one tittle of any other part of the evidence. The gallant Member had complained that he had been called upon to prove his expressions; there was very good reason for this, his expressions were charges against Mr. Nash, and he was, therefore, required to prove them. The gallant Member had also complained that the Committee and the witnesses were against him; but he had forgotten to mention that there was one person still more against him, and that was no other than the gallant Member himself; for never had he seen anything managed with so much ill-temper, or with such an appearance of personal animosity, and such a total neglect of everything like public duty. It had been proved in evidence, that there was no connivance whatever between Mr. Nash and Mr. Edwards: on the contrary, when the ground in Pall-Mall-East was leased to Mr. Edwards, that gentleman was abroad, and when he returned, finding that the ground was much more than he wanted,
1165
Mr. Rumbold
was of opinion, as the charges had been already investigated, that there was no occasion for further inquiry.
Sir M. W. Ridley
said, he should vote against the Motion, for it appeared to him to be nothing more than an attempt to get a Committee to find fault with a former Committee. But though he opposed the Committee, he was authorised by Mr. Nash (who was now suffering under illness severely aggravated by the repeated attacks upon him) to state that he had no desire to avoid any inquiry; and that he was ready to adopt any course which the House might impose, as he felt that nothing could be adduced against him to touch either his honour or his character. One fact he would state concerning Mr. Nash, because it would serve to show the spirit by which he was actuated. When the new street was first in agitation, Foley-house and gardens were offered for sale, and Mr. Nash gave 4,000
l.
hear, hear.
1166
Mr. Protheroe
said, that the last Committee had decided upon good grounds, and the House ought not to go into any further investigation. [The hon. Member was disposed to address the House at greater length but was interrupted by cries of "Question."]
Mr. Monck
was also much interrupted by cries of "Question!" The resolutions of the Committee, he said, did not go to the entire acquittal of Mr. Nash. In his opinion, that gentleman's conduct had. been not only improper, but illegal, and he put it to the noble Lord at the head of the Woods and Forests to say whether he could approve of it.
Colonel Davies
, in reply, said that he congratulated the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Calcraft) on having found his voice, for it was long since the House had heard its melodious sounds. No doubt there were very proper reasons for his silence, what they were he did not know—perhaps it was owing to his getting among those whom he had been lampooning and abusing all his political life. The right hon. Gentleman (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) had certainly refused to consent to two very reasonable resolutions in the Committee—one being only the statement of a matter of fact, and the other stating that there were sufficient grounds to justify the inquiry. He had no wish to re-try Mr. Nash; but he wanted an examination into fresh matter, which owing to the lateness of the inquiry last year, he had not been able to bring forward. At all events, he trusted that Government would cause the houses in the Regent's Park, and Regent-street, and still more Buckingham Palace, to be surveyed; for he thought that a great deal of foul play would in consequence come to light. With respect to the division of the Committee, Lord Milton, Sir Joseph Yorke, Mr. W. Whitmore and Mr. Warburton were unable to be present at the division; and he could answer for it, that all those hon. Members would have voted for the resolution which the Chancellor of the Exchequer opposed. As the Minister had said, that he would not allow the Committee, he (Colonel Davies) knew that the matter was settled, and that it would be of no use to press a division. At all events, he had the satisfaction of knowing that he had discharged his duty to the House and the country.
Motion negatived without a division.
1167
LATE EX OFFICIO PROSECUTIONS.]
Sir C. Wetherell
rose [
a little before ten o'clock
1168
hear, hear.
ex officio
1169
1170
ex officio
cum quibusdam aliis.
de re
de personâ
quod Deus avertat
indictum puta,
1171
virtute officii,
ex officio
1172
ex officio
ex officio
ex officio,
ex officio
1173
ex officio
ex officio
ex officio
tertium quid,
Laughter.
ex
1174
officio
ex officio
1175
l.
l.
ex officio
1176
1177
ex officio
1178
Ego
Rex meus
Rex
1179
1180
sans culottes,
hear, hear
1181
sui juris,
sui juris,
1182
gallopade
1183
1184
1185
Clericus Parliamentarian.
1186
flebile ludibrium,
ex officio
ex officio
1187
Nullum tamen simile est idem.
locus pœnitentiæ
1188
1189
1190
non meus hic sermo.
1191
ex officio
forum domesticum,
1192
propter dignitatem,
quantum
1193
a laugh, as Sir C. Wetherell pointed to Mr. Brougham,
1194
1195
1196
cries of "No, no."
1197
1198
ex officio
1199
The Attorney General
said, that in rising at so late an hour as between twelve and one o'clock to address them upon that important occasion, he trusted that if he expressed any difficulty, it would not be supposed that it was a difficulty to answer every topic which his hon. and learned friend had introduced into his speech; but that it would be understood to be the difficulty which he should feel in commanding the attention of the House while he proceeded to investigate the charges which his learned friend had brought against him. It was more especially necessary that he should throw himself upon the candour, the indulgence, and the patience of the House, because he should abstain from all attempt to introduce any of that entertaining kind of matter with which his learned friend had enlivened his observations. On the contrary, it would be his object to endeavour to separate from the real question all those extraneous and unconnected topics —which, however, had formed the principal part of his learned friend's speech— and to confine himself to those few points the consideration of which was essential, in order to enable the House to come to a sound decision upon the subject. In the first place, he could not help thinking that the manner in which his learned friend had treated the question showed that he was acting under the influence resulting from his considering himself as a kind of professional advocate for the person principally concerned. He could not. otherwise account for the partial manner in which his learned friend had presented the facts of the case to the view of the House. There was also another kind of influence by which it was evident that his learned friend had been actuated. To his great surprise, he had condescended to state that Mr. Alexander, the libeller, was the representative of the party in that House, and in the country, of which his hon. and learned friend declared himself to be a member. He had certainly never expected an avowal of that nature. However right his learned friend might be in questioning the propriety of the prosecu-
1200
ex officio
1201
Sir Charles Wetherell
.—What I complain of is that your's is not common, but uncommon law.
The Attorney General
in continuation. As his hon. and learned friend seemed to be unaware of the law in this case, he would tell him, that if Mr. Alexander had been tried on an
ex officio
ex officio
ex officio
ex officio
ex officio
1202
ex officio
ex officio
ex officio
ex officio
ex officio
1203
ex officio
ex officio
1204
ex officio
1205
ex officio
ex officio
1206
ex officio
ex officio
1207
1208
ex officio
ex officio
1209
1210
1211
1212
1213
ex officio
1214
1215
1216
will,
shall
1217
Sir F. Burdett
said: Sir, I am unwilling to enter upon the subject before the House at this late hour, but, mindful of early friendship and old associations, I cannot abstain from delivering a few words. Sir, I must say, that notwithstanding the multitudinous topics in which the hon. and learned Gentleman below me indulged, and the entertainment he afforded the House by those drolleries, which would, however, in my opinion, have been better calculated for any other stage,—notwithstanding those gibes and gambols, and
sesquipedalia verba,
ex officio
1218
1219
ex officio;
1220
l.
1221
l.
*
*
1222
l.
1.
Detrahere et pellem nitidus qua quisque per ora Cederet introrsum turpis.
the in furia propria;
Cleanse the stuffed bosom of that perilous stuff Which weighs upon the heart
1223
ex officio
ex officio
1224
Mr. Secretary Peel
confessed, that after the elaborate proemium of the learned Gentleman he felt considerable surprise at the Motion with which he had concluded. After the learned Gentleman's three months' gestation, and three hours of painful delivery, he was considering with what miraculous conception the learned Member was likely to teem; and was surprised when the learned Member concluded with a motion for papers, every one of which he held in his hand. He had expected some notice of a legislative proposition, or a grand constitutional assertion of principle. Notwithstanding his learned friend's offer to produce the papers required on parliamentary grounds, a justification might be made out for refusing them. It was quite natural, indeed, the learned Gentleman having intimated that at a future period he might possibly found some vote of censure upon those papers, with respect to the Attorney General's
1225
ex officio
1226
Sir C. Wetherell
—I used no such expression: neither those words, nor words synonymous; nor any thing which a fair man could so construe. [
Order.
Mr. Peel
in continuation said, he would give the learned Gentleman full power and opportunity of explaining, and if he said he had not used the words, he would entirely and fully believe that he did not mean to use them. But that such words fell from his mouth in the heat of debate, was certain, and he would appeal to the recollection of the learned Member's friends in confirmation of the statement. The learned Gentleman had said that the object of the prosecution was to beat down the powerful Protestant party with which Mr. Alexander was connected, and of which he was supposed to be the representative; and his learned friend, the Attorney General, had to consider what effect might be produced by the libels in question on parties in this country and in Ireland. He would give the opponents of the Catholic Relief Bill in Parliament credit for feelings of sincere pleasure if their predictions with respect to the results of that measure should be falsified; he was sure that they would join the advocates and supporters of the bill in rejoicing at that: but studious efforts were making at the period of these libels to unsettle the public mind in Ireland, with a view to retard the beneficial effects expected from the Relief Bill, and keep the Protestant mind in that country in a state of excitation by the hope that other influence was about to prevail with the Sovereign over that of his Ministers, and that the Protestant monopoly would be reestablished. Whatever might be the effect of those inflammatory paragraphs in this country, they were certainly calculated to be productive of much mischief in Ireland, where parties were so much excited, and where all means of fomenting that
1227
1228
Lord Althorp
observed, that he agreed in general with what had fallen from the hon. Member for Westminster, but that he must on principle condemn the practice of resorting to
ex officio
ex officio
Mr. O'Connell
observed, that it appeared to him that the prosecutions which had been carried on by the learned Attorney General showed evidently a desire to assume a dictation over the public Press. He felt extremely sorry for the manner in which the learned Gentleman had defended himself. He had asserted that the course which he had taken did not give him any additional advantage; but he would, on the contrary, show that it did give him a very great advantage over Mr. Alexander. After the learned Gentleman had first stirred in these proceedings he had changed his course, he had turned round, he had instituted two prosecutions, the one on account of Lord Lyndhurst, the second with reference to another of his Majesty's Ministers. By his first proceeding he had filed a sort of Bill of Discovery, and of that he had subsequently taken advantage. It was a singular fact, that during the heat of the contest, before the Catholic Relief Bill had been passed, when agitation prevailed to so extensive a degree, not a single prosecution for libel had been instituted. The prosecution which gave rise to the present Motion did not take place until
1229
1230
The Attorney General
denied that he wished to domineer over the Press. Nothing that he had ever said, or that he had ever done, could justify such a conclusion. He was obliged to take the law as he found it, and by the law he had been guided in all his proceedings. The hon. and learned Gentleman had introduced a case which was not then under discussion. That case, he begged leave to observe, must stand on its own merits, and must not be judged in conjunction with any other case. The hon. and learned member, he must say, was mistaken in his facts. The Duke of Wellington would have been happy, on the trial which had taken place, to have prosecuted the author of the libel; but up to the time of the trial no author appeared that could be prosecuted. If the author had been forthcoming, he would have been prosecuted. He begged leave to correct one error into
1231
Sir R. Heron
observed, that in his opinion the noble Duke had been very ill-advised in carrying on these prosecutions. He ought, like his predecessors, to have treated these libels with the contempt they deserved. If all animadversions on the conduct of public men were to be prosecuted as libels, there was an end of the freedom of the Press.
Mr. North
was of opinion, that these prosecutions had not been instituted so much with a view to gratify the personal feelings of the persons attacked, which some hon. Members seemed to suppose, as to defend the character of illustrious men, which was the property of their country. He agreed with Mr. Burke that men could not look with indifference on the contempt of their fellow creatures; and the law was therefore bound to shield them from calumny. It seemed to be a mistake to suppose that these prosecutions had not been begun on account of the excitation occasioned by the passing of the Catholic Relief Bill. Many persons, both in England and Ireland, were anxious that the agitation occasioned by the discussions on the Catholic Question should survive the passing of the bill. To allow that bill to have fair play it was necessary that the Government should watch over its infancy. It was bound to prevent busy and disappointed men from marring the effect of that healing measure. He would not enter into the questions which had been mooted as to the law of libel, he having only risen to explain that, in his opinion, these prosecutions were necessary in order to prevent the spreading of calumnious assertions, that were only intended to preserve alive a spirit of dissatisfaction.
The Solicitor General
defended the course pursued by his hon. and learned friend. The hon. and learned Member for Clare had observed, that during the period of agitation, no prosecution for libel had been instituted. This, he conceived, was a very proper mode of proceeding. Government was unwilling, while the country was in a ferment, to add to the excitation, which was felt on all sides. But when the great measure was carried which created so much warmth, then, and then only, did the Government
1232
Mr. Sadler
was of opinion, that it was very right to bring this subject before the House, and he conceived that his Majesty's Attorney General could not feel any hardship in consequence of its being so introduced. He had some observations to make on the subject, which he would offer when a distinct proposition relative to this subject was before the House. He admitted that the question had been very well argued on legal grounds; but there were some other points connected with it which he deemed very important, and which, if no other individual thought proper to bring forward, he certainly would.
1233
Mr. Hume
said, he was extremely glad that this Motion had been made, and he was quite sure the hon. and learned Gentleman (Sir C. Wetherell) had read the Attorney General such a lecture as he could never forget to the last day of his existence. The Attorney General, in explanation, had said, that he did not mean to set himself up as a dictator of the Press: but he could assure the Attorney General that the impression of those around him (Mr. Hume) was, that such was his meaning. The speech of the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Peel) was very different, and did him great credit. He had always, both in public and private, praised the right hon. Gentleman for treating the calumnies of the Press with the contempt they deserved. He was sorry that the hon. Baronet, the Member for Westminster, had attempted to palliate the conduct of the Attorney General by alluding to that of attornies general in the most odious times of tyranny. The present state of the libel law was a disgrace to the country. The Attorney General had said, that he was favourable to a well-regulated Press: but what did the Attorney General mean by this? His meaning was evident,—namely, a Press regulated by himself. He had never heard a weaker defence than that of the Attorney General, and when the papers distributed it over the land, he was quite sure that the voice of the public would induce him to stay his hand. He had never heard any individual defend the libel on the Lord Chancellor. On the contrary, every body condemned it, and rejoiced at the punishment of it. He protested, however, against this being put, as the Solicitor General had put it, in the front of the battle. He was glad that these prosecutions had been begun without the knowledge of the Secretary for the Home Department. This confirmed his opinion of the right hon. Gentleman's character. He hoped the country would know this: he hoped the country would know that the right hon. Gentleman was not aware of these prosecutions until the day after they were brought into Court. He trusted the Attorney General would learn caution by the proceedings of this night, and he thanked the learned Gentleman for bringing forward this Motion.
Sir F. Burdett
said, that the hon. Member for Aberdeen had so totally misrepresented what he had said, that he must be allowed, to lay claim to contradict it at
1234
Mr. Peel
said, that words were not strong enough to describe the misrepresentation into which the hon. Member for Aberdeen had fallen with respect to him. So far from differing with his hon. and learned friend, the Attorney General, he entirely agreed with him; nay, he had not heard one single sentence from his hon. and learned friend in which he did not concur. In what he had said upon the point on which the hon. Member for Aberdeen had so strangely mistaken him, he was speaking of himself personally, and of the abuse which had been levelled at him. He had expressly stated that his hon. and learned friend had acted upon no other than the just and proper feeling of preventing the continuance of excitement in this country and in Ireland. He entertained the same feeling, and if he had been told that a chaplain of the Duke of Cumberland had made such a political charge against a Minister, or that any other person had made such a personal charge against the Lord Chancellor, he should have been ready to suggest the institution of a prosecution. All he had contended for was, that there had been no conspiracy to ruin an individual; and he said again, that he did not know that he himself had been mixed up in the libel, until the author of the libel had been prosecuted. Knowing the deliberate intention in which these libels were published, he begged to be understood as perfectly concurring in the prosecutions against the author of them.
The Solicitor General
said, that he also had been most strangely misrepresented by the hon. Member for Aberdeen. He had not put the libel against the Lord Chancellor foremost in the battle, except so far as it was the first of a series of libels. He was willing to put that out of the question, and to defend the rest of the prosecutions.
Sir C. Wetherell
said, that at that late hour he should compress his reply into a very small compass. When he professed himself to be a Tory, he could not of course labour under so great a delusion as to expect to meet with the approbation of the hon. Baronet, the Member for Westminster. No amalgamation, no reciprocity of sentiments could take place between, them upon the Tory creed; but
1235
ipsissimis verbis
1236
The sabbath shines no day of rest to them:
1237
ex officio
Mr. Peel
said, that if the hon. and learned Gentleman supposed that he had intimated that the hon. and learned Gentleman had any personal connexion with the Morning Journal he was mistaken. He had said no such thing; and if he had misrepresented any part of the hon. and learned Gentleman's speech, he had done so unintentionally.
Mr. Tennyson
thought that a part, at least, of the present Motion, could not be complied with. The exact words in which each verdict was pronounced, and the exact words in which the juries recommended the defendant to mercy, were not, he apprehended, recorded.
Sir C. Wetherell
said, that they were handed up in writing, and did, or ought to exist.
Mr. Tennyson
said, that still he did not know that they were part of the record.
Motion put and agreed to.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Wednesday, March 3, 1830.
MINUTES.] The Consolidation Fund Bill, and the Clerks of the Peace Balances Bill, were read a third time.—Several Returns, relative to the Import and Export of Lead, and
1238
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Wednesday, March 3, 1830.
MINUTES.] Sir T. BARING presented the Report of the City of Cork Election Committee, stating that Mr. G. CALLAGHAN was not duly elected; that the last election was consequently void; that the Petition against it was not frivolous or vexatious: and also that the opposition was not frivolous or vexatious.—A new writ was ordered to issue for Cork, in the room of Mr. G. CALLAGHAN, on the motion of Sir T.BARING.—The Ecclesiastical Leases Bill was read a second time.—The Contempt in Equity Bill, the Lunatics' Property Bill, and the Liability of Real Property Bill, were read a third time.—Lord LOWTHER gave notice for Monday of a motion for leave to bring in a Bill, to remove the Market for Hay and Straw from its present situation in the Parish of St. Martin-in-the-fields.—Mr. DAWSON brought in the Transfer of Aids Bill, and the Exchequer Bills Bill for 1830: both read a first time.—Returns were laid on the table of the pay and allowances of the Royal Marines; of the quantity of Corn, Meal, and Flour, imported both from foreign parts and from Ireland, both in British and in foreign ships; of the sums received and paid by the Commissioners of the National Debt on account of Savings Banks; of the average sale at which Stock had been purchased for the redemption of the National Debt; of the money received from the sale of Life Annuities; of all foreign Lead, and Lead Ore imported; of the Salaries of Receivers General of Taxes; and of all additions made to the National Debt.—Returns were ordered of all the Coals imported into Dublin during every year since 1821; of all the Suits commenced in the Courts at Westminster during the years 1825 to 1829 inclusive; of all private and public Meetings before Commissioners of Bankrupts between January 1828 and January 1850.
MANCHESTER PETITION.]
Mr. E. Davenport
, in presenting a Petition from Manchester for a reduction of taxation, and complaining of distress, said it would be desirable that the House should come to some understanding on the subject of his Motion on the State of the Country, which stood for Friday next. He understood, as the motion was not likely to be very acceptable to Ministers, that they intended to avail themselves of their empire over the Orders of the Day on Friday, to prevent it from coming on at a reasonable hour. The hon. Member for Hertfordshire had, in anticipation of that harbinger of spring, the cuckoo, thought fit to lay his egg in his (Mr. Davenport's) nest, and refused to give way to him. The hon. Member for Bletchingley also had a motion for Friday, but was willing to allow precedence to him (Mr. Davenport). The Chancellor of the Exchequer, probably with a view to catch some stray votes in a division upon which he ought not to have a majority, had given notice of what he called a Financial Statement for the 15th of March; but the House should recollect that it was admitted Ministers
1239
Mr. Tennyson
thought it would be convenient to the House if it could be understood what was to be the question for discussion on Friday. He did not give up all hope that the right hon. Gentleman, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, might develope some plan of relief which would make the hon. Member's motion less necessary.
Mr. Bernal
wished to know from the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether he proposed or not to proceed with any Estimates on Friday, as some were fixed for that day.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that it was the general understanding that the Estimates should be proceeded with on Mondays and Fridays; but that, bowing to the feeling of the House, he had sacrificed one of those days for the East Retford question. He did not, however, therefore think it necessary to fix some other day for the motion of the hon. Member for Shaftesbury.
Sir Richard Vivian
was of opinion that the House ought on no consideration to postpone the motion for considering the state of the country. If it were again and again indefinitely postponed, the ferment in the country might go the length of a revolution, and be beyond the control of Parliament.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, he had some reason to complain, and did not therefore expect to have been attacked. He had fixed the Committee of Supply for Friday, but had given way, against his own wish, because Members were anxious to proceed with the East Retford Bill, He would not oppose the
1240
Colonel Davies
said, he did not feel disposed to place much confidence in any statement the Chancellor of the Exchequer was likely to make, and therefore he thought the House ought not to defer the motion for taking into consideration the state of the country. A large division in the favour of the motion for an inquiry might make the Members come forward with a statement suitable to the wants and wishes of the people. It was not his wish to oppose Government, but to strengthen it, if it was to enable it to give some relief to the country.
Mr. Harvey
confessed, that he was one of those who thought the distress of the country very severe, but he did not think it was of so revolutionary a tendency as the hon. Member for Cornwall (Sir R. Vivian) seemed to suppose. The country would, he believed, wait patiently, though the hon. Member for Shaftesbury's motion were postponed, and that motion would, he thought, be most suitably made, after the Chancellor of the Exchequer had made his statement. If that were not what the country had a right to expect of Government—did not give the people sufficient relief—all their Representatives might then unite in one body to compel it. He would not wish that they should do that till the government had developed its plans, for he was not without hope that the Government, by repealing the tax on Beer, and adopting other financial measures of a similar nature, would render it unnecessary for the Representatives of the people to take on themselves the task of chiding it. He thought, therefore, that the hon. Member's motion should be postponed.
Mr. A. Baring
said, he could not see any necessary connection between the motion of the hon. Member and the financial statement of the right hon. Gentleman, that one should be postponed for the other. Although he did not expect much from the motion of the hon. Member, yet, as the country was certainly suffering under some distress, the House ought not to interpose unnecessary objections in the way of a motion that had relief in view. The country might think it was sported with were the motion to be again postponed. He was the more anxious that the motion should not be postponed, on account of the ex-
1241
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, he was far from wishing to postpone the hon. Member's motion, but it would have been more convenient had the hon. Member selected a day on which he might have brought it forward without asking other hon. Members to give up their plans. He was anxious, and so were all the Ministers, that the motion should come on. He was anxious that the country should not be kept in suspense as to the several plans of relief hon. Members had to propose. It should be remembered, however, that Ministers had given way to the hon. Member for Bletchingley (Mr. Tennyson) and had consented to postpone the Estimates beyond Friday, in order that the hon. Member's motion relative to East Retford (and as that had been three years before the House, it was high time it should be settled,) might not be deprived of the support of his friends who were about to go on circuit. Having thus given way, the Ministers were then asked to forego their arrangement, and make way for the hon. Member for Shaftesbury. It has been hinted that the hon. Member may introduce his motion as an amendment to any other motion, and if he means to do so it will be a great convenience to the House to be informed whether or not such is his intention, and what is the precise nature of his motion. When that is known the House will be able to decide what course ought to be pursued.
Mr. E. Davenport
said, he was anxious to accommodate himself to the wishes of the House, but he heard such conflicting opinions, that he could not make out what those wishes were. He certainly could have no objection to state that his motion would be for a Committee to inquire into the State of the Country. He was too old a soldier not to take advantage of circumstances, and therefore he could not state more precisely what his motion would be, till the day of battle
1242
Sir Richard Vivian
said, that he did not mean to affirm that the country was in a state of rebellion, but nobody, he thought, could deny that there was a revolutionary spirit in the country, which it would not be wise to inflame by refusing or delaying to inquire into the means of relieving the general distress. He would only remind the House, in proof of his assertion, of the Birmingham Union, and of the several Societies for promoting Radical Reform, which were already matured in different parts of the country. The hon. Member for Callington did not seem aware that a meeting had lately taken place in its neighbourhood, to complain of distress, and petition for relief; and being ignorant of that, the House would not be disposed to place much confidence in his representation of the general satisfaction which the hon. Member said existed in the country.
Mr. E. Davenport
said, it appeared to
1243
A general cry of "No, no."
Sir E. Knatchbull
said, that the matter then remained in the same uncertainty in which they had found it.
The Petition was then ordered to lie on the Table.
DUTY ON PRINTS AND BOOKS.]
Mr. Bernal
begged to ask a question of the Chancellor of the Exchequer respecting a practice that had lately sprung up in the port of London, and in some of the outports. Formerly, a duty of 6
d.
1.
d.
1.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
was not then prepared, but would to-morrow satisfy the hon. Member.
THE LATE TRIALS IN CORK.]
Mr. Jephson
rose, pursuant to the notice he had given, to move for several Returns connected with the postponement from the last summer assizes at Cork, of the trials of Leary and others, charged with a conspiracy to murder. The hon. Member prefaced his Motion by saying those trials had been unwarrantably postponed by Chief Baron O'Grady. He fixed a day for the termination of the assizes, and beyond that he would not wait, though he was earnestly implored to wait, and though, by not waiting, he consigned the men to prison for several months. The hon. Member concluded by moving "That there be laid before the House a copy of the entry made by the clerk of the Crown, as to the cause of the postponement of the trials at the last summer assize at Cork, of the trials of Leary and others, accused of Conspiracy to Murder; also a copy of the Memorial of the Grand Jury of Cork to the Lord Lieutenant, for a special commission to try the prisoners, and the answer thereto;
1244
Colonel O'Grady
, in seconding the Motion, said, that he knew nothing of the circumstances, but being nearly connected with the Judge who presided, he could state that as far as he (the learned Judge) was concerned, he would have no objection to give every information in his power.
Mr. King
supported the Motion, and said, he was sure that all the circumstances would be satisfactorily explained.
Lord Leveson Gower
said, he had no objection to the Motion, except to that part which related to the Judge's notes, to call for which in such a case was, in his opinion, unparliamentary.
Sir C. Wetherell
objected to the production of the Judge's notes, and also to the confidential correspondence of the Crown Solicitor on the subject of the trials.
Mr. Doherty
suggested to the hon. Member (Mr. Jephson) to withdraw those parts of his Motion, to which, after a few words, he consented, and the Motion thus reduced was agreed to.
STATE OF THE COUNTRY.]
Mr. E. Davenport
, adverting to what passed on the subject of his motion on the State of the Country, which stood for Friday, said, that on consideration he was reluctantly induced to postpone it, as it might be inconvenient to many Members who would wish to vote upon it, and who also wished to vote on the East Retford question. He would, therefore, postpone it from Friday next, and fix it for the day after that named for the financial statement of the Chancellor of the Exchequer—namely, for Tuesday, the 16th instant.
CALL OF THE HOUSE.]
Sir R. Vyvyan
fixed his Motion, that the House be called over, also for Tuesday the 16th instant.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Thursday, March 4, 1830.
MINUTES.] The royal assent was given by commission to the Consolidated Fund Bill, and the Clerks of the Peace Balances Bill.—Returns were laid on the table relative to the Long Annuities, the Savings Banks, and the Affairs of India.
1245
COMMITTEE ON EAST-INDIA AFFAIRS.]
Earl Bathurst
moved, that the Select Committee appointed to inquire into the East India Affairs, do, from time to time, report their proceedings to the House.—Ordered.
The Marquis of Lansdown
said, he felt very great satisfaction at the motion which had just been made by the noble Earl. He was about to present three or four petitions on the subject of the East-India Company's Charter, the prayer of which was similar to the prayer of other petitions which he had already presented with reference to that question. He begged leave to take that opportunity of stating, that the Representatives of various bodies of individuals, in different parts of the country, who were sent to town to watch over the interests of many who were anxiously awaiting the result of this inquiry, had expressed to him, and, he believed, to other noble Lords, a wish to be made acquainted with the proceedings before the Committee, in such manner as might seem most proper to their Lordships, in order that they might be enabled to form an opinion on the evidence (the subject being one in which they felt a deep and important interest), and to judge how far it would be expedient for them to bring forward other evidence relating to this question. He felt, whatever the rules of their Lordships' House might be upon this point, that it was highly necessary and proper for those persons to be made fully acquainted with the proceedings of the Committee, and the subjects to which they directed their inquiry. Many of them understood the question perfectly well; and they possessed information which probably was not before the Committee, and which they were anxious to tender to their Lordships. He confessed that he was one of those who wished that course to be taken, although he was aware that some difficulties might arise in effecting the object to which he alluded, in consequence of the formation of their Lordships' Committees. He gave his full concurrence to any measure which was likely to give to those persons the satisfaction they desired; and therefore he heard with much pleasure the motion of the noble Lord, the President of the Council, who presided over the Committee. That motion arose out of a Resolution which the Committee had agreed to on that day, and which empowered it, from time to
1246
DISTRESS OF THE COUNTRY.]
The Duke of Grafton
presented a Petition from the owners and occupiers of land in the county of Suffolk. His Grace observed, that the object of the petition was to call their Lordships' serious attention to the distressed state of the Agricultural interest, and particularly to the melancholy situation in which the class of labourers was placed. The Petitioners recommended, and in their recommendation he cordially agreed, the most strict and rigid economy; and they prayed for a remission of those taxes which bore most immediately on the labouring classes. Although it was evident that great and extensive distress was felt throughout the country, yet he was not one of those who despaired of seeing that distress alleviated. In the last Session their Lordships were occupied with a question which absorbed all others, and prevented them from looking narrowly into the state of the country; but he hoped that in the present Session, some great and well-digested measure would be introduced—that some extensive and effectual remedy would be devised—for the relief of the labouring population. The interests of the country, and, he might add, the interests of humanity, peremptorily required a measure of that nature.
The Earl of Stamford
bore testimony to the fact, that very great distress existed throughout the country, not only in the agricultural, but in the manufacturing districts. In consequence of the act of the legislature by which the currency was
1247
s
Lord Calthorpe
said, that the privation experienced by the people at the present moment was, he believed, universal, scarcely any part of the empire was free from it. Most certainly the pressure was general, and was felt most severely. While, however, he admitted the existence of distress, he must be allowed to observe that, in different places, it differed extremely in degree. It appeared to him, however, that the existence of such a degree of privation as every man knew to prevail throughout England, called urgently for very strong measures at the hands of Parliament, and of his Majesty's Ministers, to meet the exigency of the time. It was the imperative duty of Ministers to do their utmost to diminish those burthens which bore so heavily on the country. He, for one, did not withhold from Ministers that credit which was due to them, for a sincere and honest anxiety to reduce the existing taxes. But he certainly must say, that if the work of retrenchment and the improvement of the country were not speedily undertaken,—if his Majesty's Ministers did not afford the utmost facilities for a full and ample inquiry into the degree and extent to which that retrenchment might safely be effected, and if at the same time the resources of the empire were not permanently enlarged and ameliorated by positive remedies,—the people would have much reason to complain. More than one remedy had been urged
1248
The Duke of Wellington
said, there was no objection whatever, on the part of his Majesty's Ministers, to afford every information in their power, with respect to the expenditure of the country. It could not certainly have escaped the notice of noble Lords, that the estimate of the expense of the country had been very considerably diminished in the present Session of Parliament, in comparison with that of the last and the preceding Session, considering at the same time what reductions had been made in those Sessions on the estimate of former Sessions. He could safely say that he had done every thing in his power, and all the other Ministers of his Majesty had done every thing in their power, to reduce the expense of the country to the smallest possible amount: There was no expense incurred that was not expressly necessary to maintain the honour of the country, and to uphold its interests, extended as they were to every quarter of the world. It was perfectly true that this island was but a small portion of the globe, yet its interests were extended all over the world, and must be maintained, though at a great expense. The expense necessary for the maintenance of the honour and interests of this country was at present only 12,000,000
l
l
1249
Lord Calthorpe
admitted, that it was quite clear, that the retention of those colonies and stations must inevitably be attended with a certain expense; but still he was by no means prepared to say that greater reductions might not be effected.
The Earl of Malmesbury
said, there was one point which had not been alluded to when mention was made of our foreign possessions, to which he would call their Lordships' attention: it was a very important point, for the station which he was about to notice had cost this country infinite sums of money, as well as the lives of our best soldiers and seamen. He believed that the subject was somewhat unpopular, but still he thought it right to express his
1250
1251
l
The Marquis of Lansdown
said, no one could doubt but that his Majesty's Ministers intended to make some reduction; and it must be admitted that some useful reductions had been made in preceding years; at the same time it must occur to
1252
minimum
minimum
1253
The Petition was then read, and laid on the Table.
The Duke of Richmond
presented a Petition from the town of Lowth, in Lincolnshire, complaining of distress. He expressed a hope that the noble Lords whose sentiments he had listened to that evening, would support the motion which he intend to submit shortly.
TIMBER.]
Earl Darnley
, in rising to move for a return of all Contracts made for Timber for the use of his Majesty's Dock-yards, since January 1st. 1810,stated that his object in moving for the Return was, to put at rest those differences of opinion relative to the price of Timber which had been lately stated in that House. He wished also to make the Admiralty aware of the necessity of putting a stop to the practice of laying in such a vast stock of Timber as was piled up in the Dock-yards. Large sums were expended every year for the purchase of Timber, which night, he thought, be saved He by no means wished to cripple the efficiency of the Navy, for he believed that to be essential to the national safety—he wished to make no reduction in the number of seamen employed, for that part of the service could not be too effective: he thought, indeed, that the coast blockade might be dispensed with, but he objected to keeping up such an immense dead stock in our Dock-yards, which perhaps might never be wanted, and was purchased apparently only to decay. When the Returns, for which he should move, were laid before their Lordships, they would be as sensible of this as he was. The vote, he
1254
l
*
Viscount Melville
said, he did not rise to oppose the Motion, but only to assert for himself, that he had a strong desire to make every possible reduction; at the same time he was bound to inform their Lordships, that he did not think a diminution of the supply of the materials of shipbuilding was consistent with the national safety. As long ago as the time of Lord Sandwich, a regulation was made to keep in the Dock-yards three years' supply of Timber, that, in case of any sudden emergency, seasoned Timber might be obtained. The regulation, however, was not carried fully into effect, till the very last year of the late war. He would not enter into details; he would only assure his noble friend, that much less Timber was made use of than formerly, and his Majesty's Government was anxious to reduce the expenditure to the lowest possible scale.—The Returns were ordered.
FOREIGN CORN.]
The Earl of Malmesbury
rose, to move for some Returns, to which, he said, he understood his Majesty's
*
l
l
1255
s
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Thursday, March 4, 1830.
MINUTES.—Mr. PHILIP PUSEY took the oaths, and his seat for the borough of Rye.
MR. M. A. TAYLOR brought in his bill to diminish, in certain cases, the inconvenience and expense of Writs
de Lunatico Inquirendo
On the Motion of MR. C. PALLMER, there was ordered to be laid before the House copies of any Correspondence between the Chairmen of any of the Water Companies in the Metropolis and the Secretary of State for the Home Department, respecting a sufficient supply of Water. Also of the Letters Patent for incorporating any Companies for the supply of Water in Christ church, Bermondsey and Southwark.
MR. O'CONNELL gave notice, that on Tuesday, the 4th of May, he would move for leave to bring in a bill to place investments of property for charitable purposes by Catholics on the same footing as similar investments by Protestant Dissenters:—That on the same day he would move for leave to bring in a bill to render valid, in this country', the marriages of Roman Catholics by their own priests; and also, for the repeal of certain penalties to which Catholic priests in Ireland were at present liable, for marrying a Protestant to a Roman Catholic—and, that on Thursday, the 6th of May, he would move for a Radical Reform in the Representation in the Commons House of Parliament.
On the Motion of ME. PROTHEROE, there was ordered to be laid before the House an account in detail of the money paid to the Commissioners of Public Records, and its application; also an account of the number of Works printed by them; also an account of the number of persons employed by the Commissioners, the nature of the employment or each, and the amount of salary.
An Account was presented of the Bank Annuities and Long
1256
LEEDS AND SELBY RAILWAY.]
Mr. Sadler
presented a Petition from certain proprietors of lands in the neighbourhood of the line of the projected Railway between Leeds and Selby, against the bill now in progress; and on Mr. Marshall moving the second reading of the bill,
Mr. Sadler
opposed the Motion, on the ground of the injury and inconvenience which the railway would occasion to the petitioners. The utility of railways in cases where water communications existed was as yet doubtful; but let it be established that they were of importance, and the petitioners were ready to sacrifice their private convenience to the public good, and abandon all opposition to the bill. The experiment as to the advantage of railways was in progress; when it should have been completed, it would be time enough to pass such a bill as the present.
Mr. Marshall
spoke of the advantages that would result from the proposed railway, and added that the great majority of landed proprietors upon the line had assented to the measure.
Mr. F. Wilson
opposed the bill, as involving an attack upon the interest of the proprietors of the Aire and Calder navigation.
Mr. Sykes
supported the bill. The intended railway would be of the greatest public benefit. He was not surprised at the opposition of the hon. Member for York, who received dividends to the amount of 10,000
l
Bill read a second time.
PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMITTEE ON
Mr. Ward
presented Evidence taken before the Committee upon the Charter of the East-India Company, and moved that it be printed.
Mr. Hume
said, this was evidence which had occupied the Committee a fortnight, and that it formed a great mass. He rose for the purpose of suggesting that, as soon as each witness had been examined and cross-examined, his evidence should be printed. This mode would enable Gentle-
1257
Mr. Stewart
thought there could be no objection to so reasonable a proposal. Besides, it was of great importance that the evidence should go forth to the public, which it could not, unless it were given to the House in small quantities.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
knew that there had been some discussion on this point in the Committee, but thought it had been settled that the evidence should be presented every fortnight. At all events, this was a question for the Committee. He believed it was not the usual course of the House to interfere in a matter which had been left to the discretion of a Committee.
Lord Althorp
, though not a member of the Committee, said, he thought that if the Committee itself did not object, it would be very convenient to the House that the evidence should be reported in small parcels, so that it might be more speedily in the hands of Members.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that as it could not be known to what length the examination of a witness might extend, it would be better to have the evidence reported at fixed periods.
Mr. Ward
said, that he had not understood it to be the intention of the House that the Committee was to give the evidence in such very small parts. Neither had he expected that the hon. Member (Mr. Hume) would have called the attention of the House to this subject. He had understood it to have been the hon. Member's intention to confine himself to a remark upon the necessity of expediting the printing.
Mr. Spring Rice
had also understood that the reports of the Committee were to be at the end of six days of actual sitting, which would include a fortnight of time, as the Committee sat only on three days of the week. To report at shorter periods might be sending the evidence in a very unsatisfactory manner before the House. Sometimes it might be desirable to report at the end of four days, and sometimes not before the end of eight; but he thought it would be better to leave the matter, as it had been already left, to the discretion of the Committee.
1258
Mr. Hume
did not wish that the House should interfere. His wish was, that when the evidence of one witness was complete it should be presented to the House.
The Report was ordered to be printed.
IRELAND:—CASE OF FRANCIS
Mr. O'Connell
wished to know from the noble Lord (F. L. Gower) opposite, whether he had any objection to the production of a Petition or Memorial forwarded to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, from a person named Francis M'Brian, a prisoner in Enniskillen gaol, complaining of the conduct of the Sub-sheriff of Fermanagh. He also wished to know from the noble Lord whether the proclamation issued last year by the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, for putting down party processions, was issued by the advice of the law officers of the Crown in that country. His reason for asking for this information was, that one of the Irish Judges, in going a circuit soon after, was reported to have delivered a charge very contrary to the law as laid down in that proclamation, and that same learned Judge had recently selected for his circuit that one where there were most trials for infractions of the law, as laid down in the proclamation, to be tried, and where, in fact, the point at issue would be, whether the explanation of the law given in the proclamation, or by the Judge, was the correct one. He wished also to know, whether the Lord Lieutenant was aware of the opinions delivered by the learned Judge on the occasion alluded to, and whether he also knew of his having selected that particular circuit. The hon. and learned Gentleman then moved that the petition of M'Brian to the Lord Lieutenant be laid before the House.
Lord F. L. Gower
had no objection to the production of the petition. As to the hon. and learned Member's questions, he would state, first, that the proclamation alluded to was certainly issued by the advice of the law-officers of the Crown. It was signed by the privy councillors, one of whom was the Attorney General. With respect to the second question, he would state that the Lord Lieutenant had no control over the Judge, and no official knowledge of the charge delivered by that learned person. All he could know of it was in that way which was open to any other individual. In the selection of circuits by the Judges the hon. and learned Member must be aware that the Lord
1259
The Motion was agreed to.
IRISH CLERGY.]
Mr. O'Connell
said, he had to present to the House three Petitions from inhabitants of five parishes, composing the union of Foxford, in the county of Mayo. One of the petitions was from the Protestant inhabitants of those parishes, and he considered it a great honour to have it intrusted to his care. The hon. and learned Gentleman then detailed the substance of the petitions, which was to this effect;—that the rev. John O'Roorke was appointed vicar of the parishes in 1817, since which time he had never resided or possessed any place of residence, or performed any duty, in the union, except on a few Christmas and Easter festivals, but had resided at a town fifty miles distant, in another county and diocese, where he carried on business as a tithe-farmer and grazier; that he never contributed any thing beyond 40s. a-year to the parish; had no school there; and that the consequence was, that the children were dependent for instruction on a school established by Roman Catholics, and that many of them had lapsed from the Church of England, and embraced what they called, the errors of the Church of Rome; that the petitioners had been grievously harassed by the conduct of the said rev. John O'Roorke, whose demands for tithes had been every year increasing, while the manner of collecting those demands became every day more oppressive; that the vicar refused to take a composition of 500
1
l
1260
ROMAN CATHOLICS or GALWAY.]
Mr. Spring Rice
presented a Petition from the inhabitants of Galway, the only town in the United Kingdom where, since the act of last Session, any civil disabilities on account of religious opinions existed. The nature of the petition he would state in a very few words. By an Act passed in the reign of George 1st, any Protestant merchant resident for a certain time in Galway might claim his freedom of the town as a matter of right. The object of that Act was, in the spirit of that day, to support what was called the Protestant interest. The principle of the Catholic Relief bill, passed last Session, rendered it expedient that any statute creating civil disabilities on account of religious differences of opinion between Christians, should be expunged from the Statute-book; and in the spirit of that Act he thought the Catholic merchants and traders of Galway should be placed on an equal footing with their Protestant fellow-townsmen. Galway was an improving town, the Roman Catholic inhabitants of which had, as the petitioners very properly stated in their petition, ever been distinguished by their loyalty; and now that religious disqualifications were abolished all over the kingdom except that town, he thought they should be got rid of there also. He would not go further on the subject at that moment, but would give notice, that on Wednesday next he would move for leave to bring in a bill to remove the disqualification, by placing Catholics and Protestants on an equal footing.
Petition brought up and read.
Mr. Protheroe
supported the prayer of the petition, and said, that from an assenting smile of the right hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Peel) at some of the remarks of his hon. friend, he had reason to hope that the bill for which the hon. Member intended to move would receive the support of Government.
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, the hon. Gentleman had interpreted his smile rightly. He thought that, consistently with the principle of the measure on which Parliament had acted in the bill of last Session, Roman Catholics ought not to be allowed to remain under disqualifications on account of religious opinions. So far he admitted the principle of the hon. Member's measure. On the manner in which that principle might be carried into effect, he would now offer no opinion, but, without
1261
Lord F. L. Gower
said, that he also would abstain from any pledge on the subject. He fully admitted the principle stated by his right hon. friend, and was prepared to act on it. If the measure were to be introduced as a private bill, he could not give it his support; though, as a public measure, the principle which the hon. Member for Limerick had stated had his sanction.
Sir R. Inglis
said, that the question was not so much one of a public principle, as of the rights of a corporate body, He did not think the House could interfere without violating the charter of the town of Galway.
Mr. Peel
said, the right which the Protestant might claim of being admitted a freeman, was not one depending on the corporation; the Protestant could insist on it, as one conferred on him by act of Parliament. Now, in the spirit of the bill of last Session, Protestant and Catholic ought to be put on an equal footing in this respect. This might be done either by giving the right to the Catholic, or by depriving the Protestant of it; but the application of the general principle did not at all affect corporate rights.
Mr. C. Wynn
hoped, that an equalization of the rights of the two classes would not be effected by depriving the Protestant of any right he already possessed; but rather, by conferring a similar one on the Catholic. If the corporation had no power to refuse the Protestant, it was not a corporate right, but one created by Parliament, with respect to which both parties should now be equal.
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, he would not enter into the question then, farther than to re-state his opinion, that on the matter in question, Catholics and Protestants should be placed on equal footing, according to the principle of last year's bill.
Mr. O'Connell
concurred with the right hon. Gentleman that that bill made Catholics and Protestants equal in all parts of the kingdom except Galway; and that, to follow up that principle, they should be put on equal footing there also.
Mr. Spring Rice
asserted that no unjust interference with corporate regulations was contemplated or required. The policy which originated the grievance alluded to was henceforward to be considered obso-
1262
Mr. Daly
contended, that the innovation proposed would in effect abrogate the rights of the corporation altogether.
Sir C. Wetherell
observed, that it did not follow as a necessary consequence of the late Relief bill, that they should infringe upon local privileges, and interfere with long-established customs and regulations of a partial operation.
Mr. North
vouched for Galway being a very Catholic place, where the great mass of the population had always been of that persuasion. By the law of the corporation, any Protestant tradesman who resided amongst them for the space of seven years, might claim his freedom; and this was held forth by way of inducement to others of the same church to come and settle with their families in the town. Those days, however, had now gone by, and a more liberal policy had been introduced, in accordance with which he maintained that the members of both churches should be placed on a perfect equality. There was in fact no longer any reason for continuing the law. The House, by making both parties equal, would only withdraw from the present Protestant generation an unfair privilege, which ought never to have been granted. The principle on which it was originally established was now no longer recognized as part or parcel of the Constitution, and consistency demanded that the legislature should in this instance, as in every other, raise their Catholic fellow subjects to a level with themselves.
Mr. Lambert
bore testimony to the respectability of the meeting which was convened for the purpose of getting-up this petition. There was no desire whatever on the part of the petitioners to put down the Protestants, or attack their legitimate interests. They merely sought to remove an invidious regulation, which only produced mutual jealousies, and kept alive the recollections of caste, and prevented the animosities of party from subsiding, as in due course they must necessarily otherwise have done. There was no peace at elections, in consequence of this unpopular enactment, as the native respectable inhabitants were naturally disgusted at the number of non-residents and strangers who were, on such occasions, brought up to vote. So odious was this system to the people in general, that he had actually seen the
1263
Mr. O'Hara
said, he should be always ready to vote for any measure which would contribute to promote union in society.
Petition ordered to be printed.
DUTY ON PRINTS AND MAPS.]
Mr. Bernal
requested that the right hon. Gentleman opposite, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, would give him some information explanatory of the increased duty which had lately been charged at some of our out-ports on prints and maps which were intended to be illustrative of literary works. He had reminded the right hon. Gentleman of the circumstance yesterday, and now again begged to call his attention to the subject.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
replied, that it was probable a difference of opinion might arise between the parties interested and the Custom-house officers as to what were legitimately chargeable and what were not so. The Revenue regulation was simply this;—all maps and prints which merely illustrated works of literature were certainly exempt from the duty referred to, as they passed with the book, being included in the 5
1
Mr. Bernal
stated, that he had been informed the Custom-house officers observed neither the spirit nor letter of such a regulation; as they lately made it a practice to charge a separate duty on maps and prints, which, according to the fair interpretation of the rule in question, would be exempted, being a necessary component part of the works to which they were attached. The hon. Member mentioned a case of the maps belonging to a geographical work having been charged with the separate duty, and other cases, in which the prints were charged 6
d
1264
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, he should be happy to be informed more precisely of the particular cases to which the hon. Gentleman had adverted.
LAW REFORM.]
Mr. Peel
moved, that an humble Address be presented to his Majesty, requesting that he would be pleased to order that there be laid before the House a copy of the second Report of the Commission appointed to inquire into the present Administration of Justice in the superior Courts of Law.
Mr. Brougham
stated his intention to postpone the Motion on this subject, of which he had already given notice, as it would be desirable that he should have an opportunity of referring to the report of the commissioners, although it was necessarily but limited and partial in its details. Members, of course, would have access to it when printed, and they would in consequence, be better informed after having read upon the subject than they were now. It was therefore his wish to renew his notice for Thursday, the 29th of April, which would be the first open day after the Easter recess.
REFORM IN THE COLONIAL JUDICATURE.]
Mr. Brougham
, on presenting a Petition from certain inhabitants of Yorkshire, praying for the Abolition of Slavery in the West Indies, inquired of the right hon. Secretary for the Colonies, whether it was the intention of Government to postpone for this Session the introduction of any measure for the purpose of effecting a Reform in the Colonial Judicature.
Sir G. Murray
stated, in reply, that the expenses attendant on such a proceeding would be very great; but he could not at present ascertain the exact amount. Certain difficulties existed, nor could they be immediately removed; but he would endeavour to facilitate the introduction of Reform, and some measure for that purpose would be mooted even before the expiration of this Session, if circumstances permitted the Government so far to consult its inclinations.
MILITARY PUNISHMENTS.]
Sir F. Burdett
desired to ask the right hon.
1265
Sir H. Hardinge
said, he certainly should object to a return of such a description as to specify the relative punishments of regiments, well knowing that it would be considered in the army as a proceeding of a very invidious character. Some regiments might appear to be stigmatised and unfavourably reported,—not on account of peculiar misconduct, but merely because they were placed under circumstances of greater temptation than their brother soldiers had been. He would readily supply the hon. Baronet with information personally, if he required any, but he could not consent to a statement of comparative punishments being laid before the House.
Sir F. Burdett
inquired whether in former times such regimental returns had not been made?
Sir H. Hardinge
added, that no such returns had ever been made. At the same time he should have no objection to state to the hon. Baronet the number of punishments in each regiment, although he could not consent that it should be made the subject of a formal return.
CHURCH OF IRELAND.]
Sir John Newport
brought forward his Motion on the state of the Established Church of Ireland, and commenced by claiming the indulgence of the House, necessary to him at all times, but more particularly at his advanced period of life. He was quite sensible that he was about to introduce a subject demanding much greater abilities than any he had ever possessed, but he hoped that his deficiencies would be amply supplied by the exertions of other Members. It was his most anxious desire that the revenues of the Church of Ireland should be apportioned to the duty discharged; that the emoluments should depend, in some degree, upon meritorious service; whereas he had good reason to know, that at present the payment was most disproportionate to the employment. Those who laboured in the vineyard most industriously ought to be paid most liberally; but the abuses that had crept into the Established Church of Ireland from an early period, had defeated any such just and reasonable arrangement, Pluralities and, unions
1266
verbatim
1267
s
1268
1269
s
d
1270
l
l
l
l
l
l
1271
l
l
l
l
1
l
s
1272
l
l
s
1
l
s
d
l
s
d
l
s
d
l
s
1273
"The appointment of a Commission, selected from the Privy Council of Ireland, instructed with as little delay as may be practicable, to proceed in a systematic examination of the several diocesses of Ireland, as to the state of the unions of parishes contained therein, the authority under which such unions have been effected, the value of the several parishes so united, their contiguity or remoteness from each other, and from the several churches contained therein, and the fitness or impropriety of their continuing so united whenever the benefices in which they are comprised shall become vacant by death or otherwise; and to report, from time to time, their proceedings in such examination to his Majesty.
"That his Majesty may be pleased to direct that strict inquiry be made by the Archbishops and Bishops of Ireland from the beneficed clergy of Ireland, assembled at their visitations and otherwise annually, as to their exact payment of their several curates of the full sum of money stipulated by the Act of Parliament to be paid to them for performance
1274
"That his Majesty may be pleased to direct that there be laid before this House such information, respecting the legal powers under which the granting or with holding faculties for possessing pluralities of benefices are now exercised, as may enable the House to judge of the expediency of proposing any modification of such powers, or of removing any obstruction which may now legally exist to controlling the same, and restricting them so as to be most beneficial to the real interests of the Church Establishment, and of the people committed to their care.
"That we particularly recommend to the consideration of his Majesty, the propriety of suspending the appointment by the Crown to any dignity or benefice within the gift thereof, as vacancies may hereafter occur, until inquiry shall have been made into the state and condition of the cathedral or other church connected with such dignity or benefice, and, where it is found necessary to rebuild or repair the same, of appropriating to such rebuilding or repair the revenues arising from such dignity or benefice, after deducting there from the necessary provision for the celebration of divine worship, and the temporary discharge of the duties connected with such dignity or benefice during such suspension of permanent appointment, as was some years since effected in the case of Litchfield cathedral."
Mr. Spring Rice
seconded the Motion.
Sir Robert H. Inglis
observed, that he had heard, since he had had the honour of a seat in Parliament, the right hon. baronet make, every year, the very same complaint of the Church of Ireland with which he had just favoured the House. But the right hon. Baronet should recollect, that the Reformation in Ireland was not universal; that therefore it was not to be expected that the whole state and Government of the Church should there stand upon as satisfactory a footing as in England. Upon former occasions the right hon. Baronet had explained to the House the grounds of his belief that the principles of the Reformation were not advancing,
pari passu
1275
1276
Lord F. L. Gower
said, he was not able to assent to the proposition either of the right hon. Baronet, or of the hon. Member for Oxford. When the right hon. Baronet had quoted a passage from lord Bacon, in which he adverted to the operations of time, and stated that those operations which had effect on all things, were totally nugatory and inefficient with respect to ecclesiastical establishments—if the right hon. Baronet extended that doctrine to the Church of Ireland he must
1277
1278
1279
Mr. G. Moore
said, he should support the hon. Member for Oxford's Amendment in preference to the Amendment of the noble Lord. He was sure that the Church of Ireland could have no objection to afford the fullest information, which
1280
l
l
1281
Mr. Hume
was glad to hear these sentiments from the hon. Member; and should found on them a claim to his support, when he should make a motion for a Committee to Inquire into the State of the Irish Church. He thought with the hon. Member, that by inquiry many erroneous impressions would be done away, and the House and the public would be fully informed of the state of that Church. He agreed, therefore, with the hon. Member; and, before the Session was closed, should ask him for his vote. At the same time, the hon. Member's statements were quite inconsistent with his vote. The proposition of the right hon. Baronet was but a milk-and-water one. It was high time that the whole establishment of the Irish Church should be inquired into, revised, and reduced, so as to accord with the state of the country. He should vote for the Motion of his right hon. friend; but he did not do so from supposing that this Motion was adequate to the circumstances of the country. Inquiry must, in his opinion, go much further; and he hoped to see the establishment reduced to two or four bishops. He should like that sixteen or eighteen bishopricks were swept away at once; and he heartily believed that, in this respect, the population of England and Ireland would go along with him. Instead of repairing the cathedrals, if they could not be converted into parish churches, he would pull them down. Why should the people be compelled to keep structures of brick and mortar, of which they made no use? Instead of appropriating the revenues of benefices, as they became vacant, to clerical purposes, he would cause them to be paid into the
1282
Mr. G. Moore
was understood to say that when the hon. Member made a motion for inquiry, he would second it.
Mr. Spring Rice
thought, that of the motions before the House, the preference was due to the Amendment proposed by the noble Lord. He was deeply interested in the Irish Church Establishment, and in his attachment to it he did not yield to the hon. Member for Oxford (Sir R. Inglis); but if that hon. Member thought that the interest of the Church was to be supported by resisting every change, every attempt at improvement, come from whatever quarter it might, he was mistaken. The members of the Irish Church did not participate in the hon. Member's views; and though they had been disposed to resist every change, they had now become sensible that changes were not necessarily injuries. They had at first opposed the Tithe-composition bill, but they had afterwards assented to it, and they found that much good had resulted from that Act to them. The Vestry Act was another act of the same kind. Whatever charges had been made against that Act, and a great many had been made, it had never been said that it was inimical in its results to the interests of the Clergy. If the hon. Member for Oxford looked at the acts of the legislature, he would know that the right of the legislature to interfere with Church property for Church purposes was recognized by many acts of Parliament, and acted on. The legislature might therefore again interfere with it to raise the stipends of curates, as it had before. The hon. Member also seemed to have confounded parishes with benefices; but in Ireland they were not the same. If the previous question should be carried, he hoped that then they should all concur in the proposition of the noble Lord. He looked to the result of the inquiry to make the Church of Ireland more efficacious than at present. Already a great improvement, he was willing to
1283
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
expressed his surprise at the amendment proposed by the hon. Member for Oxford; and he was still more surprised that the amendment was supported by the hon. Member for Dublin, who thought inquiry would remove false impressions concerning the Irish Church, and be a full refutation to the charges brought against it. He was sure that, the result of the inquiry proposed by the noble Lord would be, to show, what he had always asserted, that during the last twenty years the clergy of Ireland had zealously performed their duties, and that no church had a more zealous and deserving clergy. He hoped that the hon. Member for Oxford would withdraw his motion, and not compel the House to vote on it. As to what the right hon. Baronet had said of the present bishop of Ferns not having promoted a respectable curate when he was bishop of Limerick, he could say nothing; but since the bishop had filled his present see, he had selected for promotion men of abilities and long standing in the Church, with whom he had no connection whatever, except by their services as curates. The right hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer also asserted that the primate of Ireland, had been more cautious and careful than some of his predecessors, in granting faculties, in doing which he had been actuated by a sincere desire to perform his duty; and he concluded by requesting the hon. Member for Oxford to withdraw his amendment.
Mr. Trant
maintained that the Church of Ireland was not to blame—it had no abuses, it was in the most progressive and satisfactory state of amendment; if the Church of England was to be pulled down, let it be pulled down by honest hands. The commission was to reform what needed not reformation, and the records of that House furnished the refutation of the charges brought forward against the Church.
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, he presumed that Gentlemen who had just entered the House, and had not been present at the debate, must, from the speech of the hon. Member for Dover (Mr. Trant) suppose that some formidable proposition was under consideration for the destruction of the Church of Ireland. The course of proceeding that the right hon. Baronet proposed was, that
1284
1285
Mr. Sadler
had not been present during the whole of the discussion, and he should address himself only to the observations of the right hon. Secretary opposite. He must say, that the proposition came with a peculiarly bad grace from those who refused all commissions of inquiry into civil establishments. It would as well become the House to attend to civil pluralities, which were evils as crying as the ecclesiastical; and in many cases civil pluralities were held which were totally incompatible with each other.
Sir Charles Wetherell
said, that the right hon. Secretary had argued that there was no harm in granting this inquiry
quoad
quoad
Cries of "No, no!"
1286
cries of "No, No."
laughter
loud laughter
1287
cheer
Mr. O'Connell
answered, "No, no."
Sir C. Wetherell
.—"I, then, am in the wrong, and the cheer comes from an Emeritus lawyer (Mr. M. A. Taylor), who sits behind him—however, some person sarcastically cheered my statement; or if no person sarcastically cheered, why then I am in possession of my statement." [
laughter
Mr. Peel
rose to explain.—He must confirm the just and striking observation of the learned and hon. Gentleman, that if a certain argument was not his (Mr. Peel's) argument, why then it was not. He (Mr. Peel) had never represented the commission in England as precisely the same as that now proposed for Ireland, but he did doubt if the commission upon the whole Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction of England, and upon the control of the bishops over the Clergy, were not as important and as extensive as the commission now proposed.
Mr. M. A. Taylor
said, he had certainly felt very indignant at his learned friend's expression of the spoliation of the Church; and he (Mr. Taylor) did express himself more loudly than he ought to have done. He would, however, say that the imputation of a wish to despoil the Church against those who only wanted to reform it, was unfounded and unjustifiable. He looked upon the Church Establishment of England and Ireland with veneration; and he considered that the only effect of the proposed commission would be to place the Churches of England and Ireland on the most solid foundation.
Mr. Brougham
rose amidst cries of Question, and turning round and shaking his finger at the criers, he said, "You will have Question in proper time." He could not let the observations of the learned Gentleman pass without some explanation; for, without any explanation, he might be supposed to give his vote upon grounds which he repelled as much as any man.
1288
1289
1290
sacro-sanct
1291
Sir J. Newport
said, after what had been stated on the other side of the House, he would withdraw his Motion.
Sir R. Inglis
, to save the time of the House, would withdraw his amendment.
Lord Leveson Gower
then moved the Address in the terms already described.
Motion agreed to; and the Address
1292
PORTUGAL.]
Lord Palmerston
said, that as the debate on the motion of the hon. Member for Waterford had lasted so long, and as another important question was about to be agitated, he would postpone his intended motion, although he was desirous, for reasons which must be obvious to all, to bring it on with as little delay as possible. He hoped he should be able to make his motion on Tuesday next. His only reason for doubting it arose from the circumstance that a motion of great importance, by an hon. and learned friend of his near him, stood for that day; and would probably give rise to a long discussion. He would, however, put it to his hon. friend, if another day might not equally suit his purpose?
Mr. Wilmot Horton
expressed his readiness to oblige his noble friend, but could not consent to postpone his motion.
SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE
Mr. Stewart
said, he rose to move for certain papers referring to the interference of the local government with the administration of justice in the Supreme Court of Bombay. To recommend this Motion to the House, he did not deem it necessary to enter into the origin of this Court, but perhaps he might be permitted shortly to advert to the circumstances under which it was established. In the year 1774 or 1775, the extortions and oppressions of some servants of the East-India Company were found to press so very heavily, that Government was implored to come to the assistance of the people; and in consequence of some petitioners setting forth their grievances, and stating the necessity of their having some tribunal to protect them, were this and other courts of a similar nature established. He had to observe, that in 1782, Sir Elijah Impey was impeached for a dereliction of duty, and called to answer for having accepted office in one of the Company's courts, he being at that time Chief Justice in a supreme "court of judicature; and from this he argued that the Government at home had recognized the independence of these courts in India, and acknowledged their right to exercise a control over the local authorities, Lately, notwithstanding this establishment
1293
"To the honourable Sir C. H. Chambers, Knight, Acting Chief Justice, and the honourable Sir J. P. Grant, Knight, Puisne Justice of the honourable the Supreme Court of Judicature.
"Honourable Sirs;—We are quite aware that we transgress upon ordinary form in addressing this letter to you; but the circumstances under which we are placed will, we trust, justify this departure from usage, and our knowledge of your private and public character leads us to hope that what we state will be received in that spirit in which it is written; and that, notwithstanding your strict obligations to fulfil every part of your high and sacred duty as British Judges, you will, on this extraordinary occasion, deem yourselves at liberty to consider as much the objects, as the rules of that Court over which you preside; and viewing the intention of the legislature in its institution as directed to the aid and support of the government intrusted with the administration of this Presidency, you will, for a short period, be induced, by our representations, to abstain from any acts (however legal you may deem them) which, under the measures we have felt ourselves compelled to take, and which we deem essential to the interests committed to our charge, must have the effect of producing open collision between our authority and yours; and by doing so, not only diminish that respect in the native population of this country, which it is so essential to both to maintain, but seriously to weaken, by a supposed division in our internal rule, those impressions on the minds of our native subjects, the existence of which is indispensable to the peace, prosperity, and permanence of the Indian empire.
"This conclusion refers to a variety of circumstances, which we are equally forbid from explaining, as you are from attending to such explanation; but we deem it necessary to state our conviction of the truth of what we have asserted, expecting that it may have some weight with the preservation of that strength in the Government, which in all our territories—but particularly those we have so recently acquired—is the chief, if not the only power we possess for maintaining that general peace, on the continuance of which the means of good rule, and of administering law under any form, must always depend.
1294
2. "In consequence of recent proceedings in the Supreme Court, in the cases of Moro Ragonath and Bappo Gunness we have felt compelled, for reasons which we have fully stated to our superiors, to direct that no further legal proceedings be admitted in the case of Moro Ragonath, and that no returns be made to any writs of Habeas Corpus of a similar nature to those recently issued and directed to any officers of the provincial courts, or to any of our native subjects not residing on the island of Bombay.
3. "We are quite sensible of the deep responsibility we incur by these measures; but' must look for our justification in the necessity of our situation. The grounds on which we act have exclusive reference to considerations of civil government and of state policy; but as our resolution cannot be altered until we receive the commands of those high authorities to which we are subject, we inform you of them, and we do most anxiously hope, that the considerations we have before stated may lead you to limit yourselves to those protests and appeals against our conduct in the cases specified, that you may deem it your duly to make; as any other conduct must, for reasons already stated, prove deeply injurious to the public interests, and can, under the resolution taken and avowed by Government, produce no result favourable either to the immediate or future establishment of the extended jurisdiction you have claimed.
4. "A very short period will elapse before an answer is received to the full and urgent reference we have made upon this subject; and we must again express our hope, that even the obligations under which we are sensible you act, are not so imperative as to impel you to proceedings which the Government has thus explicitly stated its resolution to oppose.
"We have the honour to be,
Honourable Sirs,
Your most obedient servants,
Signed, JOHN MALCOLM.
T. BRADFORD. Lieut. Gen.
J. J. SPARROW.
JOHN ROMER.
Bombay Castle, 3rd October
1295
1296
1297
review
renew
"As we may not impossibly renew the Charter next year, we may take that opportunity of rectifying the expressions of the Act of Parliament, should they require it. Many persons think it would be inexpedient to open a discussion on Indian matters this year, if it could be avoided. But as I tell you, no decision is yet come to. You will see that there is no intention of deserting you. You have acted with much firmness and prudence. I entirely agree in the view you have expressed of the dangerous consequences which would result from the extension beyond the limits of the Presidency of the powers claimed by the Supreme Court. Orders have been given for expediting the patent of the chief judge. It is with deep regret that I have heard that the Company and the country are so soon to lose your services in India. I could not ask you to stay one hour to the danger of your valuable life; but I am confident you will stay till you have re-established the authority of Government in the opinion of the natives. I trust, indeed, that the unbending firmness you have displayed will have prevented much of the evil which might have been expected to flow from the conduct of the Judges. I feel satisfied that you will act with the same firmness under all circum-
1298
Lord Ashley
replied, but in so low a voice, that his speech was very imperfectly heard. He was understood to say, that he was afraid that the minds of the members were prepossessed, supposing that a gross outrage had been committed on those persons on the sacredness of whose character and functions all classes had to depend for the security of their lives and property. He hoped the House would not think he was going to argue against the independence of courts of justice. He knew that it was essential to the tranquillity and security of a country that they should, enjoy perfect freedom But
1299
habeas corpus
1300
habeas corpus
1301
Mr. Robert Grant
said, that although the intimate friend of one of the Judges, and bound by a much closer tie to another, now no more, he could not allow himself to deny that they were not wrong in the course they adopted on this occasion. But if the Judges had acted imprudently and indiscreetly, the Government had on its part made as many mistakes as the Judges. When the Governor found it necessary to assert his authority, he should not have contented himself by sending a private letter on a subject of such great public importance. The Judges were applied to publicly to grant a writ of pressing haste, and which, from its very nature, brooked no delay; and he ought therefore to have taken some public step at all hazards and consequences, even if it had been necessary to issue a proclamation. It was plain that if not legally, he was morally justifiable in adopting that course; and the Government at home would not have hesitated to pass an Act of Indemnity to free him from the consequences, in the same manner as they had done to the Bengal Government in 1781, when it resisted the orders of the Supreme Court by force, on the ground that those orders, though legal, were unjustifiable and inexpedient. The bill which was then passed adopted the same opinion, and its preamble expressly declared, that the conduct of the Supreme Court had not been strictly justifiable, although legal. Passing to the Letter of a noble Lord, which had been so often mentioned, he must say that, although it was said to have been written in haste and without due consideration, all the substantial parts of it had been fully acted on. In the various debates on the subject of
1302
1303
Colonel Graham
contended, that the provincial Courts enjoyed an independent jurisdiction, and that the attempt of Sir John Grant to establish the authority of the Supreme Court in the manner he had done, and his discharge of a convicted person, was contrary to the letter of the law, and gave the natives reason to believe that there was some mysterious process by which a guilty man could be set at liberty and left to continue with impunity in his course of crime. This country had recognised the independence of the provincial Courts, and having done so, it was extremely improper in a Judge of the Supreme Court to set aside their authority, and quite wrong in any one to support such an act. He believed that no one had ever denied that Sir J. Malcolm had done his duty in openly resisting an authority which he believed to be illegal, and which, when attempted to be enforced, had created much disturbance and confusion.
Mr. Hume
observed, that this question was one of considerable importance to the inhabitants of our Indian possessions; and after the misrepresentations of facts—misrepresentations which documents in his possession would fully prove—he did not think that it would be just towards India to suffer the discussion to be so hastily disposed of as it must be at that hour of
1304
SALE of BEER.]
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that being extremely desirous that no time should be lost in the appointment of a Committee to inquire into the laws relating to the Beer Trade, he meant, even at that late hour [past one], to move, with the permission of the House, for its appointment. He would, however, occupy the House only for a few minutes, while he stated the general principles on which he should found his propositions. The subject of granting licenses to public houses had been often brought under consideration, and sufficient had been already done towards giving freedom to the retail trade in Beer to justify the institution of an inquiry into the propriety of giving it still greater freedom. It had been shown by previous inquiries, that the present system of licensing had given rise more or less to a degree of monopoly in the Beer Trade which had produced two evils:—1. a deterioration in the quality of Beer—2. an enhancement of its price: both of which were, in effect, a severe tax on the poorer classes. Both these he hoped to remedy, but he begged to be understood as not at all yielding to the imputations thrown upon a wealthy and respectable class of individuals engaged in the manufacture and sale of Beer; the fault, if fault there were, was the fault of the law. His view was, that by opening the trade the means of consuming Beer would be extended, and that no injury would be inflicted upon the brewer, while an important benefit would be conferred on the public; and he was convinced that the apprehensions felt by many persons interested in the present system, when any alteration was spoken of, would turn out to be unfounded. He was quite sensible of the advantage of extending the sale and consumption of Beer; but at the same time, he did not mean to put out of sight
1305
Mr. Slaney
highly approved of the Motion, and congratulated the country upon the benefit that was likely to result from the investigation. The lower orders looked upon Beer as the second necessary of life, and the first advantage from a change in the present system would be, that they could obtain it cheaper and better; secondly, that their morals would be improved; and thirdly, that the distresses of the agriculturists would thus be partially relieved, because an increased consumption of Beer would necessarily create an increased demand for agricultural produce, which was greatly restricted by the existing system. For his own part, it appeared to him that general competition would best serve the interests of the respectable individuals who were engaged in
1306
Mr. C. Barclay
regretted that this important subject had been brought forward at so late an hour that it was impossible to enter into the real merits of the question. He had no doubt that the members of the committee would be fairly chosen, but he could not agree that any such investigation was necessary, or that it would be productive of any benefit. He believed that the present Chancellor of the Exchequer would find himself, like his predecessors in office, entirely mistaken as to the consequence of a change; and, did time allow, he was prepared to show that the anticipations of Lord Goderich, when, in 1825, he brought forward the Intermediate Beer bill, had been wholly disappointed. The sale and manufacture of Beer was not so restricted as the right hon. Gentleman imagined. It was by no means a monopoly; a great portion of the trade was free. Property to a large amount would be seriously affected by the change, not of the large brewers, for they were out of the question, but of a very respectable class of the community, the owners and occupiers of houses independent of any brewer. He hoped that the Chancellor of the Exchequer would note and recollect his words, when he said that the proposed alteration of the law, allowing the sale of Beer in shops, would only operate as a transfer of the trade from one class to another, without at all increasing the consumption of the article. If the right hon. Gentleman wished to induce the community to drink more Beer, the only effectual means of doing so was to
1307
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Friday, March 5, 1830.
MINUTES.] The Properly in Infants' Bill, Lunatics' Property Bill, liability of Real Property Bill, and Contempt in Equity Bill, were brought up from the Commons, and on the Motion of the Earl of SHAFTESBURY, read a first time.
A return was ordered of the quantity of Wheat Imported from Ireland into England, during each week, from July 1828, distinguishing the ports into which it was imported, and of the average price of Wheat at Liverpool and Manchester for each week during the same period.
ECCLESIASTICAL LAW.]
Lord Holland
presented a Petition from a person named Clarke, praying for a revision and alteration both of the Ecclesiastical Courts and of the Ecclesiastical Law. He had, it appeared, been a party to a suit in the Prerogative Court of Canterbury, where he was defeated. He then carried the cause before the Court of Delegates, who confirmed the former judgment; and finally he applied to the Court of Chancery for a commission of review, which was refused. He was at present a prisoner in the Fleet prison, for a contempt of the Court of Chancery, having neglected to pay into that Court a sum of money according to its order, he being in fact unable, on account of the expense of the proceedings in the Ecclesiastical Courts, to pay it.
The Lord Chancellor
stated the facts of the case. It appeared, that the petitioner Thomas Clarke, had had some property devised to him to the prejudice of the next of kin, who sought to set aside the Will on the ground of the insanity of the Testator. The cause was first argued before Sir John Nicholl, and afterwards before the Court of Delegates, both of whom concurred in setting aside the Will. The Lord Chancellor contended, that the judgment of Sir John Nicholl, and the affirmation of that judgment by the Court of Delegates, were perfectly in accordance with the circumstances disclosed before them. He had felt it to be his duty to refuse the commission of review, because
1308
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, March 5, 1830.
MINUTES.] MR. FRANKLAND LEWIS took the Oaths and his Seat for Radnorshire, and EYRE COOTE, ESQ. took the Oaths and his Seat for Clonmel.
MR. ALDERMAN WOOD obtained leave to bring in a Bill for constructing an Arcade from London-wall to St. Bartholomew's-Lane.
On the Motion of MR. C. N. PALLMER, the Lambeth-bridge Bill was read a first and ordered to be read a second time.
The Exchequer-bills Bill, and the Transfer in Aids Bill, severally passed through a Committee, and were ordered to be reported on Monday.
MR. DOHERTY brought in a Bill for the Regulation of Juries in Ireland: which was read a first time. The same Gentleman also brought in a Bill for the Relief of Illegitimate Children in Ireland, which was read a first time.
The Annual Mutiny Bill was brought in and read a first time.
Returns were ordered of any Treasury Minute between 1696 and 1699, authorising the Collectors of Taxes to take silver at less than the standard value; of the Treasury Order of Feb. 5,1700,—settling the value of Louis d'or, and Spanish Pistole; of the Treasury Order of July 25, 1773, authorising the Receivers and Collectors of Public Taxes, to receive guineas and half-guineas, at a lower than the legal rate;—of the progress made and sums expended in Improving the Water Communication of Canada, and of the rents and profits of Crown Lands, from 1816 to the present time.
Returns were presented of the number of prisoners committed for Debt, to the Custody of the Four Courts, Marshalsea of Dublin, in 1829;—of the sums paid to Newspapers for Printing Proclamations in Ireland, in the same year:—of the number of Stamps issued to Newspapers in Ireland.
RELIEF OF THE JEWS.]
Mr. Huskisson
presented a Petition from certain Jews, praying to be relieved from the disabilities under which they laboured on account of their religious belief. The right hon. Gentleman expressed his cordial concurrence in the prayer of the petition, and intimated his intention to support the bill to be brought in by the hon. Member for Inverness for the relief of the Jews.
RETURNS.]
Mr. Alderman Waithman
complained that the official part of cer-
1309
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
could assign no other reason than that which the worthy Alderman had already received from the person whose duty it was to make out these returns,—namely, that that person was bound by act of Parliament to make out a very long series of Returns by a certain day of the present month, and that this business occupied the whole of his time and diligence.
Sir T. Lethbridge
presented a Petition from certain shopkeepers of Somersetshire, against the traffic carried on by hawkers and pedlers.
AGRICULTURAL DISTRESS.]
Sir T. Gooch
rose to present a Petition on the subject of Agricultural Distress, from the county of Suffolk. The hon. Member observed, that the petition came from a great body of agriculturists, assembled at a county meeting, convened by the high sheriff. Persons of all classes and ways of thinking attended—gentlemen, yeomen, Tories, Whigs, and Radicals,—and all united in one common object, that of petitioning the House, and representing the great agricultural distress which existed in Suffolk. This was not a party question. No man was less disposed to hold factious language than himself; but this was a time when Gentlemen of all parties should unite in declaring the sufferings of their constituents, and he agreed cordially with the hon. Member for Cumberland, that if the country gentlemen felt themselves injured they were bound to defend themselves. It was impossible to deny the existence of agricultural distress. It might be said to him, "You are a supporter of the Administration;" it was perfectly true that he was, but he could not conceal his sentiments on this subject. As to the causes of the distress, he believed that the alteration of the currency had done some mischief, but he differed from the petitioners in supposing that another alteration in that would give them relief. The evils arising from that source were, he believed, nearly over.
Sir E. Knatchbull
was glad to hear that the support of his hon. friend would be given to measures for the relief of the general distress. He did not believe, how-
1310
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
expressed his approbation of the conduct of the Member for Suffolk (Sir T. Gooch) who had the manliness to express his dissent from his constituents, the petitioners, in desiring an alteration of the currency.
Mr. Hume
informed the hon. Baronet that the Free Trade, which he did not seem to like, would be attended ultimately with as much benefit to the agriculturists, as to the other classes.
Mr. Liddell
said, he believed much of the agricultural distress was caused by importations from Ireland. He did not wish to restrict those importations, but Ireland ought, under such circumstances, to be made to bear its full share of the burthens of the country.
Mr. O'Connell
reminded the hon. Member that these importations were made to pay the rents of absentees, who spent their incomes in this country.
Sir Thomas Gooch
explained, that he had meant that the evils arising from the alteration of the currency had passed the acme, and were diminishing. He did not mean that agricultural distress was on the wane.
The Petition was read
SHIPPING INTEREST.]
Mr. Duncombe
presented a Petition from Ship-owners of the town of Whitby, in Yorkshire, complaining of distress, and praying for relief. The hon. Member supported the prayer of the petition, and bore testimony to the existence of the distress complained of.
Colonel Wilson
begged also to support the prayer of the petition, and wished that he was sufficiently possessed of the gift of the gab to paint the distress in its true colours. [
Laughter
1311
1312
Cries of "Question."
The Speaker
here called "order."
Colonel Wilson
. —He would bow to the suggestion of the Chair, but he had only the interest of his country at heart in what he stated, and he did not wish to be interrupted in the performance of his duty. He did not mean to offend any party, and if he said any thing wrong, he was not conscious of it. But, to return to the shipping, he would say that it required their serious consideration; and he was glad he should have another opportunity of addressing the House on the subject. But there was a remedy which might be applied. He would tell the House what it was—confine the bonding system to our own shipping—let them have the benefit of the carriage of all timber brought to our dock-yards—let foreign shipping come in if they liked and land their cargoes, but let them pay the duty, and have, a drawback on them if they took them away again; and let us do away with our new-fangled doctrine of free trade. By the way, this was the production of the right hon. Member for Liverpool, and he wished to God the thing had been suffocated in its birth—he begged a thousand pardons of the right hon. Gentleman, he
1313
Cries of "Question."
Order
The Speaker
. —Order, order.—The hon. Member has already stated that if in the heat of discussion he should say any thing trenching on the fair limits of debate, he would bow on being reminded of it from the Chair. The hon. Member, in what he has just said, though no doubt unconsciously, is quite irregular. If the communication to which he alludes refers to any thing which fell from any hon. Member in this House, it was disorderly in those who made it in the first instance, and it would be still more disorderly to act upon such communication here.
1314
Colonel Wilson
would bow to the opinion of the Chair; but he would put his opinion in another way. The hon. Member (Mr. Hume) had lighted a torch which would be his own destruction. The hon. Member then proceeded with several other remarks which were in great part repetitions of many of those he had before delivered. In conclusion, he observed, that his constituents had instructed him to say, that if Parliament did not apply some effectual relief to the distress of the country, they would be obliged to go to the foot of the Throne; that was their last resource; but go they would, if obliged, and no doubt that Monarch, whom Providence had blessed with a benevolent heart, would be dissatisfied with his Majesty's Ministers for allowing his distressed people to come to him for relief. Let, then, every Representative in that House, if he were the Representative of one, two, or three persons, stand up there and tell the real tale of his constituents, and urge a remedy.—[
Hear, hear
Mr. Sykes
would not then go into the question involved in the petition before the House, particularly after the lengthened and able address of the hon. Member who spoke last, which represented the good sense, the good taste, and, no doubt, the sobriety of the city of York. But he must observe that the petitioners were greatly distressed, and required some measure of relief. He would enter more fully into this subject when it came for regular discussion.
NEW SOUTH WALES.—GENERAL
Mr. Stewart
, seeing the right hon. Gentleman, the Secretary of State for the Colonies, in his place, begged to ask whether he had received from a gentleman at New South Wales (Mr. Wentworth), a communication, or articles of impeachment against Lieutenant general Darling, the governor of that colony, in consequence of his proceedings in regard to the punishment of two soldier?, of the names of Sudds and Thomson, and the death of one of them; and if such a communication had been received, whether it was the intention of his Majesty's Government to adopt any measures in consequence, and what those measures might be?
Sir George Murray
answered that no doubt he had received such a communication as the hon. Member alluded to, but
1315
Mr. Stewart
then begged to ask the right hon. Gentleman, if he would have any objection to lay the papers before the House.
Sir George Murray
was understood to say, on this subject he should exercise his own discretion. He could not answer further then, though it was open to the hon. Member to move for them.
MALT AND BEER DUTIES.]
Mr. Littleton
said, he was not present last night when his right hon. friend, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, made his statement on moving for the appointment of the committee to inquire respecting Beer licenses and the sale of Beer; but it had been represented that his right hon. friend had said, that it was a doubt with him whether the reduction of duties on malt and beer would give the lower classes relief, and whether they would not be more benefitted by the reduction of some other tax. Be wished to ask his right hon. friend whether he had made the statement attributed to him?
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, it was his misfortune that in his first statements, and in his explanations, his meaning should be misrepresented by those who supposed their interests opposed to his views. He was in the recollection of the House as to what fell from him last night when addressing it on this subject, and to that recollection he would appeal, when he stated that nothing of the kind mentioned by his hon. friend had been uttered by him.—[
Hear, hear
MEDITERRANEAN PASSES.]
Mr. Hume
, adverting to what had just passed in the House as to the state of the Shipping interest, observed, that he hoped, if the subject should be brought forward, the great charges to which vessels were subjected for lights and pilotage, which he understood were very heavy, and of course proportionately diminished their profits, would be taken into consideration. There was another charge to which part of our shipping was subjected, and on which he had a motion to submit to the House,—he meant the charge for Mediterranean Passes. This, he understood, was about 5
l
1316
l
l
Mr. Croker
did not object to the production of the account; some ships, he observed, took out Passes without proceeding to the Mediterranean; the number of Passes, therefore, would not show the actual number of vessels going to the Mediterranean.—Motion agreed to.
Mr. Hume
said, that what he had stated the other night, with respect to the army pay and allowances in the present year and in 1792, had been controverted by the right hon. Gentleman (Sir H. Hardinge). He, however, was confident that the accounts would show his statement to be correct, and he would therefore move for "A Return of the rate of pay and allowances to officers and men in the Army in the years 1792 and 1829, and for similar returns as to the Navy and Ordnance."
Sir H. Hardinge
would not object to the production of the returns, and he would make them as exact as was possible; but he was sure that the correctness of what he said on the subject would be borne out; and from whatever source the hon. Member had got his information, he would find that he was mistaken.
The Motions were agreed to.
ASSESSED TAXES.—SURCHARGES.]
Mr. Hume
said, that any one who attended to the mode in which the Assessed Taxes were collected, must be aware of the great and unnecessary severity frequently exercised in the collection, and the great number of the surcharges which were made. He had moved for an account of those surcharges, the returns to which would satisfy the House, he believed, of the great annoyance to which the public were exposed in this way. He understood that it was a practice in the board of Taxes, when a person was in arrear, for the solicitor to the board to write to him, calling on him for payment, and to charge 7
s
1317
Sir M. W. Ridley
wished to take that opportunity of asking the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether it was his intention to renew the Assessed Taxes' Composition Act, which was about to expire. Great convenience had been the result of that Act, and much prevention of surcharge experienced by its operation.
Mr. Bright
said, that great, and he believed well-founded complaints were made in his part of the country, in consequence of the number of surcharges in the assessed taxes, but instead of renewing the Composition Act, he did hope, such was the great distress of the country, there would be no necessity for that act, but that the right hon. Gentleman would consent to repeal the assessed taxes altogether. Great relief, he thought, would be experienced in the country if Government would even consent to a reduction of the tax on servants. A vast number of persons now out of employment would be greatly benefitted by that course. He did not mean the tax on livery servants, for those who kept them could generally afford to pay for them.
Sir M. W. Ridley
wished to know from the right hon. Gentleman whether he had heard his question, or if any particular feeling prevented him from answering it at present?
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
was understood to say in reply, that, some arrangements were in progress respecting the assessed taxes generally, and that he would be prepared shortly to give an answer.
Sir F. Burdett
said, that many instances of surcharges were known in the country, which might be avoided if the Composition Act were renewed, but the better plan would be to abolish the taxes altogether.
The Motion was agreed to.
REPORT OF SUPPLY.]
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
moved, that the Report of the Committee of Supply be brought up, and it was brought up accordingly by Sir A. Grant.
1318
Mr. Hume
said, that he was anxious to record his opinion on this subject, that, it might appear upon the Journals to what extent he wished the reductions in the Army to be carried. He would remind the hon. Members for Suffolk and York, who talked so loudly of the distresses of the country, that if they wished to obtain relief from taxation, they could only accomplish their object by reducing the present, overwhelming military establishment. The enormous numbers of the Army, Navy, and Ordnance, were the most oppressive burthen the nation had to sustain; for the pay must necessarily be in proportion to the establishments. He begged, therefore, to state what he thought, in the present state of the kingdom, would be the proper reduction. In 1792 the three regiments of Horse Guards amounted to 779 men: now they were 1,304 men. These he would reduce by 525 men. The Foot Guards, in 1792, were 3,756 men strong: now the number was 5,726 men; he would cut off all the increase. The Cavalry, in 1792, amounted to 5,409: now it was 7,157 men, that force ought to be brought back to its former state. The Household Troops, in 1799, were 6,554 men: now they were 14,118 men; in them there might be a reduction of 7564 men. All these excesses ought to be reduced so as to bring back the establishments to the standard of 1792. It was nothing more than was reasonable, and what the suffering people had a right to expect. These were not times when it was fit to keep up a large military force for the sake of empty show and vulgar parade. Neither did the internal state of the kingdom require the presence of a large standing army; and it would be still less necessary if, as he understood, the new police system, which had answered so well, were to be extended. Ireland too was tranquil, and might spare some of the military that had been kept in that country. The vote required was nominally for 88,000 men, but the effective force, he believed, would be about 81,000 men, and of these 10,000 might be easily spared; and for a reduction to that extent he begged to move an amendment.
Sir H. Hardinge
said, that as the hon. Member only wished to record his opinion, he should not delay the opportunity of doing so by making any answer to his observations.
1319
On the Question being put, the Amendment was negatived, and the original Resolution carried.
When the Clerk arrived at the Vote for 29,000 Seamen and Marines for the Navy,
Lord Althorp
rose to put a question to the hon. and gallant admiral opposite. Shortly previous to the battle of Navarino a most brilliant action had occurred at Patras, no account of which had been inserted in the Gazette. The Turkish fleet of sixty vessels had sailed from Navarino to Patras; their entrance of that port was opposed by Sir E. Codrington, with only two frigates to support him, and he succeeded, against an immense superiority of force, in compelling the Turkish fleet to return. This affair was, in point of fact, the commencement of hostilities; and he wished to know why it had not found its way into the Gazette?
Sir G. Cockburn
regretted that the noble Lord had not given him notice that he meant to put the question, as he was at present unprepared with regard to the facts. He could say at once, that there was no reason for excluding it from the Gazette; and if it had not been inserted, it was because it was not such an affair as was usually thus recorded. Every thing that was right and proper had been done by Sir Edward Codrington; but it could hardly be called a brilliant action, except in intention. On the British ships insisting that the Turks should return to Navarino, they did return, and, according to the best of his memory, without a shot having been fired on either side.
Lord Althorp
observed, that shots were fired; the British ships had opened a fire upon the Turks.
Sir G. Cockburn
added, that according to his recollection, no such action had occurred, as it usually found its way into the Gazette. He would take care to inform himself on the subject against the next Supply-day.
Mr. Hume
wished to enter his protest against the vote for Seamen and Marines. The Finance Committee of 1817 had recommended that the whole amount of Seamen and Marines should be 19,000 men; yet the vote for the present year, after so long a continuation of peace, was not less than 29,000 men, at least 10,000 more men than ought to be granted.
EAST RETFORD.]
Mr. N. Calvert
moved the Order of the Day, for the
1320
The Speaker
put the Question, that he should leave the chair.
Mr. Tennyson
rose to move, as an Amendment, "That it be an instruction to the Committee on the East Retford Bill, that they have power to exclude the Borough of East Retford from the right of electing Members to Parliament, and to enable the Town of Birmingham to return two Members." The hon. Member adverted to the former proceedings upon this subject, and particularly to the five divisions that had already occurred upon the question, that the franchise be transferred to Birmingham. He was now, for the last time, about to make the same proposition; and he thought, that if the House rejected it, such a result would tend greatly to lower the opinion entertained out of doors of the proceedings of the Representatives of the nation. Not long since, a motion had been brought forward by a noble Lord (J. Russell) and rejected, for a limited Reform, by creating six new Members, in order to give two to each of three large manufacturing and commercial towns. The plan was opposed chiefly on the ground, that thus to add to the numbers of the Members would be to destroy the proportions established at the Union with Ireland; and it was then said, that when particular cases of delinquency were established, the franchise might be removed from the offending borough to some large town that at present had no Representative. He begged to recommend East Retford to the House as a case directly in point—as if it were made for the purpose of putting to the test the sincerity of those who had so recently resisted the motion of the noble Lord. The corruption that had prevailed at East Retford was most overwhelming, and it was the only instance of the kind that had occurred since the disfranchisement of Grampound. Those who resisted his Amendment seemed to him to verify the saying of straining at gnats and swallowing camels. The hon. Gentleman concluded with the motion he had stated in the outset.
Mr. W. Smith
seconded it. As to the guilt of East Retford, he said he had never entertained a doubt: but even if it had not been so distinctly established, the punishment it was proposed to inflict was not such as to require strict legal proof of
1321
Mr. Ferguson
agreed fully in the proposition of giving to Birmingham those rights of which East Retford ought to be deprived. The time had at last arrived when the manufacturing interests ought to be represented. They ought to have Members in that House, both as a matter of justice to them, of advantage to the country at large, and of convenience and benefit to the Parliament. There was no department or branch of British society which more contributed to the wealth and greatness of the empire, than did the manufacturing classes. It was the wealth which the State derived from them which had enabled it to carry on the tremendous war in which we had been engaged for so many years; and it was a due regard to their interests and their rights, which would alone carry us through the difficulties which that war had entailed upon the country. The manufacturing was a great and powerful interest, and one which it would be alike unjust and dangerous to leave without adequate Representation. As to the disfranchisement of East Retford, in that he should most cordially concur, even if it were not to be attended with the advantage of imparting to Birmingham rights
1322
Mr. Batley
admitted, that some time or other the towns spoken of must obtain Representatives; but he thought that time had not yet arrived, though it might be fast approaching.
Mr. Alderman Waithman
said, he had listened very attentively to the whole of the present discussion, but he had not the good fortune to hear any argument against the proposition for giving to Birmingham the rights or privileges which the House ought to lose no time in taking from East Retford. Hon. Members had talked of maintaining a balance in the Representation of the country. He confessed he saw nothing of that supposed balance. He knew not where it was to be found—he saw nothing but undue preponderance. There were not twenty Members in that House representing the commercial and manufacturing interests. But the thing
1323
l
l
l
l
1324
Sir C. Cole
wished to state the reasons for the vote he meant to give. He was satisfied from experience that many of the towns of England required to be represented in that House. As the Representative of a county, he was enabled, from his own experience, to say, that those who might sit for the counties in which great towns were situated, were totally unequal to the duty of representing them in that House. All great towns should, if possible, have Representatives of their own; it would be nothing less than the business of a life to acquire the knowledge requisite for efficiently representing a great commercial or manufacturing community. Such large towns were not represented by the county Members. An ordinary county was quite enough for two Members. In making these observations, he begged it to be distinctly understood as not advocating those sweeping and general plans of Reform so often mentioned in Parliament. He was no friend to measures of that nature, but he thought it would be a most important improvement in the system, if some of the great towns could be represented in that House, and not left to depend upon what could be done for them, from time to time, by the Members for the counties in which they were situated. It was upon those grounds that he was prepared to support the proposed transfer. It was his usual habit to support his Majesty's Government; but he should be ashamed were he not capable of giving an independent vote upon every important occasion; representing, as he did, a great county, he felt that nothing less was his duty [
cheers
Mr. Liddell
observed, that it was said, more than once last Session, that the times were at hand when Reform was unavoidable. If that were an approximation to truth, surely the best mode of providing for the agitation and excitement of such a period, come when it might, would be to put the legislature in such a situation as that it might be able to show all malcontents that justice had been done in all cases wherein reasonable complaint had been made. He had, therefore, no hesitation in declaring, before the House and the country, that if the proposition of the hon. Member for Bletchingly be not agreed to, he should feel bound, when again brought forward, to support the measure lately proposed by the noble Lord below him.
1325
Sir George Murray
did not deny that there were towns fit for and requiring; representation; but he had, on the former occasion voted for the motion of the hon. Member for Hertford, and he should continue to observe the same course, for he. had heard no argument to disturb his former opinion. Did the question then come before the House for the first time, he might, perhaps, vote for the Motion of the hon. Member for Bletchingley.
Lord John Russell
said, it appeared evident to him that the House was convinced that the great manufacturing and commercial towns ought to have Representatives. The want of commercial and manufacturing Representatives was severely felt—from year to year they felt the want of men competent to give the House information on matters of detail; and he had no doubt the time was at hand when he should see Representatives in that House sitting for the great towns. When he brought forward his Motion on a former occasion, relative to the subject of this species of Representation, the right hon. Gentleman opposite opposed it, not because it was a question with him whether or not the change was needed, but because he doubted whether the particular mode in which it was proposed to effect that change was or was not the most eligible. Here was a mode different from his; and the right hon. Gentleman might adopt it, and attain the object which he admitted to be desirable. For himself he had only to add, that he should vote with the hon. Member for Bletchingley.
Mr. Wilmot Horton
said, he would certainly vote for the transfer to Birmingham, for it would effect a practical improvement of a valuable and important character. He felt particularly bound to give the vote he intended, seeing that he took the course he had taken with respect to Penryn on the express understanding that something like the present proposition should be adopted.
The Solicitor General
was of opinion that it would be wrong to punish the innocent with the guilty; and it was not proved that all the electors of East Retford had connived at the guilt. In reference to that point the House ought, perhaps, to take into its consideration what was likely to be the resolution in another place. They were bound to look at the question in a practical point of view, and to see what would be the consequence of their own
1326
Mr. Bransby Cooper
considered that some punishment ought to be inflicted on the borough, but that its guilt was not so great as to deserve total disfranchisement. He agreed, therefore, with the Motion for extending it to the hundred. Looking, however, at the signs of the times, he would submit to Ministers whether they ought not to take the great question of Reform into their own hands, and extend the franchise to our large and mercantile towns, getting rid of our depopulated boroughs. He was not for a sweeping Reform; he was not a radicial reformer; but some improvement in the Representation was now becoming necessary, and it could not be well effected unless the Government were to take it into their hands. On the present occasion he would vote for transferring the franchise to the hundred.
Mr. Spring Rice
was surprised to hear some of the doctrines of the learned Solici-
1327
The Solicitor General
explained, that he only meant to speak of the House of Lords in its judicial capacity, having to decide on the evidence brought before it; and he was misrepresented or misunderstood if it were supposed that he meant or said that the House of Commons should give up any of its privileges.
1328
Mr. Spring Rice
explained, that he did not attribute to the hon. and learned Gentleman so monstrous a doctrine as that that House was to be governed by what some Members might suppose would be agreeable to the other House.
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, that on such an exhausted subject he meant to detain the House but a very few minutes. Both his right hon. friend, the Secretary of State for the Colonies, and his hon. and learned friend the Solicitor General, had been misunderstood. His right hon. friend never meant to say that he should now vote for the measure, simply because he had voted for it before; but because the measure had been five times decided; because he had, on every discussion, held the same opinions, and he saw no reason to change them on the present occasion. His learned friend had not referred to the House of Peers, except in its legislative capacity. He admitted that the House of Commons was bound to form its own opinions, but his learned friend had alluded to the other House sitting in its judicial capacity, and deciding by evidence taken on oath. He did not mean to discuss the question of large towns, but the noble Lord might perhaps think it right to vote for the measure, when he saw that the Mover and Seconder of the present Motion had both voted in favour of the proposition of the noble Lord. He thought some Gentlemen under-rated the advantage of giving the franchise to the hundred. In looking at our history, he found the advantages of so extending the franchise proved by experience; and it had the merit of having been sanctioned by several great men. Lord Chatham, on the question of the delinquency of Shoreham. when he had held his well-known opinions in favour of Parliamentary Reform, did not scout transferring the franchise to Bramber. On the contrary, he congratulated himself that Shoreham had been separated from India, and united to England. There was an impression that Shoreham was attached to the East-India interest; and Lord Chatham, who was then a reformer, regarded the extending of the franchise to the borough as a great improvement. Mr. Pitt also, who was a reformer, on the question of the borough of Cricklade, was friendly to transferring the franchise to the hundred. Both he and Mr. Fox were of the same opinion. On the question of the borough of Aylesbury, Mr. Fox opposed
1329
1330
Lord Althorp
observed, he could not deny that the transfer of the franchise to Bassetlaw would be an improvement, but he thought the House ought to consider the very great importance of the manufacturing districts, and the necessity of gratifying their inhabitants on the subject of Representation. He did not feel himself at all called on to consider the case of the County of York as applying to the question, because the two additional Members were not more Representatives of the great manufacturing, than of the agricultural districts of that extensive county. The arguments of proportion used by the right hon. Secretary were, in his opinion, of no weight, and they ought not to influence the vote of the House.
Dr. Phillimore
entered into a brief history of the Bill, and reminded the House, that the original proposition of Mr. Canning was, to give the Members for East Retford to the agricultural interests, and the Members for Penryn to the manufacturing interests. The learned Gentleman was proceeding to show why this plan had failed, in consequence of the evidence not being sufficient to prove the bribery at Penryn, when he was interrupted by calls of "No, No;" and he concluded, merely by observing, that the time was now come when the opinions of the people were so plainly directed to the necessity of putting an end to the corruptions which prevailed in some of the borough towns, and to the propriety of conferring a right of Representation on the great places of trade and manufacture, that he really thought it would be little less than a species of infatuation to resist their wishes, or to refuse to adopt a course which would contribute to the safety of the Government, and at the same time diffuse satisfaction among all those who considered themselves entitled to the distinction for which they prayed.
Lord John Russell
, in explanation of what had fallen from the right hon. Secretary, with reference to his motion, begged to say, that he adhered to every part of his plan; but it was a very different question whether they should add one hundred Members to the House, or
1331
Mr. Huskisson
did not, after the discussion which the subject had undergone, intend to trouble the House with more than a very few observations. The great principle which ought to govern their decision was, not that the landed or the agricultural interests should be properly represented, but that every interest should be represented. The question was, whether they should give a Representative to Birmingham—to one of the chief places of that interest which they had acknowledged, the other evening, to be the cause of much of the prosperity of the landed and of all the other interests of the country. Without the manufacturing and commercial industry of Lancashire, Warwickshire, and Yorkshire, the land of those countries would be worth comparatively little. Whatever might be the fate of the Amendment then before the House, he consoled himself by the reflection, that the time was not far distant when Government would find itself compelled to propose the very reformations which it now rejected.
The House then divided; For the original Question 152; For the Amendment 119.—Majority 33.
List of the Minority
Acland, Sir T.
Fergusson, Sir R.
Althorp, Lord
Fyler, T. B.
Baring, F.
Fazakerley, J. N.
Bradshaw, R. H.
Grant, rt. hon. C
Bradshaw, Capt. J.
Grant, R.
Bernal, R.
Gordon, R.
Burdett, Sir F.
Greene, T. G.
Birch, J.
Guise, W. B.
Blake, Sir F.
Graham, Sir J.
Buller, C.
Hume, J.
Clive, E. B.
Hoy, J. B.
Cave, R. O.
Honywood, W. P.
Carew, R.
Hulse Sir C.
Colborne, N. W. R.
Howard, H.
Carter, J.
Hobhouse, J. C.
Cole, Sir C.
Heneage, G. F.
Canning, Right hon. S.
Horton, rt. hon. R. W.
Calthorpe, hon. F. G.
Heron, Sir R.
Calthorpe, hon. A. G.
Hutchinson, J. H. (Cork)
Corbett, P.
Cradock, S.
Huskisson, rt. hon. W.
Dundas, hon. G.
Jephson, C. D. O.
Dundas, hon. Sir R.
Kemp, T. R.
Denison, J. E.
Knight, R.
Du Cane, P.
Kekewich, S. F.
Dawson, A.
Labouchere, H.
Ebrington, Lord
Lambert, J. S.
Ewart, W.
Littleton, E. J.
Ellison, C.
Liddell, hon. H.
Frankland, R.
Loch, J.
Fergusson, R, C.
Lawley, F,
1332
Lester, B.
Thomson, C, P.
Maberly, J.
Tomes, J.
Macauley, General C.
Townshend, Lord
Marshall, J.
Waithman, Alderman
Marshall, W.
Warburton, H.
Martin, J.
Wilbraham, G.
Maxwell, J. W.
Wells, J.
Monck, J. B.
Westenra, hon. H.
Macintosh, Sir J.
Whitbread, S.
Marjoribanks, S.
Whilmore, W. W.
Nugent, Lord
Wilson, Sir R.
O'Connell, D.
Winnington, Sir J.
Osborne, Lord F.
Wortley, hon. J. S.
Palmer, C. F.
Wrottesley, Sir J.
Palmerston, viscount
Wynn, Sir W.
Pendarvis, E. W.
Wynn, hon. C.
Phillimore, Dr.
Warrender, Sir G.
Phillips, G. R.
TELLERS
Phillips, Sir G.
Russell, Lord J.
Ponsonby, hon. F.
Tennyson, C.
Portman E. B.
PAIRED OFF.J
Poyntz, W. S.
Foley, E. F.
Price, R.
Robarts, A. W.
Protheroe, E.
Angelo, M. A.
Pusey, P.
Davenport, E.
Rancliffe, Lord
Fortescue, hon. G.
Rice, T. S.
Newport, Sir J.
Rickford, W.
Slaney, R. A.
Ridley, Sir M. W.
Cavendish, H.
Rumbold, C. E.
Howick, Lord
Robinson, G. R.
Wood, C.
Sandon, Viscount
Barclay, C.
Sebright, Sir J.
Robinson, Sir G.
Smith, hon. R.
Buxton, T. jun.
Smith, V.
Calvert, C.
Smith, W.
Cavendish, W.
Stanley, E. G.
Duncombe, T.
Stewart, Sir M. S.
Lamb, hon. G.
Surrey, Earl of
Lushington, Dr.
Sykes, D.
Morpeth, Lord
Stewart, Lord J.
Dennison, W. J.
Mr. O'Connell
said, before the House resolved itself into a Committee, he should move that it be an instruction to the committee, that the poll at each contested election should be taken by ballot. The object of any elector, he said, in voting for any Member of Parliament ought to be, that he thought the individual for whom he voted the best suited for public business; and the most fair way of election, in his opinion, was by ballot. Votes were influenced by two motives—those of terror and corruption. It would scarcely be asserted gravely in that House—at all events the assertion would be met with something very different from gravity elsewhere; that men were not compelled to vote at elections by improper influence, by bribery and by corruption. Now voting by ballot would altogether put an end to that. If that system were adopted, the landlord could not then compel his
1333
1334
1335
The Speaker
informed the hon. Member, that the question now before the House was, that he (the Speaker) do leave the chair. When that was carried, and the House went into committee, it would be open to the hon. Member to move the insertion of the clause he proposed in the bill.
The question was then put and carried, and the House went into committee, Sir A. Grant in the chair.
After several clauses in the bill had been agreed to,
Mr. O'Connell
moved the insertion of a clause, to the effect that the election should be taken by ballot.
Mr. Peel
objected to the clause, in the first instance, on the ground that it did not specify how the ballot was to be taken. In justice to his proposition, the hon. Member should specify the mode in which the ballot was to be taken. This, besides, was not the proper place to propose such a general principle.
Mr. Hume
said, the insertion of the
1336
Mr. Hobhouse
perfectly concurred in every thing that had fallen from the hon. Member for Clare, and he was ready to give his hearty support to the principle advocated by that hon. Member, but he would suggest to him whether it would not be more advisable to bring such an important subject under the consideration of the House in a manner more consonant to the forms of the House, and on an occasion when he would be able to give a specific detail of the plan he meant to propose. He (Mr. Hobhouse) was a warm friend to the principle of election by ballot: he had had some experience of popular elections, and he was convinced that that was the best principle upon which elections could be conducted.
Mr. Peel
said, that was obviously not the time for discussing so great a principle as the learned Gentleman had laid down. If the hon. Member for Aberdeen would look to the preamble to the Jury Bill, he would see that the mode in which the jury was to be elected by ballot was specifically detailed there. He was decidedly opposed to the principle advocated by the hon. and learned Member for Clare, being sure that such a principle, if adopted, would be productive of far greater abuses, and of more hypocrisy than at present prevailed [
hear
Mr. O'Connell
explained, that being a young Member, he was not very well acquainted with the forms of the House, but he had consulted those who were, and he understood from them that the principle of his proposition might then be with propriety adopted, leaving its details to be afterwards discussed.
1337
Mr. Western
was decidedly opposed to the principle of election by ballot. It would banish every species of confidence, and communication, and interchange of opinion between the elected and the electors, and would be productive of eternal suspicion and hypocrisy. It was an un-English, an un-Irish principle. The adoption of such a principle, he considered, would be destructive of the spirit of our Constitution.
Mr. Warburton
supported the amendment, because he conceived that the system of voting by ballot would put a stop to that intimidation over voters which was exercised, not only in small boroughs, but also in large and populous places like the city of Westminster. Nothing could be more true than the observation of the historian, "
Suffragia, optimatibus nota, populo libera non sunt
Mr. John Martin
owned himself an ardent friend to Parliamentary Reform, but declared his intention of opposing at all times, and in all places, any attempt to introduce the vote by ballot into our elective system.
Mr. Stanley
said, that if the object of the hon. and learned Member for Clare, in proposing this clause, were to deprive the higher orders of their legitimate influence in the State, it was an object which he could never lend his aid to accomplish. The influence of rank and property was an influence recognized by the English Constitution, and interwoven with its representative system. Although he was a friend to Parliamentary Reform to a certain extent, he should be sorry to see our Representation in the same condition as that of America. He believed that even in America there were great doubts entertained, whether the voting by ballot was a successful experiment. He hoped that the hon. and learned Member for Clare would not persist in bringing up this crude shadow of a clause, which, in point of fact, was not a clause; but that he would digest a clause explaining the details of his system, and would propose it hereafter as a rider to the bill.
Lord Nugent
said, that the greatest recommendation of the vote by ballot appeared to him to be this; that if two knaves met together, one to tender and the other to receive a bribe, the more one of them could be encouraged to cheat the other, the better it would be for the public. At the same time that he announced such
1338
Mr. Poulett Thomson
trusted that this clause would be withdrawn, in order that a fitter opportunity might be afforded to the House of discussing the system of vote by ballot, to which he confessed himself to be not unfriendly.
Sir F. Burdett
complained that the hon. and learned Member for Clare had not been fairly treated in this discussion. In proposing to adopt the vote by ballot at East Retford only, the hon. and learned Member had not so much followed the bent of his opinions as he had accommodated himself to the narrow views of the House. Hon. Members were accustomed to talk of the danger which was to be apprehended from making any sweeping and general alteration of the mode of election; and the hon. and learned Member for Clare, to allay the fears of those who were accustomed to fear, even where there was no danger, had called upon the House to try the experiment of voting by ballot, upon a small scale, where it could produce no danger. What stage was better suited than the present for discussing the principle of this clause? Why should the hon. and learned Gentleman involve himself in the details of such a measure, when he did not know whether the principle on which it was founded would be sanctioned by the House? He was surprised that the right hon. Secretary had not supported his objections to this change of system by better and more numerous arguments than those which he had advanced. All the arguments of the other side were prefaced by such qualifying words as, "I believe," or "I am persuaded, that danger will arise from adopting such a system." No Gentleman had more than an opinion upon the point; no Gentleman had more than faith, for which he could give no good reason, for asserting that there would be more of corruption, more of hypocrisy, and more of danger, under the system of voting by ballot than under the present system, if the great evils of the present system were corruption and intimidation, could any man doubt whether, if he deprived the corruptor and the intimidator of the means of knowing whether an act had been performed to benefit the one and to injure the other, he should not be conferring a benefit on the public? He admitted, that
1339
Mr. Peel
said, that the hon. Member for Westminster had no reason to be surprised at the paucity of the arguments with which he had supported his objections to this clause, as he had declared most explicitly to the committee, that in its present crude state he did not intend to argue it. He also reminded the hon. Baronet, that the present was a proposition which they could only argue upon presumptions, for experience as to its advantages or disadvantages they had none. As to the allusion which the hon. Baronet had made to the system of electing jurors by ballot, it bore no analogy, and could have no reference to the system of voting by ballot at elections. Did the hon. Baronet know the manner in which a jury was appointed under his bill? As he thought that the hon. Baronet was ignorant of it, he would inform him that the names of the jurors were placed indiscriminately in a box, and were taken out by chance by the officer of the court. Now surely the hon. Baronet did not intend to propose that the names of the candidates should be put into a box, and that the
1340
Lord Althorp
was of opinion that the system of voting by ballot would diminish, not the legitimate, but only the undue influence of the aristocracy. He was favourable to the principle of voting by ballot, but thought that the hon. Member for Clare had selected an inconvenient opportunity for bringing it under the consideration of the House.
Mr. G. Lamb
had a strong objection to the ballot system: God forbid the time should ever arrive when a British voter would be obliged to sneak into a corner to
1341
Lord J. Russell
did not like to give a decided opinion with respect to a proposition which was broached for the first time. He had always entertained apprehensions respecting the ballot system, and those apprehensions had not been diminished by any thing he had heard that evening. He thought that even with the ballot system it would be impossible that the manner in which individuals voted should not be known, unless the voters should resort to a system of lying and treachery which was abhorrent to the feelings of Englishmen.
Mr. Month
said, that since every act which Parliament had passed had been found ineffectual to prevent bribery and corruption, it became the House to adopt the remedy now proposed. It was said that the election by ballot would be productive of hypocrisy; but was there no hypocrisy under the present system? When a man was dragged to the hustings to vote for a candidate whose principles he detested, was there no hypocrisy in that?
Mr. O'Connell
assured the Committee that it had not been his intention to take them by surprise, and to remove any suspicion of that nature, he would withdraw his proposition, and give notice that he would move it on the third reading of the Bill.
The provisions of the Bill were then agreed to in Committee.
SUB-LETTING ACT (IRELAND.)]
Mr. Doherty
moved the second reading of the Sub-letting Act Amendment Bill.
Mr. O'Connell
begged that further time might be given for the consideration of this Bill.
Mr. Doherty
said, the Bill had been for some time on the Table of the House, and must therefore be well known; if, however, a week's delay would satisfy the hon. and learned Gentleman, he would acquiesce in his wish.
Mr. O'Connell
said, that though the original Act was well known in Ireland, that was not the case with the Amendment bill. He wanted to propose a clause in the Committee to enable landlords to declare that any devise of lands they might make should not be subject to that Act. He hoped, however, that the Bill would be postponed for a fortnight.
1342
Mr. Doherty
said, he could not acquiesce in so long a delay.
Mr. Wallace
said, the Bill was very little understood in England, though it had been much discussed in Ireland. He did not believe, however, that there could be any necessity to postpone the Bill, as the hon. and learned Member must be well aware of all the objections which could be made to it. The Committee was the proper place to discuss he details of the measure, and in that stage he should have some alterations to propose.
Mr. North
was of opinion that the measure should be postponed till the opinions of the people of Ireland were better known on the subject.
Mr. King
said, he approved of the amendments proposed to be introduced into the Act by the Bill, but he had some doubts how far the Act was suitable to Ireland, unless it were accompanied by a well-regulated system of Poor-laws, which he thought would confer an inestimable benefit on that country. Such a system, conjoined with a heavy tax on absentees, would be serviceable to all ranks and classes in Ireland, and would be hailed with gratitude throughout the country.
The Bill was read a second time.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Monday, March 8, 1830.
MINUTES.] The 26th Report of the Carnatic Commissioners was presented at the Bar.
The Marriage Validating Bill was read a second time.
Earl STANHOPE stated, that indisposition would prevent his noble friend the Duke of Richmond from bringing forward his motion for a Select Committee to inquire into the state of the Country on Thursday next. The noble Duke intended to bring the subject before the House as soon as the state of his health would permit, and would give due notice of the motion. Meanwhile, he should move that the order be discharged.—Discharged accordingly.
BANK NOTES ISSUED.]
Lord Goderich
said, a return had been laid upon the Table of the amount of country bank-notes stamped in the last three years, and of the unstamped notes allowed for at the Stamp Office. There appeared to be a progressive increase in both respects. He wished to know whether this account included Scotland; and if it did not, whether there would be any objection to furnish a return, distinguishing the amount of notes in the two countries.
The Duke of Wellington
said, the account did include Scotland, but it might be difficult to distinguish between those parts of it which related to the two coun-
1343
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Monday, March 8, 1830.
MINUTES.] Mr. PORTMAN moved an humble Address to his Majesty, praying that he would cause to be laid before the House returns of the expenses incurred by the office of sheriff during the years 1828 and 1829, as far as such returns could be made out, and also specifying the fees received during the same period.
The Marine Mutiny Bill was brought in and read a first time.
The Dramatic Writings Bill went through a Committee.
Sir J. NEWPORT inquired whether there was any intention on the part of Government to introduce a measure for the purpose of removing the restrictions on the growth of tobacco, which at present pressed so severely on the tobacco-growers?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER was understood to reply, that a measure of the nature mentioned was in contemplation.
NOTICES.] By Mr. SADLER, that he would, on the 30th of March, move a Resolution on the Laws of Libel, and by Mr. C. CALVERT, that he would, on April 6th, move to refer the petition, of the tobacco manufacturers of London and Southwark to a select Committee.
RETURNS were ordered, on the motion of Mr. HUME, of the number of contracts now existing for supplying his Majesty's Dock-yards, the number of the contractors, &c., and the sums for the Ordnance and Army; of the number and strength of the Military Guards mounted within the Bills of Mortality, on January 1, 1829, and January 1, 1850; of the manner in which the 6,500
l
FEES ON PRIVATE BILLS.]
The Speaker
informed the House, that he had taken some care and pains to arrange and regulate the List of Fees charged in the Private Bill Office, by the clerks of the House, on all matters relating to private business, to which he was anxious to call attention, particularly of those hon. Members who
1344
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
, in moving that it be printed, said, he was sure the House would feel much obliged to the right hon. Gentleman for the pains he had taken in elucidating a subject of so much interest to parties having to introduce private bills.
Lord Althorp
expressed his entire concurrence in what fell from the Chancellor of the Exchequer. He thought the House and the country were much indebted to Mr. Speaker for the pains he had taken to elucidate a subject on which there had been so much misconception as to the nature of the charges.
Mr. D. W. Harvey
also thought, that thanks were due to the right hon. Gentleman for what he had done; but he regretted to hear, that in the aggregate the amount, of the fees was to be the same as before. If this were so, they would be an alteration without an improvement. Some of the fees charged were extravagantly high. He would mention, for instance, a case where two persons recently petitioned the House, to be heard by themselves or counsel, against a private bill. The House acceded to their prayer, and
1345
l
The Speaker
said, from what had fallen from the hon. Member who last addressed the House, he feared that he had not made himself understood when he called the attention of the House to this subject. No doubt, when the Table should be printed, and in the hands of Members, whatever should be found capable of improvement would be open to the suggestions of every hon. Member, and such suggestions would be not only not opposed, but courted. It was not for him, not being acquainted with the particulars of the case to which the hon. Member referred, to make any remarks upon it, but the hon. Member must be aware that it was impossible any such charge should have been made by officers of the House.
Mr. D. W. Harvey
had thought it his duty to call the attention of the right hon. Gentleman to that case, particularly after the challenge made by the right hon. Gentleman to every Member, to come forward with any objection to any fee in the list that might be considered objectionable. It was right that the subject should be examined; for if such charge were not made he must have been imposed on by those who made the statement to him.
The Speaker
feared that he was not yet well understood. The Table of Fees which he had made out were of those charged by officers of the House. He had not offered any comment on the charge to which the hon. Member had alluded, beyond the assertion that it could not have been made by any clerks of the House. There was, the hon. Member must be aware, a great distinction to be made between the fees charged by parliamentary agents, and those demanded by the clerks of the House.
The List ordered to be printed.
NATIONAL, DISTRESS.]
Sir E. Kerrison
presented a Petition from the borough of Eye, complaining of agricultural distress, and praying for relief. He was aware of the great distress which that class suffered, and he did earnestly hope that some measure would be adopted for their relief.
The Petition to be on the Table.
Lord Clive
presented two Petitions from the county of Salop, praying for a reduc-
1346
Mr. Dickinson
presented a Petition from Taunton, most numerously and respectably signed, complaining, not as the petition presented by the hon. Baronet (Sir E. Kerrison) below him, of agricultural distress alone, but of the distressed state of the country generally, which pressed, the petition justly stated, on all classes. The petitioners said, that Ministers could not have paid serious attention to the subject, or they could not be so unacquainted, as the petitioners feared they were, with the distressed state of the country. They stated, in proof of the kind of distress which existed in the county of Somerset, that in a parish containing 1,900 inhabitants, 1,000 were depending on the poor-rates for support. He would not dwell upon agricultural distress alone, though he was certain that its extent was greatly underrated, for the value of farms and cattle had fallen fifty per cent below what they were at this time last year. Other interests were also suffering to an equal, and all were suffering to a dreadful extent. It was indeed impossible that one class or one interest could suffer without bringing suffering on the other. Burke had correctly remarked, that those who gave employment to the poor were their bankers, and whatever deprived the opulent of the means of employing the poor, must cause intense distress among the latter. For the existing distress there was one remedy; and though it might not go to the full length of the relief desired, yet it was essential, and, whether by Ministers or the House, it must be done; the people must, be untaxed to a considerable extent. He hoped, therefore, that many days would not elapse before the House was informed that relief to a considerable extent had been afforded.
Sir C. Burrell
was glad that his hon. friend had stated his opinion on this subject, for it was absolutely necessary that Ministers should be fully informed as to the actual state of the country, on which they seemed not to possess any accurate knowledge. He was borne out in this assertion by what had gone forth to the public, as having been said by the noble Duke at the head of the Government. That noble Duke was represented to have stated (hat as a fact, which was no fact at all; namely, that timber, which the noble Duke classed as an agricultural
1347
l
l
l
l
s
l
l
l
Sir T. Lethbridge
rose to corroborate what had fallen from his hon. colleague as to the state of the country generally, and the severe distress which affected the county of Somerset in particular. There was no class exempt from distress; it pressed alike on all. Within the memory no person living, was such distress felt in of the country. The only thing he regretted was, that the petitioners (for whom he had the highest respect) had not waited till after the 15th, when, no doubt, they would have heard of some measure of relief in the statement of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Except in that point, he fully concurred with them, and he hoped that. Ministers would look not merely to the distress which affected agriculture, though that was severe, but also at that which preyed on all other classes, commercial and manufacturing. He agreed in what was said about the fall in the value of landed produce, which, with the exception of wheat, did not afford a remunerating price. He thought that the state of the other articles called for a revision of the laws for the protection of the British grower and unless that were done, he was of opinion that the country would suffer even more severe distress than at present. The landowner was left without any protection in the home-market as to the articles of wool, hemp, tallow, and others, in all of which he was undersold by the foreigner. He was not prepared to propose any remedy for the general distress; that was the business of Ministers, and he looked for that at their hands. He should wish, however, for a revision of the Banking system. A change in that, would give the country great relief. He did not mean that we should give up our present metallic currency, for whatever opinions he might formerly have entertained on the point, he was convinced
1348
Colonel Sibthorp
did not know what might be the condition of the county of Somerset, as to the price of Wheat; but in other counties, particularly in Lincoln, he could state that it did not afford a remunerating price. The value of all other articles had fallen considerably below that price.
Sir M. W. Ridley
regretted that the hon. Baronet (Sir T. Lethbridge) had not stated the specific alteration which he would wish to have in the Banking system. If there was any difficulty felt from the operation of that system, the House had to blame itself for it, by the hasty and inconsiderate measure they had passed respecting the small-note circulation. He would not, however, bring back the state of the currency to what it was before that change took place—that would do more harm than good; but he was prepared to show, that the withdrawal of the small notes from circulation had been productive of much distress. Though he admitted that great distress prevailed, and the price of cattle was low, particularly in the northern counties, owing to the depressed state of the manufacturing towns in Yorkshire and the neighbouring counties; he was not prepared to concur with those who drew such a desponding picture of the state of the country. It was his consolation, to believe that the distress was partial, temporary, and passing. In that part of the country where he dwelt, there was not that want of confidence the hon. Baronet had mentioned between the bankers and their customers, but if there were he did not see how the Government could remedy it, and certainly the hon. Baronet had not proposed any plan for the purpose.
Mr. Portman
bore testimony to the great distress which existed in the county of Somerset. A great deal of that felt by the agriculturists there was the result of two bad seasons: not only the sheep and
1349
Mr. Beaumont
observed, that his experience induced him to believe that the distress was not so extensive in the districts which were exclusively agricultural, as in those where agriculture and manufactures jointly prevailed. The overwhelming taxation was in truth the real cause of the present sufferings of the people, and a considerable reduction of that heavy burthen he had no doubt would be the only effectual means of administering relief.
Mr. Dickinson
concurred with the last speaker, in thinking that the House must look to reduction of taxation for relief.
On the Question that the Petition be read,
Sir Thomas Lethbridge
said, he found it necessary to state, that what he meant as of our Banking system was, that it admitted of improvement, which he inferred from the bankers who had traded in one-pound notes having now given up the business of banking altogether. He was one of those, however, who did not wish again to see a paper circulation. As to the distress, some business might yet be carried on to a considerable extent, but he did not believe any business obtained large profits. It was not for him to propose plans to improve our banking system; he would only say, therefore, that joint-stock banking-companies would fill up the vacuum now felt; and he thought country banking would not be on a safe footing, till the banks of England were established on principles similar to those of Scotland.
TAXATION.]
Mr. Bright
presented a Petition from certain inhabitants of Bristol, praying for a reduction of Taxation in consequence of the general distress. This petition, the hon. Member stated, had been got up at a public meeting, very numerously and respectably attended. He fully assented to the prayer of the petition, and ascribed the distress complained of, in a great measure, to the alteration in the currency. The country, he contended, felt strong dissatisfaction at the existing state of things, more particularly at the oppressive means resorted to, to collect the taxes, and loudly demanded more extensive retrenchments, and a material reduction in taxation. It was highly desirable, in his
1350
The Petition to be printed.
Lord Althorp
rose to present a Petition from Kingsport, in Norfolk, praying for a reduction of Taxation. Such a concession to the distresses of the people, he maintained, was unavoidable, and he hoped that Ministers would not be the last to perceive the necessity of so far acceding to public opinion, unequivocally manifested as it had been. In urging the necessity of a reduction of taxes, particularly of those which pressed more immediately on the productive industry of the country, he begged to say that he had no wish 1o see Ministers removed from their places. He had no such object in view, having no personal wish for office. Indeed, he was sure that he spoke the sentiments of those with whom he usually acted in that House, when he repeated that he had no desire to see the present Administration changed for any other which could be brought together under existing circumstances. Still he felt it to be incumbent on the House to press the Government, that to reduce our taxation was the only remedy for the distress so generally admitted to oppress the country.
The Petition was ordered to be printed.
The noble Lord presented a similar Petition from Lynn, also in Norfolk.—To be printed.
AFFAIR AT PATRAS.]
Sir G. Cockburn
would take advantage of that opportunity to give the explanation required by the noble Lord a few nights since, respecting the conduct of the Admiral (Sir E. Codrington) commanding the British and allied fleets at Patras, a few days before the battle of Navarino. The noble Lord had asked why an account of that affair
1351
Lord Althorp
said, his statement was derived from what he must consider the very best authority. He understood the gallant Admiral to say, that only one gun was fired, whereas he was given to understand that a considerable firing took place; and that several Turkish sailors were killed. The Turks, he believed, did not fire at our ships. He repeated that he spoke from the very best authority.
Sir G. Cockburn
contended, that no authority could be equal to the official documents from which he spoke. He had not read the official letters in the House, but he had stated the substance of them.
Lord J. Russell
was much surprised that the matter had not been gazetted at the time of its occurrence. It was strange that a transaction so essential to the
1352
SUPPLY.]
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
moved the Order of the Day for the House resolving itself into a Committee of Supply. He was anxious to take advantage of that opportunity to request the hon. Member for Aberdeen to postpone his motion, which stood for Wednesday, for abolishing the office of Receiver-general of Taxes, till he had heard his (the Chancellor of the Exchequer's) promised financial statement.
Mr. Hume
agreed to defer his motion till the 24th inst. hoping that, in the mean time, the right hon. Gentleman would make the motion unnecessary.
The House resolved itself into a Committee of Supply.
BRITISH MUSEUM.]
Mr. Bankes
moved that 16,143
l
Mr. Hume
wished to know why greater facilities were not afforded to the public for viewing the Museum? Why was it open but three days in the week, and even then but for a few hours? He would not go so far as to assert that the great diminution of visitors last year to the British Museum, as compared with those of the preceding, was altogether owing to the want of greater facility of ingress, for he was aware that the satiating of public curiosity must tend to diminish the annual number of visitors; but he would contend, that there must be more than this circumstance to account for so great a falling-off as from 127,000, the number of visiters in 1829, to 68.000, the number of last year. He saw no reason why the Museum should not be open five days in the week instead of three, for the salaries paid to the officers were sufficiently liberal to command a greater portion of their time and services. Even those days on which the Museum was
1353
Mr. Jephson
begged leave to suggest the expediency of keeping the reading-room of the Museum open to a certain hour in the evening. He would suggest that it ought to be kept open at least till six o'clock. There were many respectable gentlemen, clerks in public offices, to whom such an arrangement would be peculiarly grateful, being engaged all day at business, and thereby prevented from availing themselves of the advantages which the national library afforded. Should no other hon. Member urge the matter to the Trustees of the Museum, he would, on a future occasion, bring the matter before the House.
Mr. Trant
considered the present regulation, by which children under a certain age were prohibited from visiting the Museum, highly objectionable. It only opened a door for lying; for parents said, their children were of such and such an age when they were not so much, in order to ensure their admission. He had taken his own children, but had the satisfaction of seeing others younger admitted, while they were refused, merely because he had a regard to truth.
Mr. Bankes
begged leave to say, in reply to the hon. Member for Montrose, that the officers of the Museum were engaged six days of the week, though the Museum was, as he had stated, open but three days to the public. On the other days it was usual for the trustees to admit their friends, and those who sought a private visit, as a favour, to the Museum. With respect to the falling-off in the number of visiters, he was sure the House would be gratified to learn, that though there was a diminution of the number of visiters to the Museum, there was a larger increase in the number of students who frequented the reading-room, and studied in the gallery of art. He was ready to admit, in answer to the observations of the hon. Member for Mallow, (Mr. Jephson) that it was very desirable that the public should enjoy every facility of reference to the library consistent with its
1354
Mr. Poulett Thomson
conceived, that the necessary caution with respect to the use of candles and fire might be attained by introducing them into a chamber apart from the main building. He should wish to see the liberal system pursued by the governors of the Royal Library and the Mazarine Library at Paris, acted upon by the trustees of the British Museum. In those places any gentleman who gave a fair proof of his respectability might take home any work which might be necessary to his studies, with a view to the promotion of science or literature. The hon. Member might perhaps recollect that a celebrated foreigner (Mr. W. Schlegel) came over here to consult some Sanscrit manuscripts, but was obliged to forego his undertaking, because he was not allowed to take them home with him.
Mr. Bankes
was sure, that under no circumstances would the House or the trustees of the Museum consent to the abstraction of a single volume from its present locality. He also objected strongly to introduce either fire or lights into the library.
Mr. Jephson
said, he should like to hear any valid reason against the reading-rooms being open on Saturdays; and in summer till seven or eight in the evening, when no fire or candles would be necessary.
Mr. Sadler
maintained that it was never intended that the Museum library should be employed as a mere reading-room, but as a place of reference. He did not think the time ought to be extended.
Mr. Bright
agreed with the hon. Member for Newark. If the suggestion of the hon. Member for keeping the reading-room open on Saturday were acted upon, Sunday would be employed in regulating the books and cleaning the rooms.
Mr. Hume
contended that the public had a right to every facility which could be afforded by the Museum. If money were the objection—that is, if the expense of additional officers were the reason for not extending those facilities, why let the public pay on the additional days on which the Museum would be open.
1355
Mr. D. Gilbert
was sure the trustees were anxious to afford every facility to the public in their power, compatible with the safety and integrity of the various treasures intrusted to their care. He agreed with the hon. Member for Bristol, that if the reading-room and Museum were open on Saturdays, the Sabbath would be expended in regulating matters for the ensuing week.—Resolution agreed to.
ARMY ESTIMATES.]
Sir H. Hardinge
moved that 126,000
l
Mr. Maberly
wished to direct the attention of the Committee to the annually-increasing amount of the present estimate. The whole amount of pensions, superannuations, and allowances of this description in 1827 was 5,456,000
l
l
l
l
l
The next Resolution was for 36,669
l
s
d.
Mr. Hume
thought, that this grant really deserved more consideration than he had ever been able to obtain for it. A great part of this vote went to support military sinecures. No sooner was one governor dead than another was appointed in his
1356
Sir H. Hardinge
replied, that all these offices and appointments stood on a peculiar basis; namely, that of being the only means in the hands of the Crown for the remuneration of old officers. He readily admitted that they were military sinecures; but, when he stated how few they were, they amounting only to seventy, compared to the list of 13,000 officers on full and half-pay, whose services they might be bestowed to reward, he thought it would be ungracious indeed to deprive the Crown of this mode of repaying old, and faithful, and disabled officers. He would add, that the greater number of these offices did not give the holders of them above 200
l
Mr. Sadler
thought, that naval officers should have a similar provision, or at least that they should participate in the like retiring bounty.
Mr. Maberly
thought that, on the whole, British officers were worse paid than those of any other European army: still upon principle he objected to this mode of remuneration by sinecures.
Resolution agreed to.
Mr. Hume
complained of the form in which these accounts were made out. Why not put some of these items of expenditure upon the head of effective service, instead of making them up under colonial accounts? These colonies ought to be made to supply this expenditure, instead of palming upon Great Britain the payment of their governors, lieutenant-governors, town-majors, &c.
Sir H. Hardinge
assured the hon. Mem-
1357
The Resolution for 104,000
l.,
On that of 720,859
l
s
d
Mr. Hume
objected, and complained; that the Government had not reduced this list, by filling up commissions from it as vacancies enabled them, instead of saddling the country with new pensioners. In 1818 this vote was 661,000
l
"Sir;—His Majesty being determined to provide as soon as possible for the broken officers, as well as those who are upon half-pay, with intent to ease the nation in time of the burthen thereof, as to reward the particular merit of those officers who have distinguished themselves during the course of the late war by their services, I am commanded to signify to you his pleasure, that as any commission shall happen hereafter to become vacant in the army, of what degree soever it be, the same shall always be filled up with a half-pay officer; and that for the future no person through favour, interest, or any other practices, may unjustly obtain a commission to which he has no right, in prejudice of another officer older than himself. It is his Majesty's pleasure, that the first regard shall always be had to the seniority of the commission, provided his Majesty shall have good reason to be satisfied of the character and merit of the person, and of his zeal and fidelity for his service: still observing, that a reduced officer of the same rank in the regiment where such vacancy happens, is to be preferred before all others. This his Majesty's pleasure you have to cause to be entered in the books of your office as a standing rule and direction in this behalf.—I am, Sir, your obedient humble servant,
"MARLBOROUGH.
"
June 30th
To the Secretary-at-war.
1358
"It is his Majesty's pleasure, that all colonels, now and late in the army, do certify to me the date of each officer's commission reduced out of their respective regiments, to the intent that all officers so reduced may be provided for according to his Majesty's pleasure, signified to me as above by his grace the Duke of Marlborough; and the said colonels are hereby required to send such certificates as soon as possible.
"(Signed) W. PULTENEY."
nem. con.
nem. con.
Sir H. Hardinge
1359
l
l
Mr. Hume
said, that he understood the right hon. Gentleman's remark applied to the troops of the line; but had there not been, at the same time, new commissions given in the Guards and Household Troops?
Sir H. Hardinge
said, that there had been a reduction of certain companies in these troops, although, of course, some fresh ensigns must have been appointed since the peace.
Mr. Monck
said, he could not understand why our army should not be governed on the same principles as the armies of the continental states. In the French army there was no half-pay or pensions, except for wounds or being disabled in the service. Quarter-pay, not half-pay, was the reward for mere service. Though those armies had not the large pay and emoluments of our troops, they were not less efficient.
Mr. Maberly
reminded his hon. friend, that the British officers purchase their commissions, which the officers of none of the continental armies did.
1360
Sir H. Hardinge
acknowledged the justice of the remark, and added, that, in future, half-pay was in fact to be given contingent on a certain period of service on full-pay.
l
s
d
l
l
s
d
Mr. Hume
observed, that the time was come for doing away with this grant. In this case the pay of the officers alone was no less than 11,300
l
Sir H. Hardinge
replied, he believed Chelsea about 500, and Kilmainham about 400.
Mr. Hume
thought the whole charge enormous for such a few persons.
Sir H. Hardinge
explained, that the expense of the establishment was not only for the maintenance of the men within the hospital but for the payment of 8,500 out pensioners. Kilmainham could not be abolished without increasing the expense, but reductions were in progress.
Mr. Hume
said, he was glad to hear that, but he hoped the reductions would be principally in the salaries of the superior officers; for the clerks of Chelsea Hospital were worse paid than the officers of any other Government establishment, while the paymaster received 1,200
l
l
Mr. Calcraft
was of the same opinion, and had wished the right hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer to raise the salaries of those clerks, but could not get him to advance one shilling.
Lord Althorp
asked, whether there was
1361
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that when applied to by the hon. Member on the subject, he had asked the very same question as the noble Lord had just put.
Mr. Hume
said, he had no wish to see the salaries of those clerks increased, but he thought that the salaries in other departments ought to be brought down to the scale adopted at Chelsea Hospital.— Resolution carried.
The Question, that a sum not exceeding 1,241,601
l
s
d
Mr. Hume
noticed the frauds which had been committed by claimants on this fund, and complimented the right hon. the Secretary of War for the inquiry he had instituted, and the money he had been thereby enabled to save the country. He declared his conviction, that if the late Secretary of War, the right hon. Gentleman's predecessor, had continued in office, that inquiry would not have been set on foot.
Sir John Wrottesley
inquired if any commanding officer had lent himself to the abuses which had been detected?
Sir H. Hardinge
replied, not one. The parties were interested persons, and the system of fraud was found out by a forgery having been detected. He had good reason to believe that it would not happen again.
Sir John Wrottesley
inquired whether the regimental books were not under the care of the adjutants?
Sir H. Hardinge
replied, that the frauds were committed several years ago, and in most of the cases the adjutants had been removed.
Sir John Wrottesley
admitted that this explanation was satisfactory, but he was bound to observe that these abuses could not have been perpetrated without gross mismanagement. He did not mean to enter into details, but it was a plain common sense view that the country could not possibly support in idleness a vast number of persons whose maintenance cost the country as much as the whole effective army. While the labourer was obliged to work fifteen or sixteen hours a day for a miserable pittance, that scarcely preserved his existence, the pensioned soldier
1362
Sir H. Hardinge
said, that the number of persons on the half-pay list was 81,000. Mr. Trant believed that the discovery of the frauds was accidental, and he affirmed that the hon. member for Montrose was not warranted in casting any reflection on the noble Lord the late Secretary-at-War.
Mr. Hume
did not mean to cast any reflection on the noble Lord, but he did not think the discovery was altogether accidental. A person was tried by a court martial, which found the charge vexatious; the circumstances which transpired led to an inquiry, and the accuser was dismissed from the army. From what had then occurred he was satisfied that the abuses could not have taken place, if the attestations required had been preserved at the War-Office. He believed that these frauds were quite unknown to the officers, but he also believed that they could not have occurred had there not been a considerable degree of negligence in not enrolling the attestations.
Sir H. Hardinge
said, it was not possible, under the old system, to check those frauds, and he must say that both the War-Office and the late Secretary at War were entirely blameless.
The Question was agreed to.
The Question being put that a sum not exceeding 20,986
l
s
d
Sir John Wrottesley
complained that half of the amount voted was expended on the officers, instead of being applied to the benefit of the orphans in the institution. He admitted that the objects of the charity were meritorious, but he must contend, that under the circumstances of the country a reduction in the expense ought to take place.
Mr. Hume
said, that that institution grew out of a state of war, was at present uncalled for, and would, he hoped, be gradually done away.
Sir H. Hardinge
did not concur in opinion with the hon. Member for Aberdeen. The country was bound to provide for the
1363
l
Mr. Hume
said, he was of opinion that if there were no establishment, then there would be no children to provide for; the friends and relatives of the orphans would take care of them; but as long as the Government took the charge upon it, the relatives naturally said, why should we be inconvenienced by those whom the Government taxes us to provide for. Children were accordingly sent from all parts. Public establishments put an end to private charity. Once say, that after 1831 or 1832 this establishment should cease, and nothing more would be heard of orphans claiming the support of the country.
Mr. Monck
thought, if the vote were continued, it ought to be more definitely appropriated. It could not for one moment be affirmed, that all the children of soldiers who chose to marry should be supported at the national expense. In principle he thought the children should not have a claim, as a matter of right, to be placed in the Asylum.
Sir John Sebright
supported the grant, because it was proper to provide for the children of those who had died in the service of the country.
Sir H. Hardinge
said, that great reductions had been made in the establishment since the peace.
Mr. Hume
was of opinion, that if this principle of providing for the children of those who died in the public service were once admitted, it ought to be extended to all functionaries, and then he did not know why the committee should not grant 40,000
l
l
Mr. Protheroe
was also opposed to the grant, being convinced, by what the hon. Member for Montrose said., that if the public did not undertake to provide for such orphans they would be taken care of by their friends.
Sir H. Hardinge
assured the Committee that no larger sum would ever be required, and he would also assert that the strictest
1364
Resolution agreed to.
The next Resolution was for a sum not exceeding 145,267
l
Mr. Hume
said, that the number of widows who died and the number who were put upon the list during the year ought to be specifically detailed. He inquired whether any regulations had been adopted by Government since last Session, as to the manner of granting these pensions. It was necessary to have more information before voting the sum required.
Sir H. Hardinge
said, that these pensions were in future to be granted only to the widows of officers who had served ten years, and who had been on full pay for that period, or to the widows of officers who had been killed in action. It had also been settled, that when the widow married again, the pension should cease.
Mr. Hume
thought it desirable, that the estimates for Navy and Ordnance pensions should be placed upon the same footing with the Army. There was a reduction of five per cent made upon the pensions of the soldier, while no such reduction was made in the pensions granted to the Artillery or the Navy. The soldier, therefore, considered himself plundered, though, if the Estimates were properly stated, he would see that credit was given him for the reduction of five per cent in his pension. All the military and naval pensions should therefore be stated in the same way.
Sir H. Hardinge
said, the reduction of five per cent was made upon the pensions of the soldiers serving in the line, by an Act passed in the reign of Geo. 2nd, and it was then conceived but fair, that such reduction should not apply to the Ordnance, as the individual serving in the Ordnance was at the expense of his agency, and it was thought also, at that time, that he could not be admitted to Chelsea Hospital. The reduction was, in fact, equal, both in the Line and in the Ordnance.
Mr. Monck
contended, that we ought to take example by France and America, and endeavour to reduce the present extravagant expenditure connected with our army. He objected to the extravagant amount of this estimate. Why should officers' widows receive pensions, while
1365
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
1366
Mr. Hume
thought it was monstrous that the country should be called on to vote pensions for upwards of a thousand widows, and that no specific information should be laid before the House of the circumstances which made it proper to grant those pensions. A detailed description of every new case for which a pension was granted, with an account of the number of pensions which ceased every year, ought annually to be submitted to Parliament.
Sir Henry Hardinge
had no objection to lay such information before Parliament, as to the classes of officers whose widows were receiving pensions; but there was no
1367
Lord Howick
vindicated the Opposition side of the House from the charge of encouraging extravagance. Only the year before last, the right hon. Gentleman and his colleagues opposed the reduction of the useless office of Lieut. General of the Ordnance.
Resolution agreed to.
The next Resolution was for a sum not exceeding 185,036
l
Mr. John Stewart
suggested, that as all pensions were only granted as a means of support to persons supposed to be otherwise destitute, that pensions ought in all cases to be withdrawn when the circumstances of the persons rendered them independent of that means of subsistence.
Mr. Hume
wished to know whether care was taken in the granting of the last-mentioned pensions, that the officers to whom they were granted were wounded, as he had known individuals without wounds in the receipt of such pensions.
Sir H. Hardinge
said, that an officer must, under the existing regulations, undergo the examination of five medical men, and he must prove before the Medical Board, that he had suffered a permanent injury, equal to the loss of a limb, before a pension could be granted for a wound. That examination also must take place five years after the wound had been received, and if it could not then be proved that the injury was permanent, no pension was granted.
Mr. Monck
inquired what was meant by "The Compassionate List" and "The Royal Bounty."
Sir H. Hardinge
explained, that the former was to provide for orphans, and
1368
Mr. Monck
further inquired if those widows were not entitled to pensions under the preceding estimate. To him it appeared that these widows was the very class of persons for whom the last estimate was meant to provide.
Sir H. Hardinge
replied, that the allowances were not, in fact, granted to the widows who might have no claim, or having a claim, might also have large families, and no means to provide for them, but were granted to the children of those who had fallen in battle. The total amount of pensions under this head did not exceed 40,000
l
l
l
Mr. Hume
said there were no means, if these items were not included in the regular estimates for the army, of checking the amount of them, which might grow up to be enormous.
Sir H. Hardinge
said, if the Compassionate Fund went to provide for the children of those who had died in the service, the Royal Bounty was limited to persons whose husbands or fathers had been killed in the service. Such an employment of funds was one, he was sure, which the Committee would never refuse to sanction by its vote.
Resolution agreed to.
The next Resolution was for the sum of 54,204
l
Mr. Maberly
wished to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether this estimate were made up in conformity with the Act of Parliament? Pensions sanctioned by the Treasury, or by an order of Council, were not legal until sanctioned by that House. There was no better mode of checking these pensions than by having them specifically stated in the army as they now were in the navy. He would recommend to the hon. and gallant Secretary that this should in future be done.
Sir H. Hardinge
admitted that these pensions were specifically stated in the Ordnance estimates; but said that that was not ordered by the Act of Parliament, but had been adopted in consequence of a
1369
Lord Sandon
suggested, that the particulars of every case in which superannuation was granted should be made out.
Sir H. Hardinge
agreed with his noble friend, that such an account would be very desirable.
Mr. Hume
expressed himself of the same opinion, and thought that the names of pensioners, and the length of their service should be added. He wished to know how it was that such a number of Lieutenant-governors of the Military School were placed on the pension list.
Sir H. Hardinge
explained, that the late Lieutenant-governor was upwards of seventy years of age, and at that time of life a man ceased to be very fit to manage young boys. And as it was customary to give the situation to officers of long standing and respectability, a few years additional service at the college brought their public lives to a close.
Mr. Hume
inquired if the present Lieutenant-governor of the Military College received pay from any other corps or office.
Sir H. Hardinge
replied, that the Lieutenant-governor was a Lieutenant-colonel of Cavalry, and received his regimental pay as well as his staff pay, consistently with the rule of the service.
Mr. Hume
said, that was a practice to which he must object, as in fact it kept out of sight a part of the expense of the establishment. When an officer was placed on the staff in India, his regimental pay ceased, and he thought the same rule ought to be followed at home.
Sir H. Hardinge
said, that it had always been customary for the officers in the English service to retain their regimental pay when placed on the staff, and he thought he could prove that this practice was at once the most economical, as well as the fairest. At the close of the war the staff officers returned to their regiments, and continued in active service without any additional expense to the country.
Colonel Baillie
was of opinion that the hon. Member for Aberdeen made a mistake as to the Indian army, the officers of which, when placed on the staff, continued to receive their regimental pay.
1370
Mr. Hume
said, that as he had been a Paymaster himself for some years he could venture to say that he was right.
Resolution agreed to.
The next Resolution was for 32,000
l
Mr. Hume
and Mr. Maberly both objected to the payment of these fees, which they considered disgraceful to the country.
Resolution agreed to.
On the motion that the Chairman should report these Resolutions to the House,
Mr. Gordon
rose to ask the hon. Secretary when he meant to bring up the Report, as he intended upon that occasion to propose a Resolution to the following effect:—" That it is the opinion of this House, that as long as the regulation is in force by which Officers on the Half-pay of the Army, Navy, Ordnance, and Marine, are prevented from receiving the whole of their half-pay, or any part thereof, whilst they are enjoying the emoluments of civil office, it is expedient and just that the same regulation should extend to officers on full-pay of the Army, Navy, Marine, and Ordnance, who enjoy the emoluments of civil office, or of any other naval and military allowances."
Sir H. Hardinge
said, that it would be most agreeable to him to have the report on these resolutions brought up to-morrow. He should certainly oppose this resolution; and if the gentlemen who had motions for to-morrow would give him precedence for but half an hour, he thought that he could dispose of it most effectually in that time.
The Chairman left the chair; the report to be received to-morrow,
BOMBAY JUDICATURE.]
The Order of the Day having been read for the House to resume the adjourned debate on the Bombay Judicature,
Mr. Hume
expressed his decided impression that the interference of the Government with the Supreme Court of Judicature in Bombay was uncalled for by any exigency. The facts of the case by no means bore out the allegation of the noble Lord (Ashley) that an excitation bordering on rebellion would have prevailed in that part of India, if the Judges had been allowed to act as they wished. It was plain that the conduct of the
1371
1372
Mr. O'Connell
said, he meant to confine himself to the legal part of the question, and he would first state that he conceived the production of the papers necessary for the vindication of Sir John Malcolm. In the accounts already published, two cases were mentioned, that of Bappo Gunnes and that of Moro Ragonath, concerning which disputes had arisen between the Judges and the Governor. Bappo Gunnes, as he understood the matter, being committed to gaol, applied for a copy of his committal, which was refused. He then applied to the Supreme Court for a
Habeas Corpus,
1373
Habeas Corpus
alias habeas,
1374
Habeas Corpus,
1375
ex parte
Mr. George Bankes
said, it surprised him that the hon. and learned Member for Clare should vote for the Motion, when he appeared already so fully informed on the subject. He trusted the House would allow him, from his official situation, to enter into some explanations, and he thought he should be able to show that Sir John Malcolm did not mean to insult the Judges, and that he interfered for the protection of the natives. The hon. Member for Clare said, there were two cases; but the hon. Member was mistaken in supposing that Bappo Gunnes was a British subject. The
Habeas Corpus
habeas
1376
1377
Habeas Corpus.
1378
1379
Habeas Corpus,
1380
1381
1382
Mr. W. W. Wynne
agreed, he said, with the hon. Member who had just spoken, that the House of Commons was not the proper place to try the dispute between the government of Bombay and the Supreme Court, but the Motion before the House had no such object. The House was not called on to declare which of these two parties were wrong, but to decide if it. should not have official cognizance of a letter, written by a great public functionary, which had already appeared in print. He was satisfied that both the public functionaries in India had acted from conscientious motives, and he thought Sir J. P. Grant might reasonably have arrived at the conclusion he had adopted, and have acted as he had done. [The right hon. Gentleman then quoted the passage of the Act, appointing the Judges of the Supreme Court, already quoted by Mr. O'Connell, to show that the judge might conscientiously have formed the opinions on which he had acted.] The same interpretation was put on the Act in 1827 by the Chief Justice of that day, who declared that "the Supreme Court had a jurisdiction over all native and other subjects." He did not
1383
1384
1385
Mr. Cutlar Fergusson
said, he hoped the House would do him the justice to believe, that no relations subsisting between him and the East-India Company could have the effect of influencing the vote he intended to give on that occasion. He had given the question then under discussion the fullest, and, he trusted, the most dispassionate consideration, and that led him to the conviction that the Court of Bombay had decided in error. He had had the advantage of passing seventeen years of his professional life in India, in the course of which a considerable quantity and variety of business came under his observation, and within the sphere of his practice; he might say, perhaps, that he had more professional business than any man in India; yet in the course of that he never had the slightest reason to imagine that any judge could think of saying that there was no native of India not subject to the jurisdiction of the British courts in India. He was quite sure that no lawyer would differ from him, when he said that no natives were subject to British courts except such as were distinctly specified to be so. If the inferior court were wrong —of which he had not the slightest doubt —the Supreme Court was not less in error. Had such doctrines as were now contended for by the Supreme Court been maintained since our first conquests in India, our hold of our Indian possessions would now be extremely insecure. A pledge has been held out to the inhabitants beyond the pale of the English courts, that they should be allowed to retain their Hindoo laws to which they were attached. Had they supposed that they would have been subjected to laws with which they were unacquainted, they could not have been induced to submit to British authority. The liability to British laws, on the part of Hindoos, was what no judge had ever thought of, and it was a doctrine which he expected would never receive the sanction of any man acquainted either with the law or with the state of India. It was, he conceived, indisputable that English laws had their local boundaries in India. On these grounds, then, he thought there ought to be a declaratory act, and, that it
1386
Habeas Corpus,
1387
Habeas Corpus
Habeas
1388
Mr. Robert Grant
explained, that he still was of opinion that the decision of the Privy Council was extra-judicial, because the native suitors were not heard. He wished for a declaratory act.
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, he could not allow the present discussion to close without making a few observations. When he considered the great responsibility which devolved upon public functionaries, he had no hesitation in saying, that, when guilty of error, if it were found that they acted at the same time with upright intentions, and were actuated by conscientious feelings, he had not the slightest hesitation in saying that they were entitled to the most indulgent consideration. But if, as in the case of the governor of Bombay, it was found that the parties had acted in a manner the most discreet, prudent, and proper, he thought they had a double claim to be supported by the Government; and that claim would, he thought, be recognized by the House. He wished to have it understood, that he desired, like his right hon. friend Mr. Wynne, with whom he concurred, to leave the legal question entirely out of view—they had nothing to do with the legal question. The hon. and learned Member for Clare, however, had discussed the legal question; a proceeding which had been rendered altogether unnecessary by the decision of the Privy Council—a tribunal much more competent to decide such a question than was that House. The authority of that decision, he believed, would not be lightly questioned, when it was recollected that two Chief Justices, Lord Tenterden and Sir N. Tindal were present, as also Lord Wynford, and his right hon. friend, whose habits, professional and official, so fully qualified him for assisting in such a decision. He had no doubt the House would feel that it was not necessary to place the independence of Indian judges upon a lower footing than that of English judges; this was not a case affecting their independence, but a question relating to the assumption of authority unwarrantable and dangerous. For the exercise of
1389
1390
1391
1392
Mr. C. Fergusson
explained, that he meant to cast no censure on Sir J. P. Grant.
Mr. Stewart
expressed his regret that Government, after having, at so short a period before, expressed its readiness to supply Parliament with all possible information concerning India, should refuse the first paper it had been asked to produce. The question had not been fairly met by his opponents; for all the arguments they had urged about the jurisdiction of the Court at Bombay, and the decision of the Privy Council, had nothing to do with the question. The Letter of Lord Ellenborough was obviously a public document, because it was an answer to representations sent from the Indies before the noble Lord was in office. He was in hopes that the documents he moved for would have tended to justify the Bombay Government. Thinking that the correspondence would at least elucidate that conduct, and being willing to put the professions of the Government, to which he had just alluded, to the test, he should certainly like to take the sense of the House on his Motion.
The House then divided—For the Motion 15: Against it 106: Majority against the Motion 91,
1393
List of the Minority.
Bentinck, Lord G.
Rice, T. S.
Ebrington, Lord
Thomson, C. P.
Grant, R.
Townshend, Lord C.
Gordon, R.
Warburton, H.
Hobhouse, J. C.
Wynn, Rt. Hon. C.W.
Jephson, C. D.
Wrottesley, Sir J.
Morpeth, Lord
Tellers.
O'Connell, D.
Hume, J.
Protheroe, E.
Stewart, J.
EAST RETFORD.]
On the Motion for bringing up the report of this Bill, Mr. Stewart objected to proceeding with it at so late an hour. Such a measure ought not, in the then state of the House, to be forced forward; and he moreover had an amendment to propose, which he should like to hear discussed.
Mr. Nicolson Calvert
hoped the hon. Member would allow the Bill to proceed, considering the length of time it had been in the House, and how often it had been discussed, he did not think this an unreasonable request.
Mr. Stewart
said, he must oppose the further progress of the Bill.
Mr. Secretary Peel
put it to the candid consideration of the hon. Member, whether such a course would be advisable, after the numberless discussions the Bill had undergone.
Sir John Sebright
was of opinion, that the Bill had been amply discussed, and ought not to be delayed.
Mr. Hume
thought it might as well be stopped then as at any subsequent stage, and, in his opinion, the sooner it was strangled the better: he hoped the hon. Member would persist in his opposition.
Mr. Tennyson
wished to state, that he continued as hostile to the Bill as ever, but he would not then join in opposing it. As the hon. Member, however, wished for delay, with a view to further discussing his clause, his wishes, he thought, ought to be the guide of the hon. Member who had brought in the Bill.
The Question was then put, and the report brought up. On this,
Mr. Stewart
rose to propose a clause similar to that which was proposed in the case of Penryn. When that was proposed hon. Members objected to it on account of its applying only to one borough, and expressed themselves willing to vote for some general measure; and yet when a noble Lord, a few nights before, proposed a general declaration applying to all boroughs, the
1394
1395
Mr. Nicolson Culvert
said, the hon. Member appeared as if he had passed the whole of his life in India, and were totally unacquainted with the nature and forms of our Constitution. With the professed object of preventing bribery and corruption generally, the hon. Member proposed a clause that was applicable only to one borough. He would not object to a declaration of that kind, if it were to be made by every Member; perhaps even if the number of the electors in the borough under consideration were less than 200 he might be disposed to adopt it, because the smallness of their number might warrant the presumption of bribery; but it was ridiculous to imagine that bribery could be extended over a body of electors amounting to more than 2,000. The assumption that the electors of the hundred of Basset law would be under the influence of the peers who lived there had no foundation but the hon. Member's own imagination. On the whole he considered the clause so preposterous, that he was persuaded, were the House as full as the hon. Member had wished it to be, that he would find very few supporters.
Mr. Hume
said, the hon. Member, in admitting that he saw no objection to a general clause of this description, had proved that the one proposed had in it nothing preposterous. The hon. Member could not call that absurd for one borough which he would not object to apply to all boroughs. He should like to see the clause, in the first instance, applied to one borough as an experiment. The hon. Member seemed to think that the influence of peers would not be exerted on the electors of the hundred, but the House was acquainted with too many instances of that interference to adopt the hon.
1396
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, if the same electors as before were to retain the franchise, he should be disposed to agree to the clause, but to them was now to be added 2,000 others, and it would be unfair towards these infant electors to stigmatize their birth by branding them with a suspicion of bribery. Moreover he thought it would be wrong to make any distinction between the Members of that House. They ought all to be placed on the same footing, though he did not mean to say that they ought all to make a declaration of that kind. Seeing no reason for selecting the two Members for the Borough of East Retford from among the 658 who composed that House, and seeing no public advantage likely to result from the introduction of the clause, he should certainly oppose the Motion.
The clause was negatived without a division. On the Motion that the Bill be read a third time that day week,
Mr. Hume
said, as the constitutional amendments to the Bill had been all lost, it would be better to reject it altogether, and he hoped that all those who had, on any occasion, objected to it, would oppose it on the third reading.
Mr. Robert Gordon
said, he had voted for transferring the franchise to Birmingham, but not being able to obtain that, he had been willing to accept the hundred of Bassetlaw, as preferable to uniting the franchise to the old corrupt borough. The borough of Cricklade, which he represented, had had the franchise so extended, and he was persuaded that it was as independent as any borough in the kingdom. With that experience he thought it would be unwise to oppose the Bill.
Mr. Stewart
said, he differed from the hon. Member, and he should, in the next stage, oppose the Bill.—Motion agreed to.
LAW REPORT.]
The Second Report of the Commissioners, sitting to inquire into the State of the Law, was brought up by Mr. Secretary Peel, and ordered to be printed.
CLARENCE MARKET.]
Lord Lowther
1397
1398
The noble Lord, in answer to a question from Mr. Hume, said he did not anticipate any expense to the Office of Woods and Forests from the removal of the market.
CORRIGENDA.
Page 117.—The observations on the present state of Manufactures ascribed to Lord Tullamore (page 118) were made by Mr. Ewart, one of the Members for Bletchinley:—in the same Speech, another error has crept in, where the word
yards
pounds.
Page 687.—In the Marquis of Blandford's Speech on Parliamentary Reform, a quotation is given incorrectly; it should be "Sum ex iis, qui mirer antiquos."
1399
As in adverting to any Proceedings in Parliament, the Reader must have frequent occasion to refer to
and to the Two Series of
the subjoined
which exhibit at one view the period comprised in each volume of those Works, will be found very useful.
A CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE
Showing the A. D. and the A. R. in which the Thirty-six Volumes of HANSARD'S PARLIAMENTARY HISTORY OF ENGLAND respectively commence and conclude.
VOL. I
6
WM.
I
1072
to
22
JAMES
I
1624
II
1
CHAS.
I
1625
to
18
CHAS
I
1642
III
18
—
I
1642
to
12
—
II
1660
IV
12
—
II
1660
to
4
JAMES
II
1688
V
4
JAS.
II
1688
to
13
WM.
III
1702
VI
1
ANNE
1702
to
13
ANNE
1714
VII
1
GEO.
I
1714
to
8
GEO.
I
1722
VIII
9
—
—
1722
to
6
GEO.
II
1733
IX
6
GEO.
II
1733
to
10
—
—
1737
X
10
—
—
1737
to
12
—
—
1739
XI
13
—
—
1739
to
14
—
—
1741
XII
14
—
—
1741
to
16
—
—
1743
XIII
16
—
—
1743
to
20
—
—
1747
XIV
20
—
—
1747
to
26
—
—
1753
XV
26
—
—
1753
to
4
GEO.
III
1764
XVI
5
GEO.
III
1765
to
11
—
—
1771
XVII
11
—
—
1771
to
14
—
—
1774
XVIII
15
—
—
1774
to
17
—
—
1777
XIX
17
—
—
1777
to
19
—
—
1778
XX
19
—
—
1778
to
20
—
—
1780
XXI
20
—
—
1780
to
21
—
—
1781
XXII
21
—
—
1781
to
22
—
—
1782
XXIII
22
—
—
1782
to
24
—
—
1783
XXIV
24
—
—
1783
to
25
—
—
1785
XXV
25
—
—
1785
to
26
—
—
1786
XXVI
26
—
—
1786
to
28
—
—
1788
XXVII
28
—
—
1788
to
29
—
—
1789
XXVIII
29
—
—
1789
to
31
—
—
1791
XXIX
31
—
—
1791
to
33
—
—
1792
XXX
33
—
—
1792
to
34
—
—
1794
XXXI
34
—
—
1794
to
35
—
—
1795
XXXII
35
—
—
1795
to
37
—
—
1797
XXXIII
37
—
—
1797
to
39
—
—
1798
XXXIV
39
—
—
1798
to
40
—
—
1800
XXXV
40
—
—
1800
to
41
—
—
1801
XXXVI
42
—
—
1801
to
43
—
—
1803
1400
A CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE
Showing the A. D. and the A. R. in which the Volumes of the First and Second Series of HANSARD'S PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES respectively commence and conclude.
First Series.
VOL. I—II
44
GEO.
III
1803/4
III—V
45
—
—
1805
VI—VII
46
—
—
1806
VIII—IX
47
—
—
1806/7
X—XI
48
—
—
1808
XII—XIV
49
—
—
1809
XV—XVII
50
—
—
1810
XVIII—XX
51
—
—
1810/11
XXI—XXIII
52
—
—
1812
XXIV—XXVI
53
—
—
1812/13
XXVII—XXVIII
54
—
—
1813/14
XXIX—XXXI
55
—
—
1814/15
XXXII—XXXIV
56
—
—
1816
XXXV—XXXVI
57
—
—
1817
XXXVII—XXXVIII
58
—
—
1818
XXXIX—XL
59
—
—
1819
XLI
60
—
—
1819/20
new Series.
VOL. I—III
1
GEO.
IV
1820
IV— V
2
—
—
1821
VI—VIII
3
—
—
1822
VIII—IX
4
—
—
1823
X—XI
5
—
—
1824
XII—XIII
6
—
—
1825
XIV—XVI
7
—
—
1826
XVII
8
—
—
1827
XVIII—XIX
9
—
—
1828
XX—XXI
10
—
—
1829
INDEX
TO VOL. XXII.
NEW SERIES.
INDEX TO DEBATES IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS.
A
Address on the King's Speech, 4
Austria, Treaty with, 480
B
Bank Notes, 1342
C
Currency, 581
Corn, Foreign, Returns of, 1002, 1254
E
East India Trade and Company, 248, 1245
G
Greece, Affairs of, 179, 395, 584, 1062
L
Law, Ecclesiastical, 1307
N
Nation, State of the, 795, 928
—Distress of the, 1059, 1247
P
Poor, and Poor-Rate Returns, 264, 1002
Portugal, 591
R
Russia, Conduct of, 1060
S
Salaries and Pensions, 1004
T
Terceira, 925
Timber, British, Returns of, 1002, 1253
INDEX TO DEBATES IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS.
A
Address on the King's Speech,
59
—,Report on, 137
Army Estimates, 535, 800
Admiralty Court of Ireland, 795
Absentees, 1065
Assessed Taxes, 1316
B
Banking, System of, 528
Beer, number of Barrels of, Exported, 210
Beer and Malt Duties, 213, 1304
Bills, Private, 137
Birmingham, 858
Brougham, Mr., Misrepresentation of, 1068
C
Chancery, Court of, 270, 363
—Contempt of the, 369
Charitable Establishments (Ireland), 573
Clarence Market, 1396
Clergy, Churches and Chapels, 57
Courts, Ecclesiastical, 58
Council, Order in, for Slave Laws, 213
Cork, Trials in, 1246
Colonies, Administration of Justice in, 856, 1264, 1370
Crown Lands, Mr. Nash, 1154
Currency, 381, 1147
D
Darling General. 1314
Debts, Small, 267
Dramatic Writings, 918'
Dublin Jurors, 1009
E
East India Company's Charter—Lord Ellenborough's Letter, 124, 271, 334, 1256
East Retford, 334, 1319, 1393
Ex Officio
Exports, Real and Official Value of, 305
F
Fees in Criminal Courts, 334, 570
—on Private Bills, 1343
G
Game Laws, 845
Georgia, Quarantine in, 799
Giles's St., Vestry Bill, 1146
Greece, 544, 1350
I
Illusory Appointments, 363, 429, 918
Ireland, Case of Francis M' Brian, 1258
—Church of, 1265
K
Katharine Docks, 1052
L
Land Revenues, 1005
Leeds, 858
—Railway, 1256
Lunacy, Commissions of, 1148
M
Malt, Duties on, 134
Malt and Spirit Duties, 846
Manchester, Birmingham, and Leeds, 858
Mexico, Cuba, and Spain, 215
Military Punishment, 1264
Museum, British, 1352
N
Navy Estimates, 1122
Newark, 1077
New South Wales, 1314
O
Officers, Military, 569
P
Peace, Clerks of the, 573
Portugal, 1292
Privileges, 1011
Prints, Duty on, 1246, 1263
Property, Real, Liability of, 368
R
Reduction in Expenditure, 436, 480, 743
Reform Law, 650, 1264
—Parliamentary, 678
S
Salaries, Reduction of, 436
Slave Trade, 568
Smugglers Families, Relief of, 332, 392
Spain and Mexico, 215
Speaker, Deputy, of the House of Lords, 1075
Speech from the Throne, 224
Spirit Duties, 846
Stamps on Irish Newspapers, 332
Standard Silver, 270
Strangers, Admission of to the Commons' Gallery, 134
Subletting Act (Ireland) 536, 1341
Supply, 325, 389, 436, 480, 580, 743, 774, 800, 1041, 1122, 1317
T
Towns unrepresented, 136
Truck System, 1010
Tythes, Composition for, 244
U
United States, 133
W
Water to the Metropolis, 1011
Ways and Means, 743, 799, 1144
Weavers. Distress of, 1005
West Indies and the United States, 133
West India Duties, 848
—Trade, 1066
Wexford Election, 1146
Wool Trade, 1063
INDEX OF NAMES—HOUSE OF LORDS.
A
Aberdeen, Earl of, 42, 44, 411, 428, 1061, 1062
B
Bath and Wells, Bishop of, 1003
Bexley, Lord, 923
Buccleugh, Duke of, 4
Bute, Marquis of, 998
C
Carnarvon, Earl of, 26
Cawdor, Lord, 924
Chancellor, Lord, 927, 1061
Clanricarde, Marquis of, 41, 925
D
Darnley, Earl of, 52,
999,
Durham, Lord, 255, 256, 258
Dynevor, Lord, 924
E
Eldon, Earl of, 925, 928, 968, 971, 979
Ellenborough, Lord, 248, 255, 258, 262
G
Goderich, Visc, 18, 419, 479, 944, 945, 948, 977, 980, 984
H
Holland, Lord, 42, 45, 179, 261,
395,
K
King, Lord, 47,
995,999,
L
Lansdown, Marquis of,
53,
Lauderdale, Ear of, 247
Londonderry, Marquis of, 392, 1060, 1061
M
Melbourne, Viscount, 418
Melville, Viscount, 258,
998
Montrose, Duke of, 180
R
Radnor, Earl of, 981, 985
Richmond, Duke of, 25, 265, 957, 980, 1002
Rosebery, Earl of, 963, 971, 972
S
Salisbury, Marquis of, 981, 1002
Saltoun, Lord, 7
Stanhope, Earl, 10, 47, 53, 478, 479, 4S0, 928, 938, 945, 1000, 1002, 1004
T
Teynham, Lord, 264, 265, 1000, 1002
W
Wellington, Duke of, 34, 53, 257, 258, 264, 394, 419, 478, 479, 480, 926, 927, 938, 948, 973, 977,
990,
Wharncliffe, Lord, 999
Winchilsea, Earl of, 46. 1059
INDEX OF NAMES—HOUSE OF COMMONS.
A
Althorp, Lord, 112, 377, 391, 511, 542, 724, 759, 788, 794, 825, 1228, 1257, 1319, 1330, 1340, 1344, 1350, 1351
Arbuthnot,—, 1005, 1162
Ashley, Lord, 130, 1298
Astell, William, 297
Attorney-General, 672, 922, 1032, 1199
Attwood, Mat., 241, 322, 381, 389, 534
B
Baillie, Colonel, 1369
Bankes,—292, 299, 1352, 1353, 1354
Bankes, George, 127, 128, 129, 132, 133, 283, 292, 644
Barclay, C, 1306
Baring, Sir T., 572
Baring, A., 234, 763, 1033, 1240
Baring, Francis, 332
Batley, Charles H., 336
Beaumont, T. W., 1349
Beckett, Sir J., 838
Benett, John, 529, 649, 699
Benson, Ralph, 649
Bernall, Ralph, 851, 918, 1239, 1243
Blake, Sir F., 353
Blandford, Marquis of, 170, 176, 325, 326, 391, 527, 678, 805
Bright, Henry, 302, 848, 850, 896, 1349
Brownlow, Charles, 531, 841, 848
Brougham, Henry, 119, 127, 130, 132, 214, 663, 721, 724, 856, 907, 1025, 1068, 1075, 1264, 1287
Brydges, Sir J., 73
Burdett, Sir F., 172, 513, 536, 542, 704, 1094, 1217, 1264, 1338
Burrell, Sir C, 1037, 1063, 1065, 1066, 1346
Burrell, Mr., 1066
Buxton, Fowell, 568
C
Calcraft, John, 835, 836, 839, 1164
Callaghan, Gerard, 436, 573, 579
Calvert, Nicholson, 334, 358, 435, 1055, 1393, 1395
Calvert, C, 569, 1062
Chancellor of the Exchequer, 88, 165, 231, 270, 325, 326, 353, 384, 390, 391, 436, 480, 499, 527, 533, 535, 580, 743, 754, 785, 837, 846, 853, 1008, 1009, 1066, 1144, 1145, 1160, 1239, 1257, 1263, 1283, 1304, 1315, 1344
Chandos, Marquis of, 844, 845, 848
Chaplin,—, 1008
Clerk, Sir G., 333, 1122, 1143, 1144
Clinton, F., 1090
Cockburn, Sir G., 1047, 1319, 1350
Colborne, Ridley, 846
Cole, Sir C, 1324
Cooper, Bransby, 1326
Courtenay, Right Hon. T. P., 321
Croker, Right Hon. J. W., 459, 1040, 1316
D
Dalrymple, Adol. J. 1018
Daly, James, 1262
Darlington, Earl of,
59,
Davenport, Edward, 178, 727, 1055, 1238, 1241, 1242, 1244
Davies, Hart, 231, 1064, 1066, 1154, 1166
Davies, Col. 724, 742, 780, 781, 787, 800, 821, 822, 833, 848, 1009, 1057, 1240
Dawson, Alexander, 538, 922
Dawson, George, 450, 462, 837
Dawkins, Col. 1058
Denison, William, 213. 825
Dickenson, William, 528, 1346
Doherty, John, 540, 920, 1244
Douglas, Keith, 849, 857
Duncombe, John, 115, 328, 527, 1310
Duncombe, W. 466, 790
E
Euston, Lord, 1057
F
Fazakerley, John, 430
Fergusson, Cutlar, 668, 672, 774, 794, 1075, 1321, 1385, 1392
Fergusson, Sir Ronald, 786
Fitzgerald, Maurice, 118, 574
Freemantle, Sir T. 1146
Freemantle,—, 573
Fyler, Thomas B., 233, 324
G
Gascoyne Gen. 296, 305, 847, 886, 887
Gilbert, D. 1355
Gooch, Sir T. 1309
Gordon,— 569, 1144
Gordon, Robert, 266, 390, 535, 842, 847, 1152, 1370, 1396
Gower, lord F. L. 113, 536, 841, 1005, 1244, 1258, 1261, 1276
Graham, Sir J. 209, 438, 459, 477, 1140
Graham, Col. 1303
Grant, Sir A.
326
Grant, Charles, 146, 350, 854
Grant, Robert, 649, 796, 1388
Greene, Thomas, 244, 247, 359, 520
H
Hardinge, Sir H., 535,
536,
Harvey, D. W., 268, 270, 431, 729, 733, 1005, 1018, 1039, 1040, 1073, 1099, 1344, 1345
Heron, Sir R., 807, 1231
Henries, Right Hon. J. C, 517, 648
Hill, Right Hon. Sir G., 840
Hill, Sir R., 1008
Hobhouse, J. Cam, 701, 784, 1033, 1106, 1146, 1336
Horton, Right Hon. J. W., 761
Howick, Viscount, 113, 336, 362, 433, 521, 717, 1105
Hume, Joseph, 57,
58,
Huskisson, Right Hon. W., 214, 294, 299, 304, 325, 341, 358, 359, 856, 889, 1147, 1308, 1331
I
Inglis, Sir R., 133, 798, 1261, 1274
Irving, John, 1064
J
Jephson, C. D. O., 579, 1057, 1243, 1353, 1354
K
Kerrison, Sir E., 1345
King,—1342
Knatchbull, Sir E., 69, 760, 1011, 1063, 1064, 1243
L
Labouchere, Henry, 789, 1134
Lamb, Hon. George, 224, 843, 1143, 1340
Lambert, J. S. 1262
Lennard, Thomas B., 433
Lennox, Lord G., 332
Lethbridge, Sir T., 1309, 1347
Liddell, Hon. H. T., 1310. 1324
Littleton, Edward John, 267, 293, 649, 727, 733, 734, 1012, 1064, 1315 Lowther, Lord, 1065, 1088, 1396
Lumley, J. S., 327, 359, 477
Lushington, Dr., 153, 881
M
Maberley,—, 91, 154, 168, 243, 506, 527, 536, 724, 770, 788, 807, 832, 837, 839, 844, 1048, 1134, 1163, 1355
Macdonald, Sir J., 278, 283
Macintosh, Sir J., 132, 556
Mandeville, Lord, 229
Martin, Sir T. B., 429, 1041, 1048
Martin, John, 1337
Marshall,—336, 532, 858, 1256
Mildmay, P. St. John, 115
Monck, John B., 826, 1166, 1341, 1359, 1364
Moore, G., 1279
Morpeth, Lord, 463, 879
Murray, Sir G., 790. 806, 833, 857, 884, 1057, 1264, 1315, 1316, 1325
N
Newport, Sir J., 795, 847, 1265
North, J. H. 1231, 1262
Normanby, Lord, 231, 340
Nugent, Lord, 701, 847, 858, 1337
O
O'Connell, Daniel, 93, 172, 212, 213, 215, 233, 266, 269, 328, 332, 365, 381, 463, 538, 579, 644, 673, 718, 799, 840, 841, 845, 921, 923, 1009, 1040, 1068, 1076, 1153, 1228, 1258, 1259, 1332, 1341, 1372
O'Grady, Colonel, 1244
O'Hara, James, 1263
Osborne, Lord F., 134, 209
P
Pallmer, C.N., 792, 1011
Palmer, Robert, 118
Palmer, F., 434
Palmerston, Lord, 146, 266, 558, 566, 567, 783, 1292.
Parnell, Sir H., 542, 801, 835, 1046
Peel, Robert, 58, 101, 131, 134, 141, 177, 212, 220, 228, 267, 271, 278, 282, 297, 304, 334, 353, 359, 391, 430, 468, 476, 522, 527, 529, 564, 567, 569, 570, 578, 650, 676, 714, 737, 742, 799, 817, 821, 822, 830, 842, 1038, 1047, 1065, 1076, 1115, 1136, 1142, 1224, 1234, 1237, 1241, 1260, 1261, 1264, 1283, 1287, 1328, 1335, 1339, 13S3, 1396
Peel, W., 213
Pendarvis, Ed. W. W., 698
Phillimore, Dr., 334, 1154, 1330
Planta, Joseph, 134
Portman, Edw. Berkeley, 530. 573, 1076, 1348
Powlett, Lord W., 895
Protheroe, Edward, 58, 76, 178, 644, 1166, 1260
R
Rice, Spring, 116, 124, 128, 133, 135, 462, 573, 841, 842, 1005, 1257, 1260, 1261, 1282
Ridley, Sir M. W., 1036, 1065, 1165, 1317, 1348
Robinson, George R., 133, 230
Rumbold, Charles E., 1165
Russell, Lord J., 136, 148, 536. 544, 714, 858, 859, 1146, 1330, 1341
S
Sadler, Michael T., 155, 232, 1040, 1101, 1232, 1256, 1285, 1354
Sandon, Lord, 887
Sebright, Sir J.
88,
Sibthorp, Colonel, 429, 430, 1008, 1065, 1348
Slaney, Robert A., 1008, 1076, 1305
Smith, William, 57, 113, 177, 214, 572, 714, 847, 854, 1321
Solicitor-General, 363, 367, 368, 369, 376, 429, 919, 921, 923, 1005, 1037, 1151, 1231, 1234
Speaker, The, 1012, 1313, 1343, 1345
Stanley, Hon. Edw. G. S., 429, 544, 724, 734, 787, 1337
Stewart, William, 290, 293, 1257, 1292, 1314, 1392, 1393, 1396
Stewart, Sir John, 233
Stewart, J., 296
Sykes, Daniel, 569, 1256, 1314
T
Taylor, Michael Angelo, 128, 270, 467, 1147, 1148, 1154
Tennyson, Charles, 527, 920, 921, 1055, 1237, 1239, 1320, 1393
Thompson, Ald., 86, 1062, 1063, 1142
Thomson, Charles P., 303, 323, 324, 434, 1077, 1101, 1126, 1354
Trant, W. H., 128, 167, 242, 247, 325, 841, 922, 1283, 1353
Tullamore, Lord, 117
Twiss, Horace, 703, 723, 875
V
Valletort, Lord, 880, 884
Vivian, Sir R., 1239, 1242, 1244
Vyvyan, Sir R., 788, 790
W
Waithman, Robert, 167, 229, 305, 390, 391, 769, 1040, 1309, 1321
Wallace, Thomas, 537, 1342
Warburton, Henry, 1058, 1163, 1337
Ward, William, 66, 798, 1063, 1146, 1163, 1257
Warrendcr, Sir G., 462, 1066, 1133
Western, Charles, 74, 178, 434, 436, 514, 786, 1055, 1147, 1337
Wetherell, Sir C, 377, 531, 742, 922, 1032, 1153, 1167, 1234, 1262, 1285
Whitmore, William, 113, 276, 532
Wilbraham, George, 870
Wilson, Sir R., 214, 215, 568, 649, 700, 787, 1143
Wilson, R. F., 1256
Wilson, Colonel, 1310, 1314
Wodehouse, Edmund, 215, 270, 429, 526, 528, 529
Wood, Charles, 507
Wood, John, 157, 1005
Wood, Colonel, 118
Wood, Alderman, 210
Wortley, Stuart, 858
Wrottesley, Sir J., 466, 645, 785, 804, 1143, 1361, 1382
Wynn, Hon. C. W. W., 887, 1011, 1037, 1040, 1261
Y
Yorke, Sir Joseph, 150, 154
END OF VOL, XXII