323rbatr an Pram/finalinParrianirnt.
1. PUBLIC EXPENDITURE ; NAVY ESTIMATES. When the question was put, on Monday, that the House should resolve itself into a Com- mittee of Supply, Mr. HUME rose to oppose the motion. He was anxious to ascertain from Ministers whether they intended to propose any reduction of tax- ation. Lord Althorp had carefully abstained from giving any informa- tion on this point. But every member who had any thing like a popular constituency was pledged to economy and a reduction of tax- ation; and he thought that the proper time to redeem that pledge was before they voted the Supplies for the year. It was clear that_there would be no reduction of taxation without a reduction of expenditure ; for although the deficiency of the former year's revenue was in part made up by the surplus of 600,0001. which had accrued up to 5th January 1833, still there remained a deficiency of nearly half a million on the two years. He maintained that the number of 27,000 men for the Naval service of the year was unnecessary. The Finance Com- mittee had recommended extensive reduction both in the Army and the Navy in times of peace. Now, that there was no danger of external war, was admitted by Ministers. The establishments ought, there- fore, to be reduced. He was prepared to show, that notwithstanding the great amount of taxes which had been taken off since 1817, still as many ounces of gold and wheat were actually paid now as in 1814, 1815, and 1816, when the taxes amounted to 69,000,0001. a year. He concurred in the reestablishment of the money standard ; but he had always said that the expenditure of the country ought to be brought down to the same level.
He had made a statement in 1826, which showed that the average of wheat paid in taxes during the three years commencing in 1813 and ending in 1815, was 15,853,000 quarters, and that the average of the three years from 1823 to 1825 was 17,434,000 quarters. Yet between those two periods there had been taxes taken off to the amount of 17,000,000/. in money. So that it appeared there had been an actual increase in the taxation of 101. per cent., though the nominal taxes in the latter period were only 52,000,000/., while they amounted to 69,000,000/. during the former period. Then, as to gold—it had risen in value; so that the same value of it was paid in taxes during the years 1823, 1824, and 1825, as had been paid during the years 1814, 1815, and 1816.
The capability of the people to pay ought also to be taken into ac- count. Now crime sprang from poverty, and the increase of poverty was shown by the great increase of the number of crimes during the last ten or twelve years. He complained of the increase in the number of Marines, which was now to be 9,000, although for six years, from 1817 to 1823, they had been on an average only 4,000. With regard to the Army, he consi- dered that there could be no possible reason for keeping up more than 55,000 men, but Ministers asked for 89,000.
The whole amount of men composing the.three descriptions of our forces ex- ceeded 120,000. Adding to this number the Military Staff, the Volunteers, and the Yeomanry, making altogether an additional armed force of nearly 60,000 men, there would altogether be found to be the enormous body of 180,000 armed men. There could be no possible necessity or excuse for main- taining such a monstrous force as this.
He concluded, by moving the two following resolutions- 1. "That it is expedient, before voting the Estimates for the Naval and Military Es- tablishments for the public service of the year, that this House should he informed of the state of the Finances of the country, and whether any and what relief is to be afforded to the people from the burden of taxation, in order that the establishments may be suited thereto." 2. " That it is imperative on this lipase to require a large reduction of taxation, as the best means of affording relief to the country."
Lord ALTuour contended, that the plan which Ministers had adopted with regard to bringing forward the Estimates, was in accordance with the views of the Finance Committee ; which were to cut down the ex- penditure as low as was prudent and practicable, and then to vote the money. He reminded Mr. Hume, that although there bad certainly been a deficiency of revenue, there had also been a great reduction of taxation ; and he thought that he took a too gloomy view of the finan- cial state of the country altogether. He concluded by saying, that the proper principle to be adopted was, to vote what was requisite for the service of the year, without regard to the balance-sheet of last year.
Mr. ROBINSON contended, that full information on the general state of the finances ought to be given before voting the Supplies.
Mr. HERRIES would not vote for Mr. Hume's resolutions, although be agreed with many of his observations, which had not been answered by Lord Althorp. He thought that no benefit had been derived from the change in the financial year, and considered that, notwithstanding the quarter was not ended, Lord Althorp might very well have Made the general statement which was called for. One quarter made very little difference in such a vast revenue as ours.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM said, that Mr. Herries's statement before the Committee of Finance was inconsistent with what he had now told the House. He had told the Finance Committee that the revtnue of the state must be made to meet the exigencies of the state.
Mr. HERRIES here said, that he had never meant to exonerate the Chancellor of the Exchequer from making a financial stattment previ- ously to voting the Estimates. He only asked for an exposé of the Ways and Means as regarded these Estimates alone.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM wished to know what would be the advantage of such a statement, when it was laid down as a principle that the re- venue should always be adopted to the expel] hture ? The Navy Esti- mates had been laid upon the table two days after the meeting of Par- liament ; and out of about forty returns moved for by Mr. Hume, only two had been refused.
Mr. D. W. HARVEY said, it was evident that no exposition of the financial state of the country would be wrung from Ministers ; there- fore the House must wait patiently. When it was made, hoWever, he anticipated that it would be such as to remove all gloomy inipresssions that it would prove to be an agreeable surprise.
Mr. HUME withdrew, his motion, as there geemed to be a difference of opinion as to the propriety of bringinmb it forward at this time.
The House then resolved itself into aCommittee of Supply.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM rose to move the Navy Estimates. He was aware that an attention to economy had been strongly urged upon the members of the House by their constituents ; and he could safely assert, that Government had done, and were determined to do, their utmost to reduce the expenditure of the country. With regard to the reduc- tion of expenditure generally, he would refer to the statement of the Finance Committee ; who had pointed out what part of the expendi- ture was, and what was not, susceptible of reduction. The average annual expenditure for the five years preceding 1827, was 55,744,8631.; of which the interest and charges of the Debt, the Civil List, Pensions, and Deadweight, amounted to 35,952,8301.; leaving only about 20,000,000/. on which any reduction could be made. During the last five years, this sum of twenty millions had been gradually reduced to sixteen millions ; of the four millions thus reduced, three millions had been saved out of the Naval and Military expenditure of the country; and further, of those three millions, one million had been saved by the present Government. The reduction in the Navy Estimates of the present year, as compared with those of the preceding year, would be 220,5001.; which was principally effected in the wages and victuals to seamen, timber and materials, civil establishments, and wages to ar- tificers. The reduction in these items, as compared with 1831, was no less than 1,212,417/. The debt of the Navy arose from the circum- stance, that though the money for the wages of the seamen was voted annually, yet they were only paid as their ships arrived from foreign stations, and from the practice of drawing bills for them at long dates from abroad. This debt in 1830, was 1,314,0601.; in 1831, 1,317,7241.; but in 1832, was reduced to 977,179/. ; and Sir James trusted that he should be able to reduce it still further before the end of the year. He then proceeded to reply to the assertion of Captain Yorke, made on the 15th February last, that "he had visited the dockyards at Ports- mouth, and found them swept quite clean, so much so that if a first- rate man of war had come in to refit, he doubted whether she would have a topmast, or three spare yards." Now, Sir James said, that he had on the very day the charge was made, sent down for a return of the description of stores referred to by Captain Yorke, then actually in the dockyards. From the return made to him it appeared that the stock was very abundant ; and, among other articles there were 70 topmasts, and 51 topsailyards fit for ships of the line. A similar charge made by the Duke of Wellington, respecting the stock of stores, was equally unfounded : in building-timber, hemp, cordage, anchors, and chain cables, there was a considerably larger stock on hand in 1832 than he found in 1830, when the Duke quitted office; in canvass alone was there any decrease of stock, while there was nearly two years' con- sumption in store of that article also. The amount expended in stores during the three years ending 1829, was less than that expended during the three years ending in 1833, by 147,790/. ; and the amount of victual- ling stores and provisions purchased in 1831 and 1832 exceeded the amount consumed by 38,537/. He explained the loss which the public suffered by overpurchasing stores, especially salt provisions : in 1806, 10,357 tierces of salt meat had been sold by auction for 22,662/., and in a subsequent period of the same year 18,000 tierces had been pur- chased for 68,2501., thus making a loss to the public of 45,588/. The Half-pay had been reduced during the last two years by the sum of
41,6431. or about 20,000/. per annum. The promotions had been con- siderably reduced in number. He could not, he regretted to say, pro- pose any reduction in the number of sailors, which ought to be the same this year as the last, namely 18,000 Seamen and 9,000 Marines. The number of our ships in 1778 was 440, being 92 more than at the present time ; in 1793, we had 488, being 140 more than now. But though the number had been lessened, the size of the vessels was increased, and the number of men necessary to be employed was consequently greater. He would just mention what was the present naval force of France,
Russia, and America. France had 31 sail of the line and 37 frigates ; Russia' 36 sail of the line and 23 frigates ; America 8 sail of the line and 10 frigates. He quoted the report of the American Secretary of
the Navy, dated 3d December last, to prove that the Americans were well aware of the necessity of being prepared with naval stores, and of the danger of too great reduction in their naval expenditure. He justi- fied the keeping up of a large naval force, on the ground of the necessity of protecting our commerce and maintaining our present superiority in all parts of the world; and concluded by moving-
" That it is the opinion of this Committee that 27,000 men, including Marines, should be voted for the service of the Navy for thirteen lunar months, ending 31st March 1834."
Captain YORKE said, that he had made his statement respecting the deficiency of stores from ocular inspection. They must have been re- . moved out of sight. The Spartiate came in M refit, and was. obliged to take out it foremast from the Nelson for that purpose. He con- demned the appointment of Captain Symonds to an office which uo naval person had "ever filled before. He considered that Sir II: Neale ought not to have been refused the command at Portsmouth because Inc
had been returned to Parliament. • . .
Sir E. CODRINGTON believed the dockyards to be in a better state, as regards efficiency, than at any former period. Ile objected to the mode in which pensions were granted.
In looking over the list of pensions and allowances, he found it stated that the honourable G. A. C. Stapylton received 1,000/. a year for fifty-nine years of service; and Mr. John Jackson, Master-Attendant at Plymouth, 4431. for thirty-two years of service. He knew that both these gentlemen were in Service fifty-five years ago ; and he did not understand the reason why, in the one case, the number of the years of service was increased, and in the other decreased. He also saw the name of Mr. Marshall W. Clifton, to which a pension of 660/. a year was attached for twenty-seven years of good service. Ile really did not believe that the gentleman was old enough to have served that term ; and yet the 6601. a year lrbich he received was pretty nearly 1001. a year more than he (Sir E. Coarington) was entitled to, who had been in the service of his Country since 1785.Mr. Croker was entitled at the end of five years' service' to retire with a pension of 1,500/. ayear. Now on what ground could the grant of such a large pension as that be justified ; He did not think that the circumstance of that gentleman havine-b been in the receipt of a great income when in office, was any reason for givino.him a large annual allowance on his retirement. But this was not all : he fowl that Miss Rosamond Croker also received but of-the public purse 300/. ayear. Now, he would state a case to the House to which lie begged to call their serious attention. It was the case of a lady, the sister of three distinguishedofficers, all of whom died while engaged in the actual service of their country. She was left with the children of one of her brothers to pro- vide for, and she was also obliged to contribute to the support of an aged father ; yet not one farthing did the Government, even after repeated applications, grant to that lady, in consideration of the services of her gallant relations, until his present Majesty was appointed Lord High Admiral, when by his kindness she was put in possession of 50/. a year. Now he begged to put the case of this young lady in contrast with that of Miss Rosamond broker. ( Cheers.).
Sir Robert Seppings, he said, had been fifty years in the service, yet he was put down as having served only thirty-nine years, that his pen- sion might be only 760/. He mentioned the case of Mr. Wickham as one of great hardship. He had received five wounds at the battle of Navarino, and had been round the world with Captain Parry, and yet was still suffered to remain one of that ill-used body the Captains' Clerks. He thought that the power assumed by the Admiralty, of dismissing officers against whom no charge had been brought before. a court-martial, and retaining others in the teeth of a verdict against them, ought to be better regulated.
In 1819, Mr. George Booth, who had been a purser for twenty-seven years, sent into the Admiralty a certificate of his service, signed by Lord Exmouth. On attending at the Admiralty, he was, in consequence of some incorrectness in the signature, charged by Mr. Croker with forgery •2 and happening to he stout and somewhat of an irritable disposition, he obliget1 Mr. Croker to seek shelter by flight, notwithstanding that Sir George Cockburn came to his aid. (Laugh- ter.) Well, this gentleman, because he would not quietly submit to he called a forger, was erased from the Navy List ; and was only restored in consequence of a remonstrance made by a member of that House, who threatened to bring the case before Parliament. The other instance he would allude to Was of a very different description. It was the case of a purser, who was convicted of robbery by a court-martial, and who was notwithstanding, retained on the list for two years after his conviction.
Sir Edward then proceeded to defend himself against an old charge respecting the transmission of some thousands of Greek slaves through the fleet at Navarino, which Sir li.ober Peel had stated to have been permitted contrary to the orders of Government, received by Sir Ed- ward within forty-eight hours of that event. Now, the despatch al- luded to by Sir Robert was dated twenty-eight days after he 'had him- self given information respecting these slaves, and did not contain a syllable on the subject, or respecting the events which led to the battle of Navarino.
Mr. GOULBURN defended Mr. Croker against the aspersions of Sir E. Codringten. Mr. Croker had been in office, not five only, but twenty-three years, nine of which were during a tremendous war. He richly merited his pension.
Sir E. CODRINGTON said, that by the official list Mr. Croker's term of service was stated at five years; but, "God knows, every officer in the service is aware that he was many, very many years in office." (Laughter.)
Sir ROBERT PEEL complained of Sir E. Codrington's unexpected attack upon him, on such authority as that of Galignani's Messenger. He really could not recollect distinctly what he bad said so long ago. In common courtesy, he ought to have received notice of the charge which was to be brought against him. He would refer to the Mirror of Parliament, and to his private papers, and would be prepared,to meet Sir Edward on some future occasion.
Sir E. CODRINGTON said, he would take care to repeat the question on the next convenient opportunity.
Mr. HUME could not, for the soul of him, see on what ground Mi- nisters could justify themselves in keeping up such an enormoas amount
of Naval force. America possessed a commerce very nearly equal to ours, and yet six vessels of war efficiently protected her Commerce all over the world; while we kept up 118 fully equipped sail of the line, exclusive of transports. He proposed, as an amendment, that the pre- sent vote be reduced from 27,000 Seamen to 20,000,—a force at least equal to the wants of the country. Mr. G. Youmo said, that if no other person brought the subject of impressment forward, he would do so himself, with a view to put a stop to it. The Committee divided : for Mr. Hume's amendment,.44; against it, 347; Ministerial majority, 303.
Mr. HUME then proposed to reduce the vote before the Committee (for 955,2200 by the sum of 6,910/. This amendment was solely aimed at Marine sinecures—the offices of General, Major. General, and four Colonels of Marines, which were undeniable sinecures.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM denied that these were sinecures. These Ma- rine appointments were filled by Naval men, as best acquainted with
the discipline necessary to be kept up in board men of war. •
Mr. SANDFORD, Mr. N. CALVERT, Mr. PETRE, Lord EBRINCToN, Mr. Punwrauqa Colonel HAY, and Sir R. PRICE, opposed thelamend- men. Mr. O'CONNELL and Mr. GistoariE suppoitedit. Mr. Bitiacedi said, he would vote for the amendment, as a means of repairing what he now considered to be a wrong vote which he gave on a former occasion, in opposition to the motion of the member for Mid- dlesex for the abolition J sinecures.
Mr. HUME said, it was impossible to satisfy the nice scruples of all honourable members. Sonic members asked him to point out a case of abuse, and yet they voted against him on a former occasion when he brought forward the abominable case of Lord Augustus Fitzelarence.
A Member, on the Ministerial side, said that he would join with Mr. Hume in voting against any case that could be proved to be one of abuse.
Mr. Horn said, there was always a loophole by which members could escape. No 5.inecures, either Civil, Military, or Naval, ought to be continued ; and he hoped, notwithstanding the strange indications which he observed around him, that they would not survive the present session.
The Committee Aivided : for Mr. flume's amendment, 83; against it, 223; Ministerial majority, 140.
The original vote for 955,220/. was then agreed to.
The sum of 438,004/. was then voted fot victuals for Seamen and Marines.
The House resumed, and the Chairman reported progress. Ad- journed at two o'clock.
2. ARMY ESTIMATES. On Wednesday, the House having resolved itself into a Committee of Supply, Sir JOHN HOB1IOUSE rose to move the Army Estimates. He would confine himself, at that time, to ask- ing for a vote for the number of men only ; which he was sorry to say was notless than last year. The reductions which had been steadily going on in his department for several years previously to his taking office—reductions which would average 276,000/. for many years—ren- dered it impossible for him to make such a flourishing statement as had
been made by Sir James Graham. He bad, however, in the face of many difficulties, reduced the expenditure below what it was last year by the sum of 206,712/. 8s. 2d. In some instances the expenses were more, in others less ; all was fairly stated in the accounts, without mystification. The forces this year, at home and abroad, exclusive of India were 78,503; and were thus distributed—in Great Britain, 21,783 ; Ireland, 23,135; abroad, 33,585. Sir John then went into statements of considerable length, to show that the increase in the number of troops since 1792 had by no means kept pace with the in- crease of territory and population ; and that the cost of the Army bore a smaller proportion to the whole revenue of this country than that of any of the principal European powers or the United States. He ad- mitted that he could not reduce the Estimates to the same amount as he found them when he took office. A sense of duty to his country, under its present circumstances, would not allow him to be as econo- mical as his predecessors. He considered that, without laying it down as a rule that we ought always to regulate the size of our Army by that of other countries, still it was advisable to maintain the same front that we had done in former days. He concluded by moving a vote of 89,419 men for the Army of 1833.
Mr. HUME would put it to the House, whether, at the late hour of twelve o'clock, it would be advisable to proceed with the discussion. (Cries of" Oh! oh!") He was himself prepared to go on with the discussion ; but, in accordance with the wishes of several of his friends, who had to attend Committees in the morning, he would suggest that it should be postponed.
Lord ALTHORP would not agree to any postponement.
• Mr. HUME proceeded to argue against an increase in the Army Esti- mates beyond what had been sanctioned by the Duke of Wellington,— a good judge, it must be admitted, of what number of troops were ne- cessary for maintaining the dignity and power of the empire unim- paired at home and abroad. The effective force this year would cost more by 56,000/. than the forces at any time under the Wellington Ad- ministration. He objected to the continuance of so large a force in the Canadas. One thousand men would be quite sufficient for Ca- nada; the other four thousand might well be spared. The wise change of policy which had been made in the government of that colony had conciliated the people ; and in fact, he was informed that there was no necessity for a single soldier there. -There were 33,000 men in the Colonies at present ; they might very safely be reduced to 25,000. If the Government were to do away with the Established Church in Ireland, the 30,000 men now stationed in that country would not be needed. In Ireland, besides the regular force, there was a body of Po- lice amounting to 7,000 men, besides Yeomanry and Militia. He would move, that the Army should be reduced to the same number which it was in 1830, and which the Duke of Wellington thought sufficient.
"If the House," said Mr. Hume in conclusion, "will go with me in opinion —and God knows how far honourable members will be inclined to go; for at pre- sent they seem more inclined to go to sleep—(Laughter)—they will support me in my amendment to the motion before them. I think that the number of men to be voted for the service of the year ought not to be more than was maintained during the Administration of the Duke of Wellington. There are indeed, many reasons why it should be less ; for the Continent is not so disturbed, and there is not so much probability of war now as there was then. I shall, however, content myself with moving that the Army be reduced to the standard of 1830; and shall therefore conclude by moving,—' That the Land Forces be reduced to 81,184 men,' being the establishment maintained by the Duke of Wellington."
Major BEAUCLERK seconded the amendment. Lord ALTHORP opposed it; on the ground that, in the present state of Ireland and the Colonies, it would be imprudent to reduce the nuin- bar of our land forces.
Mr. WARBURTON suggested, that the division should be taken on the money grant, and not on the number of men. Mr. WYNN was opposed to keeping up a large standing army because the Continental nations kept them up. Seventeen years ago, he and Lord Althorp had opposed that principle with success. In the state of this country and of the Colonies, he admitted there might be good rea- son for keeping up a large army. The amendment was negatived.; and the vote of 89,419 men was agreed to, upon the understanding that the debate and division should take place on the grant of money.
The House adjourned at a quarter past two o'clock.
3. Tamiox. Mr. G. Rosmsort, on Tuesday, moved " that a Select Committee be appointed to consider and revise our existing
taxation, with a view to the repeal of those burdens which press most heavily upon productive industry, and the substitution of an equitable tax on property in -lieu thereof." He supported this motion in a speech of great length, in which he advocated the necessity of yielding to the almost universal wish of the country by reducing taxation. But when be considered how necessary it was to support public credit, and the efficiency of the national establishments, he came to the conclusion, that the only way in which the labouring classes could be ielieved would be by repealing those taxes which pressed most heavily upon articles of consumption, and the substitution of a property-tax. He quoted the opinion of Mr. Huskisson, Mr. Powlett Thomson, Lord Althorp, and Mr. Bankes, in support of his proposition. He main. tamed that poverty and crime had greatly increased ; and that when the Spring work was completed, the temporary stimulus which it com- municated to trade in some places would fail, and great distress would again overspread the land. He reminded Lord Althorp that he and Mr. P. Thomson bad been tellers, on a divison which took place in March 1830, upon a motion of a similar tendency to the one which be now proposed ; and he was curious to hear on what ground Lord Althorp would oppose a principle which ha then strenuously advocated. Mr. Robinson then proceeded to state his plan.
The taxes which he proposed should be repealed or reduced were—the whole of the Assessed Taxes, the taxes on Brick, Tiles, Glass, Hops, Malt, Paper, Soap, Starch, and Stone Bottles ; cue half of the Sugar-duties, and one half of the duties on Tea ; the duties on Cotton, Wool, and the taxes on Newspapers and Advertisements. All these vere taxes bearing most heavily on the labour- ing and middle classes.
By the repeal of the taxes above-mentioned, the loss to the revenue would be 15,700,000/.
From this, however, they must deduct the sum of 500,000/., which,`by his calculation, might be reduced in the collection of taxes. Another sum of 500,000/. he calculated Ivould result from the increased consumption of sugar, and the sum of 400,000/. from the increased consumption of tea, and a fourth sum of 310,000/. which would arise from the increased consumption of other articles. Adding these four sums together, there would be produced the sum of 1,710,0001.; which, deducted from the supposed total loss to the revenue of 15,710,000/., would leave the amount of 14,000,0001.; and this amount he pro- posed to raise by the tax on property.
He was aware that a property-tax would press heavily upon men of landed estates ; but they should recollect that they would be relieved from the Assessed Taxes and the duties on Malt and Hops. He did not consider it fair that many men who lived at club-houses and pos- sessed large fortunes should escape direct taxation, in the way they did at present. These persons generally held money in the Funds, the payment of the interest on which caused so much of the existing distress. With regard to the manner in which the property-tax should be levied— He should suggest a graduated tax of a per centage upon realized property. of every description. He would have it on a graduated scale, so that a man with
only 2001. a year should not pay at the same rate with a man of 20,000/. a year. He would not at present mention the amount of his graduated scale, lest he should frighten the 20,000d. a year gentlemen.
He by no means thought that if his motion were carried against the Government they were bound to retire ; but he trusted that they would find means to ease the burdens of the country—to lessen the pressure, if not to diminish the amount of taxation.
Mr. WARBURTON seconded the motion. He objected the other evening to the extensive and diffuse nature of the inquiry proposed by Mr. Attwood, but he approved of the principle of this motion, which was specific enough to engage the attention of a Committee. He was quite aware of the complicated nature of our system of taxation, and the difficulty of meddling with it to advantage.
Thus, to allude only to Auction-duties, which Mr. Cobhett had on a former evening brought under notice—if they were taken off, would not all the shop- keepers who who paid heavy House and Window-taxes immediately complain? Would they not say that they were subject to heavy taxes for every thing they sold in their shops, while those who sold by auction, and kept up no establish- ments were exempt from such duties? He stated this as an example to show, that however important it was to give facility to the transfer of property, it was not so easy to make changes as to propose them. This was only a sample of the complicated system which had extended itself over the whole country.
He was not quite clear as to the nature of Mr. Robinson's proposal, whether it was one to tax property alone, or property and income also. He would say, that if the tax on property were to be permanent, if it were not merely a war-tax, it would not be doing any injustice to tax income as well as property. If such a tax were permanent, it ought to fall on annuitants as well as others, for it would only touch them as long as they received the annuity. The objections chiefly made to the tax formerly, were that it was unequal to tax property and income ; but make the system permanent, and not temporary—let it not be merely a war-tax—and that objection would disappear. Without enter- ing into any question as to the propriety of taxing small incomes, though per- haps small incomes should be exempt, he saw no injustice in taxing income de- rived from Funded as well as other property.
Mr. Ricardo had proposed to pay off the National Debt by a tax upon every species of property ; but this plan was impracticable. A modi- fication of it had been proposed by a gentleman named Sayer, who bad been employed in collecting the income-tax. Ile proposed to leave it optional with every capitalist and landlord to pay off his share of the National Debt—
If the person was unable or unwilling to redeem his share, it was to remain, and be collected as before ; but if he chase to wash his hands of this tax it was
to be at his option to redeem it. If the subject should ever be fairly taken into consideration, this plan of giving landlords the option of redemption would re- lieve it of its impracticability, and make the scheme be thought desirable. The Land-tax might be taken as an illustration, the redemption of which had been allowed on a similar principle.
He thought that Mr. Robinson's plan was not extensive enough. It left three millions of the expenses of collecting the revenue entirely untouched. It was only a partial measure taking off one fourth of the taxes. If a property-tax were established at all, it ought to supersede all other taxes—to sweep away all direct taxation. The plan of an income-tax, redeemable at option, would not be liable to any objections of being a breach of faith, such as was implied, he believed, in the motion of Mr. Attwood. It would leave all existing contracts untouched; it
would remove taxes from the industry of the country, and it would place these taxes where they could be best borne—on the large capitalist, and on the large landed proprietors, and on those who ought to bear the heaviest taxation.
Lord ALTHORP said, that when in 1830 he supported Mr. P. Thom. son's motion for a revision of taxation, he did not vote for a property- tax, which was no part of the proposition.
At the same time, he would fairly admit, that he had on that occasion used expressions such as those Mr. Robinson alluded to, and had expressed himself favourable to a property. tax. He knew that he had stated, that though he was opposed to a propertv-tax in 1816, yet subsequent experience taught him that it might be adopted. 'He stated then, in 1830, that this chan„rre of opinion had been brought about by longer experience. But since 1830, he had had a great deal more experience, and experience of a kind calculated to take more effect on his mind than any experience he had had before.
He agreed with the principles of taxation laid down by Mr. Robinson.
The taxes should certainly be removed from the labouring classes, and laid on property. But the difficult question was to know what taxes pressed most on labour. Mr. Robinson said that taxes should not be laid on articles of the labourers' consumption ; but in his opinion, taxes which into fered with the employment of labour pressed more severely on the labourer than taxes on articles of his consumption. Therefore he thought, that in taking off taxes, they ought rather to consider whether the taxes to be removed interfered with the employ- ment of labour, than whether they fell on what the labourer consumed.
He objected to the enormous amount of the reduction proposed. If a property-tax were laid on, it should be borne in mind that there would be no increased power of consumption--no augmentation of the receipts into the revenue because untaxed articles were consumed in greater quantities. The income-tax which was taken off in 1816 produced 14,500,000/. ; but a very disproportionate part of that sum, for many reasons, was produced by fixed incomes. He therefore thought that a tax on fixed incomes of 10 per cent. would not now produce that sum. He thought a property-tax was suited for a war-tax, because the facility for removing property out of its reach- was much less in war than in peace.
Mr. Warburton had said that he would take off all indirect taxes, and substi- tute a property-tax. But he (Lord Althorp) was assured that any attempt to raise52,000,000/. per annum by means of a property-tax, would produce such an effect upon capital, as would strike a most fatal blow at the prosperity of this country. It was proposed that this property-tax should be a graduated one. Now he was perfectly free to admit, that every man should pay taxes in pro- portion to what he enjoyed; and if it were possible to invent any system which, without these disadvantages, could effect that object, it would be the perfection of taxation. But, in reference to a graduated property-tax, he could not see upon what principle they were to go. It was nothing more nor less than saying what amount of income a man ought to have. When they laid on a greater tax on a man possessing 20,000/. per annum than on a man possessing 1,0001. a year, what was it hut saying that the man of 20,000/. a year had too much property? If the principle were to be carried out to diet extent, it would come eventually to the equalization of all property. Nothing could be so dangerous as to hold out such a prospect.
He concluded by saying that he would give the subject his most se- rious consideration, but must oppose the motion.
Mr. CORBETT would vote for the motion, because he wished to get rid of the present system ; though he thought a graduated property-tax neither more nor less than confiscation.
Mr. HUME said that all taxation was confiscation. The question was, bow to tax the community so as to inflict the smallest possible portion of injury upon it. Now, experience proved that a direct tax on property could be collected for 1 per cent., while indirect taxes cost from 6t to 10 per cent, in their collection. He thought that the sub- ject could be brought forward with mere advantage from the Treasury Bench than by a Committee. He approved of the principles laid down by Lord Althorp ; who, he trusted, would act upon them as speedily as possible.
Colonel Toettess would support the motion. His opinion coincided with that of Mr. Huskisson and Mr. Ricardo, who thought that the industry of this country was so much oppressed that it had heroine ne- cessary to raise the public revenue by transmuting taxation from active to dormant capital. It was impossible to give any extensive relief to the nation by reducing taxation, as long as so large a sum as thirty-four millions annually was absorbed by the interest of the Debt and fixed charges.
Relief could be obtained only by shifting taxation from industry and placing it upon the fixed and immovable property which was expended without putting industry in motion. And here he must dissent from Lord Althorp, who had just said, that if the proprietors of fixed property were taxed, their revenue would be diminished—that they would consume less, and therefiwe the indirect taxes would become less productive. He dissented from this. If a landed pro- prietor who received 100,000/. a year paid 10,000/. a year as a property-tax, this 10,000/. a year would still exist as revenue in the hands of those to whom the Treasury paid it: the whole unproductive income of the country, though differently distributed, would remain exactly the same in amount; and the con- sumption could not be diminished, nor the revenue derived from indirect tax- ation be reduced.
He was of opinion that a property-tax would not drive capital out of the country_ Such a tax, instead of driving capital out of the country, would draw capital into it. What was the great evil of taxation ? The evil consisted in this—tax- ation, as now imposed, took so large a portion of the produce of industry from the producers, that profits and wages were reduced. But if you took off all
taxes from productive and active capital giving employment to labour, and placed them upon the rent of land and upon the dividends received from the
Debt, neither profits nor wages would be reduced. On the contrary, the profits derived from the employment of active capital would immediately increase; and to obtain the increased profits, capital would flow into the country, trade in all its branches would improve, arid the demand for labour and the wages of the la- bourer would both increase.
The rent of houses and land would consequently improve, and thus the dormant fund which was subject to the tax would be augmented in
value. He maintained, moreover, that it was unjust to tax industry for the payment of a debt incurred for the protection of fixed property and dormant capital. If the present system were persevered in, a spirit of discontent would arise greater than that which the Reform Act had allayed. • Mr. Ho Y said, that if fifteen millions of taxes were repealed, and the
amount which they produced were to be distributed among the tax- payers, the relief would be only three farthings a day to each.
Mr. WALTER would support the motion, which Was very different from that of Mr. AttWood the other night. The people cried out against the present taxes. The Government, however, must still be maiiitained, and he thought that a graduated property-tax was the best means of maintainieg it. Its imposition would enable them to remove burdens which pressed upon industry and ingenuity. He conceived then, upon every ground, affecting as well the popularity Of the King'a Government as the character of the Reformed Parliament and the feel- ings of the whole constituency by which it had been elected, that the present motien ought to command the assent of his Majesty's Ministers and the House of Commons. The question was one which went home to the common sense of every order of men in the nation. It WaS eminently a practical subject ; there was nothing speculative, nothing fanciful, nothing Utopian in it. The people from one end of the kingdom to the other were anxiously looking forward to some measure which should conduce to their solid and permanent relief; and considering to what little purpose two months of the sea ion had been already exisended, and how small a portion of the public expectation had to that hour been satisfied, he feared their constituents, if a motion of this nature were re- jeutted, would ask universally, "Of what use is your boasted Reform?"
Mr. O'CONNELL would vote for the motion. It did not pledge them to a property-tax—it was merely one for inquiry ; and in his opinion the House was bound to inquire into the distress of the country. Mr. P. THOMSON said that Mr. O'Connell could not have heard what the motion was which he was going to vote for. It was not a mere motion for inquiry. It was proposed to repeal fifteen millions of taxes, arid substitute a tax on property in lieu thereof. Mr. Robinson ought to come down to the House with some feasible plan, and not talk vaguely about an income or propeity-tax. When he brought for- ward his motion in 1830, he expressly stated that he did not wish a property-tax to be imposed. Several of the taxes which he then ob- jected to had since been repealed. Be therefore now occupied a different position to what be did then. He cordially agreed with what Lord Althorp had said respecting the disturbance and unsettling of great interests which would result from a change in our system of taxa- tion, although he was aware of the ultimate advantage of it. But it was necessary to proceed warily. He thought that a property-tax would not reach absentees—they would carry their property out of the country with them. The country had experienced great relief from reduction of taxation.
Since the year 1619, there had been repealed taxes on articles princi- pally consumed by the lower classes, or which, in his opinion, was a matter of . much more importance, on the raw material and other articles used in manu- factures, no less a sum than 16,864,000/. Those articles haul been principally Soap, Coffee, Tobacco, Silk, Windows, Beer, Leather, Candles, Printed Cotton, &c. Under the present circumstances, when the revenue very little exceeded the expenditure, the utmost caution ought to be used on the subject.
Mr. D. W. Heaves- said, that Ministers opposed a property-tax most vigorously because they knew that they had a willing audience.
The apprehensions of Mr. P. Thomson, relative to the effects of a tax nod absentees, were really ludicrous. He feared that people would carry away their property with them: lunv could they ? They might sell their Funded property ; but the purchasers would remain, and the tax would be payable upon the in- terest, no matter what the price of Consols might be. Then, with respect to landed property, dint must remain ; for absentees could not, like snails, travel with their houses on their backs. He approved of a graduated property. tax, because in that case taxation would be adapted to the means which persons pos- sessed to pay it.
It had been ascertained that 10/. out of 301. which a labourer received went to pay taxes on articles which were necessary to his subsistence. New a man of 30,000/. per annum ought by the same rule to pay 10,000/. in taxes. But he—die rich man—might live on 300/. per annum, which would provide him with the necessaries and comforts of life, and thus elude taxation. His property would be invested in the Funds, which the poor man was taxed so heavily to protect. They talked of "COnfiseatiOn"--bere was a system of confiscation, worthy of the atten- tion of Government.
Mr. fiascos% amidst much interruption, declared his intention of supporting the motion.
Mr. PEASE thought, that the deliberations of a Committee on this subject would enable the House to come to a consideration of the Budget under more favourable circumstances than they would other- wise do. He would therefore support the motion.
Mr. ROBINSoN said, that as he appeared to be supported by the ge- neral feeling of the House, he would press his motion to a division.
The House then divided : for Mr. ROBINSON'S motion, 155; against it, 221; Ministerial majority, 66.
4. CURRENCY QUESTION. Mr. M. ATTWOOD, last night, as an amendment on the motion for the third reading of the Irish Distubances Bill, moved for a Committee to inquire how far the distress of the come my was occasioned by the operation of our Monetary System. But, after some conversation with Sir Roemer PEEL and Lord At.- 'moms relative to the propriety of bringing on the question when there would be more time for its discussion, he withdrew it.
5. IRISH DISTURBANCES Biles The order of the day for the con- sideration of the report on this bill being read, on Wednesday, it was agreed that it should be recommitted, for the purpose of making some further amendments ; Mr. O'CoNNE1.1. consenting not to oppose the bringing up of the report, although be would take the sense of the House on the third reading. The bill was then recommitted. Several verbal amendments were agreed to on the first, second, and third clauses. On the fourth clause being read, Mr. Snaw proposed to omit the words which prohibit the Lord- Lieutenant from proclaiming a district merely because tithes shall not have been paid in it.
Mr. O'CONNELL supported the amendment. As the clause stood, it was nonsense,—declaring against that which, it was admitted, was nearly impossible.
Sir ROBERT PEEL also objected to it. It was a bad specimen of the legislative powers of the Reformed Parliament, in this their first measure.
Mr. STANLEY, said, that if Mr. Lambert, who proposed the altera. tion in the clause which it was now wished to strike out, adhered to his former opinion, he would divide with him.
Mr. LAMBERT said, that the Irish disturbances arose from the deep- rooted, inextinguishable batred of the people to the tithe system. He had proposed an alteration in the clause in ortler to render it impossible to proclaim a district on account of the nou-payment of tithes. He had supported the bill with this alteration, belicvmg it to be highly ne- cessary. For this he had been virulently attacked in Ireland, by news- papers under Mr. O'Connell's influence. }le load an extract from the Dublin Morning Register, which abused him,e;:', S•.,rgeant Perrin, and Sir Robert Peel, for their support of the bill. [The extract is said to have created much laughter in the House.] He concluded by saying that he did not care in what shape the principle of his proviso was re- tained, but he adhered to the substance of the alteration which it em- bodied.
The Committee divided : for the clause' 123; against it, 44; majo- rity., 79. The clause therefore is retained in the bill, with the proviso against the proclaiming of any district, on account of the non-payment of tithes therein.
The 14th clause was amended so as to prevent any person being ac- tually transported by sentence of a court-martial, unless that sentence be previously confirmed by the Lord-Lieutenant; and so that the power of calling a court-martial should not be placed in the hands of "any person authorized by the Lord-Lieutenant," but in those of "any general or other officer commanding in the district" so authorized.
. The other clauses were then agreed to, with some verbal alterations. Upon the question that the preamble be brought up, Mr. O'CONNELL proposed the introduction of a proviso into the bill, to suspend the exercise of the powers of the Lord-Lieutenant during the time of a general election, should such occur while the act was in operation.
Mr. O'DWYER and Mr. H. GRATTAN supported the proviso.
Mr. STANLEY, Mr. LAMBERT, and Lord ALTHORP opposed its in- troduction.
Mr. O'CONNELL said, that it was a farce to talk of the Lord-Lieu- tenant's responsibility. If lie interfered unduly in an election, and complaints of such interference were made in the House, it would be easy for the two members returned by him to get up and say, that the county was in a state of disturbance. He accused Lord Anglesea of having interfered in the Dublin election—
When the Conservative party waited upon Sir W. Gossett, they got a direct promise of the support of the Government against hint (Mr. O'Connell). Mr. Alderman Dailey came direct from Sir W. Gossett anti stated the fact. The same statement had been made in the newspapers by Mr. Bovton and Mr. West, and was never denied. On the first day of the election, Alderman Dar- ley and great numbers of the Police voted against him and Mr. Ritthven ; but on the third day, when their return was certain, a proclamation, signed "An- glesea," appeared, protesting to Heaven that the Government had taken lid part in the election. To that man the House were about to commit the execution of the bill.
Mr. STANLEY strongly denied that the Government had intcrkred at the Dublin election. Both parties were opposed to the 4;ecrn- ment. All interference was disclaimed by the Lord-Lieutenant in his memorandum, which Mr. O'Connell was pleased to call a p-..oclania- tion. No man, under ordinary circumstances, xvould dare- to impeach the word of Lord Anglesea. It was beneath the Government to reply to mere newspaper attacks.
Mr. Snaw said that the statement referred to was not a mere news- paper attack. It bore the signature of Mr. West, a gentleman of as high honour and integrity as ever existed.
Mr. STANLEY asked Mr. O'Connell if he did not know that Sir William Gossett had declared that he had been misunderstood by Al- derman Parley? He believed the fact to be, that Alderman Parley, having ascertained that Government would not interfere, said, " You may go on safely, for you will have the support of persons under Go- vernment," well knowing that those persons, if left to themselves, would prefer Mr. West to Mr. O'Connell.
The Committee then divided : for Mr. O'Connell's proviso, 72; against it, 214; majority, 142.
Mr. O'CONNELL proposed two clauses, which were agreed to. The first suspends the power of the act in a county or borough to which a writ has been issued for a new election during the session of Parlia- ment. The second prohibits the Lord-Lieutenant from interfering with the meeting of any corporate body, according to their charter. He then proposed a clause, declaring that the powers of the act were given to the present Ministers "from peculiar confidence in them," and that the powers should cease and determine with their responsibility ; with something about their "mild and considerate" exercise of them ; but the clause was not fully read, and was withdrawn amidst some laughter.
The preamble was then agreed to; the House resumed; the report was received; and the bill was ordered to be read a third time on Friday.
.Last night, the order of the day for the third reading of this bill having been read, ,
Mr. West had assured him of the truth of that statement, and showed him documents which proved beyond the shadow of a doubt, that Mr. West was distinctly, unequivocally, and in as plain terms as the English language could express, promised the support of the Irish Government. ( ContintWd cheers at the Unions, and by that means the movement was given which brought the from the Opposition.) He believed that Mr. Stanley and the Lord-Lieutenant Ministers back into office. (Loud and continued cheers, and vehement cries of.- were personally, unconnected with the transaction. ( Cheers from the Minis- terial benches.) Honourable members had no reason to cheer, for the docu- ment which the Lord-Lieutenant caused to be published in the newspaper con- nected with the Government, denied) not that he had personally interfered, but that the Government had interfered. Mr. Shaw asserted that the Government did interfere. He was assured of that on the word and honour of Mr. West ; and, further, he saw the proofs of it in the handwriting of individuals holding the highest offices in the Irish Government. (C/seers from the Opposition.) He wished not to mention the names of those individuals, but he would do so if Mr. Stanley asked him.
Mr. O'CONNELL said, that Sir William Gossett had authorized Alderman Darley to declare that the Government would support the Conservative candidates. Mr. CLAY rose to oppose it. Those mongrel tribunals, half-civil,- half-military—that tampering with the right of petition.and suspension . of the Habeas Corpus—compelled him to give it unqualified opposition. He had voted for the first and second reading in the hope of seeing it improved in the Committee ; but he bad been disappointed. He ob- jected to the bill also on the score of its inefficiency. He remarked that Ministers bad lost much of their popularity by supporting it, as was proved by the result of the Marylebone election. Their candidate was routed by the very same gentleman who, in a former contest, bad been routed by their candidate. He repeated, that he would vote against the bill. Mr. WILBRAHAM approved of the bill generally, but objected to the court-martial clause.
Mr. Cosum proposed as an amendment, that
" Seeing in this bill the substitution of military courts for courts consisting of judges and jurors—seeing in it the abrogation of the most precious of all the institutions of the country—seeing clearly that its main purpose is to keep in the hands of the present Aristocracy the plunder of the ancient church and the poor, which the ancestors of that Aristocracy obtained by apostacy, and which has been retained by the cruel trend laws and by the shedding of innocent blood. —and suspecting, moreover, that this bill is intended as a prelude to the adop- tion of similar measures in Great Britain, this House will read this bill a third time this day six months."
• He maintained that the great number of petitions which he and others had presented against the bill—those presented by himself exceeded fifty thousand signatures--proved that the people of this country were opposed to it. He would divide the House on his motion, if no other member than Isis worthy colleague, supported him.
Mr. FIELDEN seconded the amendment.
The SPEAKER suggested, that it would be proper to put the amend- ment in the usual way,—simply that the bill be read a third time that day six months.
Mr. POULTER opposed it ; and repudiated the imputation that those who supported the bill wished to enslave Ireland.
Sir SAMUEL WHALLEr, though extremely unwell, could not let the bill pass without recording his opposition to it. He was glad to find that some of the worst clauses had been modified, but the alterations in the bill were not such as could induce him to support it. He spoke the sentiments of his constituents, the electors of Marylebone' —who had sent him to the House in opposition to all the influence of the Go- vernment.
Mr. BERNARD, Mr. JOHN YOUNG, Sir H. VERNEY, and Mr. HALL DARE supported the bill. Mr. DARE said he disliked the alterations in the court-martial clause, as they destroyed its efficiency, but left the odium.
Mr. LANGDALE, Mr. RUTHVEN, Mr. BARRON, and Mr. G. F. YOUNG opposed the bill.
Mr. H. G. WARD was inaudible for some time. He made a ram- bling attack on the principal members who had opposed the bill, espe- cially Mr. Roebuck ; who, he said, was a more prominent agitator than Mr. Steele, and would throw the whole country into confusion to vei i a proposition in the Westminster Review. The petitions against the bill emanated front Political Unions; but where were the numerous assem- blages who congregated together last year? rhere v.-as the crowd who then offered up their grateful incense to the Member for Middlesex.
Mr. MArateE 'O'CONNELL said, that if Ministers had taken as much pains to get up meetings this year as they did the last, there would have been as many. He knew for a fact, that last year, when Ministers had resigned, it was by the Political Unions set in motion by themselves that they were brought back into office. ( Cheers.) A friend of his had told him that at that very time he - lad met a gentleman coming from one of the Ministers with fifty franks in his pocket ffir the leaders of the different Political Unions. (Cheers.) Letters were written and enclosed in those franks, and they were received by the leaders " Name' name ! " from the supporters of Ministers.) He was able to name and ready to do it to Lord Althorp, or any Cabinet Minister who asked him for it. (Renewed calls to " Name.") He was ready at any moment to name the party upon that condition.
Mr. Huai E said that Mr. Ward talked of the stupidity and dross on the Opposition' side of the House, but this he would say, that he had. never met with more brass than had been exhibited on the other side. The member for St. Albans had no doubt duly prepared his speech, and practised it before a glass—(Laughter and cries of" Order 1 ")—with a degree of assurance—(" Order, order !")—he would repeat it, with a degree of assurance—although the noble lord who called him to order might term that assurance modesty. He would say, that a more modest, well-looking, well-behaved young gentleman, performing his part with modest assurance, he had never seen. When he recollected the use of the pronouns "*e" and "our," in Mr. Ward's speech, he was afraid- lie had been set on to make his attack by some of those near him. He had reproached the people for meddling in politics' calling them bar- bers, carriers, and so forth; were not Sir Robert Peel and Lord Al- thorp Merchant Tailors? Earl Grey, Lord Brougham, not to mention himself, their humble servant, Fishmongers? How could he treat assemblies containing men of such dignityamong them with disrespect? Six hundred thousand of the people of England had petitioned against the bill; and though Mr. Hume knew further opposition to be una- vailing, still he would vote for the amendment, and "give the bill this last kick."
Mr. D. BROWNE and Mr. PETER supported the bill ; and it was op- posed by Mr. BELLEW and Mr. E. RUTIIVEN. The latter gentleman spoke amidst much noise, confusion, and several hiccoughs from a mem- ber on the Opposition side of the House.
Mr. O'CONNELL once more called upon the people of England not to let "this infernal bill" pass. The bill, it was true, was mitigated, but it still contained matter enough to insult, in the most outrageous manner, the people of his country : there still remained those horrible and insulting clauses against the right of petitioning—those which an- • nihilated the trial by jury and the Habeas Corpus. He contended that • no case had been made out for banding over his country to those pseudo- '
: military tribunals, which the House termed courts-martial.
O0 of the peasantry had delivered the murderers into the hands of without going into court, by arbitration on the part of the judges. He had on Justice, was incorrect. There was not that improvement in the feel- a former occasion quoted the returns of two periods of nine years each, in order ings of the peasantry which such a proceeding would seem to indicate, to place the beneficial workings of this reconciling practice in a strong light to their Lordships. In the rather period, not less than 449,000 out of 724,000 cases were so disposed of; while in the later period—in that ending in 1822—not less than 21,000 out of a total of 31,000 cases (that is two-thirds) were so settled, without the expense and delay of formal litigation.
• He declared most solemnly that Ministers had not half the anxiety he had to put down przedial agitation and disturbance. This was not the way Ireland ought to be treated, to be merely co-equal in name. He prayed to his God that when repeal came—and come it now must—they could never stay it, they could not even hope to do so—. that it might come through peaceful agency, and not through oceans of blood. If ever he had doubted before of its success, that bill —that infamous bill—the way in which it hail been received by the House—the manner in which its opponents had been treated—the personalities they had been subjected to—the yells one of them had that night been greeted with—yells not fit for any assembly where decency was thought of—( Cheers front the Opposi- tion, echoed by the Ministerial Benches)—all these things dissipated his doubts, and told him of its complete and early triumph. Did they think those yells would be forgotten ?—did they suppose their echo would not reach the plains of his injured and insulted country—that they would not be whispered in ber green vallies, and heard from her lofty hills ? Oh! they would be heard there—yes, and they would not be forgotten.
He had all his life contended with a certain party; be would contend with them no more—at least not in a spirit of hostility. He hoped that all bad passions would be allowed to subside, and that the demands of his country for justice would not be disregarded in their calmer hours.
Let that hour arrive when their mutual prejudices could be overcome, and their evil passions set at rest, and they could then say, in a bold and unanswer- able tone, " We want justice, and will- have equality." Ministers might then legislate for England, but Irishmen would legislate for themselves. Ministers had greatly assisted in the repeal of the Union : they had given increased energy to the cry, because they had convinced those who before doubted, that justice was not meant to he done towards Ireland. To be sure it might be said they were not eight millions—that they were divided ; but then they would be eight millions when the fears of some and the unlucky prejudices of others had been conquered by the force of reason and of truth. He had done his duty—he stood acquitted to his conscience and his country—he had opposed this measure throughout; and he now protested against it as harsh, oppressive, uncalled for, unjust—as establishing an infamous precedent by retaliating crime against crime —as tyrannous, cruelly and vindictively tyrannous. In the name of his country he asked for justice.
In conclusion, he implored the House to pause even at this late hour, -and change this harsh and bitter measure for one of inquiry.
Lord ALTHORP again defended the bill. Everyday the necessity for such an enactment became more apparent : crime had not diminished in amount—life and property were as insecure as when the bill was first brought in. He referred to the murder of Mr. Leonard, and said Be maintained that. the alteration in the different clauses of the bill had only rendered it more efficient. Mr. O'Connell had complained of personalities being indulged in by the supporters of the bill : he really thought that Mr. O'Connell was hardly the man to complain on that score. He talked of liberty, but Lord Althorp thought there could be no real liberty without peace.
One of the great merits of liberty was, that it provided peace for all, and se- curity for all, am! justice to all—not that one side only should be heard—not that one party alone should be dominant—not that a man should be denounced for having expressed in a legislative assembly the honest convictions of his mind —but that all should be entitled to their opinions, and to the expression of them without molestation and without dread. Mr. O'Connell had asked if there was ever a couutry which so much required agitation as Ireland : Lord Althorp asked if there ever was a country which so much required quiet and repose. (Continued cheers.)
He concluded by repeating, that the system of savage and tyrannical conduct towards the poor and defenceless continued unabated in Ire- land, and therefore the bill must pass.
Mr. BARRON and Colonel VERNER said a few words, when the House divided : for the third reading, 845; for the amendment, 86; Ministerial majority, 259.
6. CHANGE OF VENUE BILL. This bill, on the motion of Mr. STANLEY, was read a second time on Wednesday, with the understand- ing that the discussion upon it was to take place on the third reading.
7. LAW REFORM BILL. The first clause of Lord Brougham's bill, which gives to the Judges the power of making alterations in the mode of pleading in the Superior Courts, was opposed, on Tuesday, by Lords ELDON and WYNFORD ; on the ground that it conferred too much power upon the Judges, who should not be allowed to make law for five years without the consent of Parliament, to whom Lord Wyn- ford thought they should submit their regulations for sanction.
Lord BROUGHAM objected to this proposal, as likely to produce un- necessary delay and inconvenience.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH thought, that the end of Lord Wynford's amendment would be gained, if it were enacted that the regulations made by the Judges should not be binding until they had been laid be- fore Parliament for six weeks.
Lord Wyxroan persisted in putting his amendment ; and it was re- jected by a majority of 12 to 3.
Lord BROUGHAM approved of Lord Ellenborough's amendment ; which was put and carried—as were the other clauses of the bill. The report was ordered to be received on Wednesday.
8. LOCAL JUDICATURES. Lord BROUGHAlf, OR Thursday, moved the first reading of a bill to establish local judicatures in England. The bill was similar in principle, and in the majority of its provisions, to the one which he formerly submitted to the House. lishing newspapers, &c., to enter into bonds themselves and find securities. Its object was the establishing, as it were experimentally in certain districts These enactments were useless and mischievous; they did not prevent the daily
The bill was then read a third time, and passed.
The House adjourned at two o'clock.
Many petitions against the Coercion Bill were presented this week; and three in favour of it. Mr. ESTCOURT, it appears from the Times re- port, on Thursday presented a petition from "time merchants, ship- owners, and manufacturers of Dundee," complaining of the delay in passing the Irish Coercion Bill, and urging the House to pass it into a law without delay. Mr. H. Ross supported the prayer of the peti- tioners, with many of whom he was personally acquainted. He said that great dissatisfaction prevailed among men of business in Scot- land, on account of the long discussion on this bill, and they were in general anxious that it should be passed as soon as possible. and counties, but ultimately in all the counties anti districts, after its advan- tages shall have been proved in the experimental districts, local jurisdictions, for the purpose of facilitating the administration of justice,—and not only facili- tating, but bringiug it home to the door and placing it within the pecuniary reach of every subject in the kingdom. These local jurisdictions would be SO many courts, over which a sergeant-at-law, or a barrister of not less than ten years' standing, should be appointed to preside as judge ; care being; taken that those judges shall be men able and experienced in the law, and of so high a character, moral and professional, that the King's subjects should have confi- dence in their decision.
He proposed that these courts should take cognizance of actions for debt and damages not over 20/. ; although the parties might agree to submit actions to their decision involving sums of any amount. He expected better results from this provision than would appear on the surface. He stated the great relative proportion which debts under 20/. bore to the whole amount which were sued for in the courts.
Out of 93,000 affidavits of debt made in the year 1826 (the last of which he possessed a return) in the three Courts of Continuo Law in Westminster Hall, not less than 30,000, or about one-third part, were for sums under 20/. ; 64,000 for sums under 50/. ; and the remainder, for sums above 50/. Again, out of 890 suits, tried in London and Middlesex in 1830, not less than 330, or more than one-third foam were for sums under 20/. ; in the country, judging by the returns from the Oxford circuit for the same year, the proportion was stilt greater, there being not less than 160 out of 340 causes for sums under 20/. tried in that circuit.
The bill contained another provision which he expected would work advantageously,—that is, either party in an action for debt might com- pel the other to answer upon oath the facts of the case ; which would save the tedious roundabout and expensive process of filing a bill of discovery. The bill would invest the local judges with a species of arbitrary power—be meant the power of reconcilement.
He proposed that the local judges should exercise in their several jurisdictions and localities all the functions which appertain to Masters iii Chancery, and the office of Bankruptcy Judges in the new Bank- ruptcy Courts ; which had, be was proud to say, produced the best re- sults, and were held in high esteem by the mercantile world. The last important provision of the bill would do away with imprisonment for debt, in all cases where the insolvent had made a satisfactory disclosure of the state of his affairs. This would be an apt precursor of the bill about to be introdueed in the House of Commons for abolishing im- prisonment for debt altogether. He had also another bill to introduce, the subject of which he would simply mention. It was intended te alter the appellate jurisdiction of the Privy Council ; and he hoped that ere loug a similar alteration might be effected in the appellate jurisdic- tion of the House of Peers,—a subject of the greatest importance. He then proceeded to state the-substance of another bill which he intended to introduce before Easter.
This bill would be directed to effect some important reductions in certain kw offices,—namely, the Six Clerks' Office, the Report Office, the Register Office, and several others. It would also effect the abolition of some useless and cum- brous places connected with the Court of Chancery, to the amount of four or five and twenty; remedy delays in proceedings, and abridge expenses. In short, the bill he proposed to introduce would impart greater Justice and accuracy to the proceedings of every branch of the Court of Chancery. The following would be the list of the reductions in the offices to which he had alluded :—In the Six. Clerks' Office, a saving of 29,000/. would be effected ; in the Report Office, a saving of 4,3001.; in -the Register Office, of 10,5001.; in the Masters' Offices, of 11057/. ; which, with the further fees now received in those offices, to be abolished and compensated from the Suitors' Fund, amounting to 14,0004 would make a total saving of 66,9571. a-year. He would say no more of the contemplated measure than this, that much confusion would be prevented by it in the administration of the proceedings of those different offices.
The Duke of BUCKINGHAM wished to know, whether the establish- ment of the local courts under the bill presented to the House would supersede the jurisdiction which the local courts at present in existence exercised ; and also whether that bill would affect the regulations for empaneling juries ?
Lord BROUGHAM said, that the provisions of the bill would not in- terfere with the Sheriff's right of assembling juries. The number of the new courts would be regulated by the wealth and population of the districts in which they were to be established. The courts might, per- haps, after despatching all the business in one district, move to another. As to the question whether the new courts would supersede the jurisdiction of the old local courts, he would merely remark, that there were 280 of these courts at present in existence ; most of which, he had reason to believe, were totally inoperative; and some of them, indeed, had had no business to transact for the last fifty or sixty years. There were, he might add, many of them which entirely reversed the benefit which ought to result from legal tribunals, creating mischief rather than doing good, and enhancing, rather than diminishing, the expense of processes. All persons would receive compensation on the abolition of the old courts, who could establish a title to it by their services.
The bills were then read a first time.
9. LIBEL LAW. Sir F. VINCENT, on Thursday, obtained leave to bring in a bill to alter and amend the law of libel.
The first thing he should desire, would he the repeal of that part of the Six Acts and of that bill brought in subsequently, which compelled all persons pub.. publication of the most atrocious libels, while they prevented the dissemination of much useful knowledge. He would also do away with all ex officio informa- tions; he would make libels a subject for action or indictment, and not an arbi- trary ex officio infurmation,—a proceeding originated in the tyrannical Star Chamber, by which any law dficer might keep out of the way any person whom be thought objectionable. IR should also desire to protect propnetors, pub-
'
.lishers and printers from being responsible for acts over which they can show they had no power of control or prevention. He recollected a case, where even a servant had been included in a prosecution for libel, for having carried to the post-office a letter which contained the libel. At the same time, it should be required of all such persons to deliver up the name of the author of the libel complained of. Ile would eh() include in the same exemption all booksellers and venders, for the inadvertent sale of a libel. He would have the justice of an allegation left. in all cases to the sole judgment of the Jury. He would have the counsel for the defendant allowed to be heard last. In the event of a verdict against the defendant, the prosecutor shall be obliged to insert the verdict and the principal points at least of the case, iu six daily or weekly papers, as is done in Franca ; in order that those who had read the libel should see its refutation in the verdict of the Jury.
The AITORNEY-GENERAL ( Sir W. Horne) would not oppose the introduction of the bill. He would reserve what he bad to say on the subject to the second reading. He was not inclined to oppose what appeared to be the opinion of Parliament.
10. COUNSEL FOR PRISONERS. Mr. EWART, OH Thursday, obtained leave to bring in a bill for allowing prisoners in criminal cases to have the benefit of a full defence by counsel.
Mr. POULTER objected to it ; on the ground that the law at present required the strictest proof of guilt, and that the modes of escape for a guilty person were already numerous enough. He suggested, that the power of addressing the Jury by counsel should be taken away from the prosecutor, and thus both parties would be placed on an equality.
Sir T. FREFMANTLE thought, that if the prosecutor's counsel were allowed to reply, the prisoner would not gain much by the proposed alteration.
Mr. O'CoNNar.r. said that this bill would introduce a very beneficial alteration into our criminal jurisprudence.
Behind cross-examined the witnesses in a case where three brothers, whom in his conscience he believed to be innocent, were convicted of murder, and exe- cuted in consequence of their conviction. Now, he would stake his existence, that even with his humble abilities, if he had been permitted to say a few worth to the Jury on their behalf, in exposition of the inconsistences and improbabili- ties contained in the evidence given against them, they would have one and all been acquitted.
Sir J. CAMPBELL (Solicitor-General) would not oppose, he would rather support the bill.
The theory was certainly in its favour. In cases where a fiweigner was ti +er where a blind man, or a deaf and dumb man, was put on his defence against a criminal charge, gross injustice was done by not allowing their defence to be Inade by counsel. He doubted, however, whether it was expedient in all, cases to give the prisoner the right of making his defence by counsel ; and he was even inclined to think that it would be better to take away from the procecutor the right of addressing thejuror by counsel, than to give such right indiscrimi- nately in all cases to the prisoner. He conceived it would be wiser that, in all prosecutions where counsel address the Jury for the prosecutor, counsel should also have the right to address the Jury for the prisoner. He would therefore enact, that unless a speech was made by the .prosecuton's counsel, no speech should be made by the prisoner's. If the alteration contemplated by this bill were made, the present number of Judges would not be sufficient to get through the criminal business of the country. That was, however, a matter of little importance, if the alteration was an improvement, for you could easily double She number of the Judges.
H. ASSIZES FOR LANCASHIRE. Mr. EWART, on Thusday, pre tented a petition from Liverpool, praying that the Assizes might be removed from Lancaster to Liverpool and Manchester ; and moved for leave to bring in a bill for that purpose. A conversation ensued, in which Sir ROBERT PEEL, Lord ALTHORP, Mr. C. P. TnomsoN, Sir J. CAMPBELL, and Mr. R. WASON, took part. Sir J. CAMPBELL sug- gested, that instead of the House legislating on this subject, the King in Council should be empowered to fix the place of holding Assizes wherever it might appear convenient. On the understanding that some such measure would he introduced, Mr. EWART agreed to post- pone the discussion of his bill.
12. CHURCH REFORM. The Marquis of WESTMINSTER, on Friday, presented a petition from Wales, complaining of the pluralities and ether abuses in the Church, particularly of the circumstance of the Established Clergy being almost universally ignorant of the Welsh language. He earnestly supported the prayer of the petition; which was reasonable and just.
The Bishop of BaNcort said, the statements in the petition were a mass of calumnies and misrepresentations. He denied that the Welsh livings were held by pluralists, or that the clergymen did not under- stand the Welsh language. The very reverse was the fact. It was true he did not understand the Welsh language himself, but his chaplain did, and at every Confirmation he delivered an address in Welsh to the persons who did not understand English.
The Bishop of St. Amen also stated, that the petition was full of falsehoods, copied from a book written by a gentleman in Chester. The time might come when the people would want private property as Much as they now want Bishop's property,—they might want some of the Marquis of Westminster's property, which would be better worth having, perhaps, than that of the Bishops. He too acknow- ledged that he did not understand Welsh, but then his chaplain was an excellent Welsh scholar.
Lord KING asked, if it were not true that there was a great concen- tration of the good things of this World among the Clergy—that there were eight livings annexed to the See of Bangor, for instance?
He believed that the relative of one Prelate had seven preferments. One holy person wished for a sixfold curer of men ; here the wish was surpassed—here was a sevenfold curer. The names of Beevor and Horsley were constantly oc- curring. The writer of a book alluded to by the right reverend Prelates had been most unceremoniously attacked by them. He could assure them that the person referred to was a most respectable person.
The Dissenters had multiplied in consequence of these abuses. In one Welsh county the number of ckurches was 49, and of Dissenting neetinghouses 140.
•
The Marquis of WESTMINSTgIl was more satisfied than ever- of the necessity of a reform in the Church.
The right reverend Prelates, in answer to the observations in the petition about the people not understanding the language in which they were addressed, said that the.charges were translated to them. But a translation did not get rid of the objection. The Articles of the Church were framed to avoid such a thing. Many noble lords opposite might understand the Bishops if they were to preach in Latin ; but would it satisfy the Articles, if they were to preach to the people in Latin, and have their sermons translated ?
Mr. C. K. TYNTE, as the member for a county containing a very large body of Dissenters, congratulated the Dissenters and the people of England on the liberal manner in which Ministers had met the motion.
The motion for a Select Committee was then put and carried.
13. Iorsn CHURCH REFORM. Lord ALTHORP, on Monday, post. potted the resolutions relative to the Church of Ireland till the Alotulay following.
Petitions against time proposed Bill were presented on Wednesday, . by Sir It. VYVYAN from the Clergy and Deanery of Bristol, by Colonel PERCEVAI: from Elphin, and from Foxford in the county of Mayo, by Mr. G. EVANS from a place in Carmarthenshire.
14. PAROCHIAL REGISTRATION. Mr. WILES moved, on Thursday, for a Select Committee " to consider the general state of parochial re- gistries, and the laws relating to those registries, and the registration of births, baptisms' marriages, deaths, and burials, in England and litales." He said that the state of confusion into which the whole system of registration was fallen in this country deserved serious care. Ile detailed the several enactments which had been made to secure proper registries, since the time of Cardinal Wolsey to 1812. The bill passed in 1812 was not carried into effect.
It enacted, that the Clergy and Churchwardens should annually make out duplicates of the parochial registries to be sent to the Registrar of each diocese, who was to make out a copy in alphabetical order, and preserve it for reference. Of all the dioceses in the kingdom, there were but three in which the registries were deposited in places of safety. No Registrar had made out an alphabetical list of entries. In the important dioceses of London, Chester, and Bristol, at least one half the parishes had never made any returns at all ; and where made. they were frequently constructed with so much irregularity and inattention to the Act, as entirely to fail in accomplishing the intended object. The whole system was in a state of utter confusion. Some thousand returns 'Flaving been sent irregularly through the Post office, the Registrars refused to take them in, on the ground that they had no funds to pay the postage. The returns were sent back to the Post-office, where they accumulated to such an extent that it was thought necewilry to burn them.
There was no effectual provision for the registration of Dissenters— Yet in Wales two-thirds of the population were Dissenters. There were above 8,250 Dissenting meeting-houses in England and Wales, and the Dissen- ters could not amount to fewer than 4,000,000—about one-third of the entire population. He repeated, there was no provision for the registration of this large body ; examined copies of certificates from Dissenting ministers could not be read in courts of law. This was a gross injustice, not only to Dissenters, but the public at large.
His plan would render it imperative for the Established Clergy to keep a registry of the births, marriages, and deaths, of persons of all communities; but lie Was for rendering them in this respect rather civil than religious officers. It would be best to discuss the plan in a Com- mittee, before entering into its details in the House.
Mr. C. K. TYNTE seconded the motion. .
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL (Sir W. Home) approved of it, and would support it.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL (Sir J. Campbell) said, that an improved system of registration was necessary. It was easier to trace a pedigree five hundred years old, than a modern one.
One of the greatest evils of the present system consisted in the forging of certificates. He knew of the occurrence of an instance of aforgery of that de- scription, where there was an insertion of a birth in a professedly old Bible that tinned out to be one prepared for the purpose. In fact, there was a regular manufactory of old Bibles in London for that especial purpose, where applica- tions were made for them when they were required to pass off a forgery of this kind. They were prepared with such art, that it was impossible to discover the forgery 11136S by the means of a magnifying glass.
15. CATHOLIC MARRIAGES. Lord Mor.vNeux gave notice on Thursday, that after Easter he should move to bring in a bill to legalize the marriages of Catholics by their own clergymen.
16. SABBATH OBSERVANCE BILL. A discussion arose in the House on Friday, upon the presentation of a number of petitions by Sir A. AGNFM in favour of his bill. Mr. Brauttostr said, the bill ought tit be styled "a bill for the better promotion of cant." Mr. HUME said, the Legislature could not compel people to become pious. Sir A. AGNEW said, the object of the bill was misunderstood—its principle was to recognize the cessation of all labour o» the Sabbath. Mr. Curr.an FERGUSSON reprobated the language used in reference to this bill and the petitioners who supported it, who were sincere in their desire to have Sunday better kept. Sir ALEXANDER HOPE concurred in Mr. Fergusson's observations. Mr. POTTER said, the bill would disorganize the whole society of England : it might do for Scotland, but would never be tolerated in this country. Mr. A. JOHNSTONE defended the bill. Mr. O'CoriNr.t.t. said, it was very different from what he had expected ; and he would now decidedly oppose the bill, though be bad intended to support it. Mr. Conarrr thanked Sir A. Agnew it.new for making his bill so bad that it would be quite impossible to p 17. GAME LAWS. Mr. LENNARD moved, on Thursday, for leave to bring in a bill to amend the Game Act, so as to allow tenants to shoot game on their land without the permission of the landlord.
Sir E. KNATCHBULT. seconded the motion:
Mr. HEATHCOTE said, that as experiments for the prevention of crime, the Game Act and the Beer Act had both failed.
Mr. BARING said, that it was unfortunate that both those Acts bad passed in the same year, because it prevented the effects of the one being distinguished from those of the other bill, as far as the increase of crime was concerned.
Mr. W. BROUGHAM wished the Game Act to be amended. As it
stood at present, to constitute poaching, the offence must be committed between an hour after sunset and an hour before sunrise—the two hours during which more game was illegally destroyed than at any other time.
Mr. FAMIFUL said, that the Game-laws were tyrannical and in- famous—made for the exclusive benefit of the rich, to the injury and oppression of the poor.
Mr. AGLIONBY protested against such an assertion. The Game- laws were for the protection of property. The rich man had as much right to his game as the poor man has to his pigs and poultry.
Leave was given to bring in the bill.
18. SLAVERY. Lord SUFFIELD, on Thursday, presented a petition from Edinburgh, signed by 21,291 persons, praying for immediate emancipation of the Negroes; by which they meant, that at the earliest possible period there should take place a substitution of legal restraint for the irresponsible power of the master over his slave. He said that rumours were afloat respecting the Government plan, which had excited great consternation ; and he wished to have some authentic information of the intentions of Ministers.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH thought that Ministers should bring forward their measure with the least possible-delay.
Lord Gonsiuctt said, that the delay was not attributable to Go- vernment, and that communications with the parties more especially interested on the subject were going on. He declined stating at pre- sent what the Government plan was.
Earl FITZWILLIAM approved of the conduct of Ministers.
The Duke of BUCKINGHAM said,. that Government was to be blamed for the delay which had taken place in the settlement of this question. The Government had communicated with a portion of the West Indian in- terests; and to them they bad told their hopes, their wishes, and their disputes, which were kept a secret from the general body of West Indian proprietors. This was the cause of the delay which had taken place; and the Government were responsible for all the confusion in which West Indian affairs at present stood.
Earl GREY said, .that it could not fairly be imputed as a crime to _Ministers that they had endeavoured to ascertain the opinions of the IVest Indian body on this subject ; which was beset with difficulty and danger.
The Duke of IluckirIgham complained that the Government had communi- cated with a select portion of the West Indian proprietors. How would he have had the Government act ? Would he have had the Ministers go to a general assembly—to a meeting at Exeter Hall—and there publicly declare their 'wen- thins ? All that Alinisters could do, was to consult those privately whom they knew to be opposed to them, but in whom they had the greatest confidence, in order to ascertain in what way their objections could be met. Of course it would, be inconsistent with his duty to throw out any- hint respecting the nature of any plan which it might be in the contemplation of Ministers to propose.
He was glad to find, from Lord Suffield's explanation, that the Edinburgh petitioners did not really mean "immediate" emancipation ; but the each period at which emancipation could take place with safety to all the interests concerned.
The Duke of RICHMOND emphatically denied the assertion of the Duke of Buckingham, that there were any disputes in the Cabinet -relative to the West India question.
Lord SUFFIELD then presented a similar petition from Glasgow, signed by 31,172 persons.
19. FacToRIES BILL. Mr. GREEN, on Monday, presented a peti- tion from the master-manufacturers of Lancaster and the neighbourhood, ,praying for a commission to take evidence relative to the labour in fac- tories before passing the Factories Bill. Sir C. BURRELL said, that this would only procrastinate the bill. Mr. Manic PHILLIPS said, that if the bill were to pass for two years, or even for one year, at the end of that time the trade would be driven from this country into the hands -of foreigners. Lord ASIII.F.Y would resist to the utmost any attempt to procrastinate the passage of this bill by any motion for a commission of inquiry. Mr. M. Arrwoon asked why the manufacturers were so sensitive upon the subject, if there were no oppression practised ? the .object of the bill was to put an end to oppression.
20. COMPLAINT AGAINST GENERAL DARLING. Dr. LUSHINGTON, on Wednesday, presented a petition from Captain Robinson, formerly of the 17th Light Dragoons, against General Darling, late Governor of New South Wales. The petitioner complained that General Darling had illegally tampered with witnesses who gave evidence against him (the petitioner) on a court-martial ; that inadmissible evidence had been allowed to be given against him ; that some of the witnesses were con- victed felons; that he was not allowed to cross-examine them ; and that the whole proceedings were irregular and oppressive. Dr. Lush- ington spoke highly in favour of the petitioner's character, and said that be had never seen charges less specific, clear, or more confused than those which were preferred against him by General Darling.
Mr. HOME confirmed the petitioner's statement.
Colonel VERNER said, that Captain Robinson was incapable of any act unbecoming an officer or a gentleman.
Mr. R. GRANT said, that he bad not had time to examine the minutes of the court-martial, which filled three folio volumes, and that Gover- nor Darling had only received notice of this motion on Tuesday. The proceedings, as far as he bad looked into them, appeared to have been legal. He wished the discussion of the matter to be deferred. Dr. LUSHINGTON then postponed his motion for the production of papers to the 23d May.
21. NEW POLICE. Mr. W. Bat:Immix, on Wednesday, presented a petition from the parish of Christchurch against the New Police Act. The petitioners complained, that whereas under the old system their parish was watched at the cost of 1,1001., they were now obliged to pay the Commissioners of Police 2,1001. Mr. Brougham said, that at the last election he was obliged to pay 130/. for special constables, be- cause the High Bailiff of Southwark stated that the peace of the bo- rough, which was supposed to be preserved by the New Police, would be endangered if they were allowed to appear. He would support a motion, if it were brought forward by any member, for a Select Com- snittee to inquire into the subject. Mr. WILES said, that he had been opposed originally to the establish.- meta of -the New Police: but he was new of opinion, that as long as they continued to conduct themselves as they had hitherto done, they should be supported by the public.
22. SPGAR-DUTIES BILL This bill was read a third time in the House of Lords on Thursday, and passed.
23. BEER SIKH'S. Mr. RYLE, on Monday, presented several peti- tions, from Macclesfield and other places, complaining of the evils arising from the increase of beer-shops. Sir C. Beiumu., Mr. Ro- BINSON, and another Member, considered that the great increase in the number of these shops tended to demoralize the people. It was said that the publicans, in order to encourage customers, now.permitted gambling and other immoral practices in their houses, which they Were not in the habit of doing previously to the passing of the Beer Bill.
24. DUTY ON MARINE INSURANCES. Lord .SANnox, on Monday, presented a petition from the merchants, shipowners, and other inhabi- tants of Liverpool, members of the Marine Insurance Company, pluy- ing for a reduction of the duty on marine insura»ces from .5s. to 2s. 6d. The present duty drove a great number of insurances out of this coun- try into the bands of foreign underwriters.
2,5. MINISTERIAL CHANGES. On Thursday, on the motion of Mr. SPRING RICE, a new writ was ordered to issue for the election of a member for North Lancashire, in the room of Mr. Stanley, who has accepted the office of Colonial Secretary, and one for Westminster, its the room of Sir John Hobhouse, who is made Secretary for Ireland.
26. LIVERPOOL ELECTION COMMITTEE. Elizabeth Robinson was summoned to the bar of the House of Commons on Tuesday, to state her reasons for refetAng to answer questions put to her respecting some bribery proceedings at the Liverpool election. She said that she was afraid to tell—that her life would be in danger were she to answer the questions put to her. After a conversation of some length,—in which Mr. Hems, Mr. BENF.TP, Sir It. PEEL, MT. SPRING RICE, Mr. C. WYNN, and Mr. D. IV. Hanvev took part,—the SPEAKER informed the woman, that she would be committed to the custody of the Ser- geant-at-Arms if she persisted in refusing to answer the questions put to her, and that she would receive full protection if she did answer. She was then ordered to withdraw, and to appear before the Liverpool Election Committee on Wednesday.
27. STAFFORD BRIBERY BILL. This bill was read a third time, and passed, on Friday, after some ineffectual opposition from Mr. SHAW and Mr. WYNN.
28, SIR ROBERT PEEL AND SIR EDWARD CODRINGTON. A very long conversation passed on Tuesday, between Sir R. PEEL, Sir E. ConaiNcroN, and Lord PALMERSTON, relative to a misunderstanding of some instructions transmitted by Government in 1828, subsequent to the battle of Nayarit)°, to Sir E. Codriugton, by which Sir Edward was directed to prevent the deportation of some Greek slaves from the Morea to Egypt by the Egyptian fleet.. Sir Edwfird declared that he received no orders to that effect, and was therefore much surprised to lind,"by a report in Galiynani's lilessever of a speech by Sir R. Peel, that he had been charged by him with neglect of orders in not prevent- ing the carrying away of the slaves. Sir Romer PEEL referred to the reports of his speech in the Times' Chronicle, mid Hansard's Debates, from which it appeared that be had made no such charge. Five years had elapsed, and Sir Edward had been silent the whore of that time. Sir E. CODRINGTON said, that he had bad communications on the sub- ject with Lord Melville, Mr. W. Peel, and Mr. Croker ; who, it seems, had never mentioned the subject to Sir Robert Peel. The mutter ended by Sir E. ConerNurox's professing himself satisfied with Sir Robert Peel's denial of having made the charge attributed to bins in Galiynani's Messenger.
29. BRITISH MUSEUM. Mr. BERNAL, on Monday, brought up the report of the Committee of Supply voting 16,0001. to the British Mu- seum.
Mr. COBBETT strongly objected to the grant, on the ground that the Museum did no good at all to the majority of those who paid this mo- ney. He would ask, of what use in the wide world was the British Museum ? It was only a place for loungers, and 16,000/. was too much to pay for it. He should like, to know to whom the 10,000/. which were paid for salaries out of the 16,000/. went—whetber it did not go to the Aristocratic fry ? For his own part, he did not know where- abouts in London this British Museum was. The grant was a scan- dalous Government job, and he would move that the report be recom- mitted.
Lord ALTHORP seconded the motion, as he was sure that no one else would do it ; and he wished to have the opportunity of saying a few words on the question. He was not surprised at Mr. Cobbett's opi-
nion, for, a few nights ago, he had stated that education did no good. There was, he felt happy to say, no class of persons in this country who agreed with Mr. Cobbett that the first principles of science were of no use..
Mr. WARBURTON said, he did not know that the whole of the 16,0001. was judiciously expended; but he had no doubt as to the principle of supporting a public institution of this kind.
Mr. Cobbett's motion was negatived, and the report received.
30. SOANE'S MUSEUM. Mr. COBBETT, on Monday, presented a pe- tition from Mr. George Soane, of Worthing, son of Sir John Soane. against the bill called Sir John &nine's Museum Bill. It was referred to the Committee on the bill.
Previous page
