Page images
PDF
EPUB

Mr GRATTAN presented a petition from the Corporation of the City of Dublin, against the claims of the Roman Catholics. He must at the same time say, that he differed from them totally and entirely in respect to the prayer of the petition; and though he did not agree with his worthy constituents, and though he would not canvass their motives, still he hoped he might be allowed to lament, in their conduct on this occasion, what he could not presume to blame. The petition was laid on the table.

USURY LAWS.

Mr Serjeant ONSLOW, in moving for leave to bring in a Bill to repeal the laws relating to the rate of legal interest, observed, that he had the pleasure to find, last year, that he was only opposed by one gentleman, although several thought it not then the time for such a measure. He was happy that he had postponed his motion, because now he was sure every one would agree that it was necessary, as a measure of political economy. He thought it extremely strange, that persons should not be considered as capable of borrowing without directions expressly laid down by the Legislature. It might as well be said, that no man should be allowed to sell except by the direction of Parliament. The most beneficial projects had often failed by limiting the rate of interest by law, so that a capital could not be raised to carry them on. Ireland had suffered particularly from the deficiency of capital, owing to the existing laws relating to the rate of interest. then moved for leave to bring in a bill to repeal the laws which regulate or restrain the rate of interest.

He

Mr VANSITTART would not oppose the bill at present, because he perfectly coincid ed in the principle of the Learned Serjeant; but he questioned whether the public mind was prepared for so sudden a change in that which had been so long established by law. Leave was then given to bring in the bill, and the House adjourned.

May 2.-Mr BENNETT brought up the Report of the Police Committee; and he stated, that in a short time he would call the attention of the House to the mode of licensing public-houses.-The report was ordered to lie on the table.

BREACH OF PRIVILEGE. Mr BENNETT said, he had received a copy of a book, vindicating the character of the Tower-division Magistrates, contain ing some passages reflecting on the Police Committee; in consequence of which he had summoned the author before the Committee, when he avowed himself the author. The book is written by the Rev. T. Thirlwall, Rector of Bowden, in Essex.

The book was handed to the Clerk, and he read the passages complained of. One accused the Chairman, Captain Bennett, of hearing evidence alone, and protested against his being tried by Committees, Inquisition, or Star Chamber.

Mr BENNETT said, the author had been called on to explain the inuendoes contained in the last passage, and he had denied that he had accused the Committee of want of candour or impartiality, and said that he meant nothing disrespectful to the Committee. Being again pressed to explain that part, he objected to answering that which might criminate himself. It was the desire of the Committee to have accepted any reasonable apology; but none was offered them by the gentleman until this morning, when he expressed his contrition for the passage complained of, it being merely a rhetorical figure of speech, and that he had directed his publisher to stop the sale of his book. The Committee had, however, thought it right to bring the subject before the House. He then moved, that the Rev. Mr Thirlwall should attend the House on Wednesday next.

The motion was agreed to; and on the motion of Mr BENNETT, the explanations given by Mr Thirlwall were laid before the House, and ordered to be printed.-Adjourned till Monday.

Monday, May 5.-The Scots Madhouse Bill was read a second time, and committed for the 23d May.

FIRST REPORT OF THE FINANCE COMMITTEE.

In a Committee of the whole House, Mr DAVIES GILBERT stated the views and objects of the Finance Committee.

There were several bills to be brought in; and the first he now moved for, was one to abolish the Chief Justiceships in Eyre. A debate of considerable length followed, as to the utility of the proposed measure, in the course of which Lord CASTLEREAGH said he would vote for it, to do away the false opinions which prevailed on the subject of sinecures. It would not be a great saving; but sinecures being bad in principle, it would operate as a cure to the impression and delusion that had gone abroad.

On the question being put and carried, it was ordered that bills should be brought in for the abolition of the offices of the two Chief Justiceships in Eyre, north and south of the Trent-the office of Auditor, and four Tellers of the Exchequer the Wardenship of the Cinque Ports, and the Governorship of the Isle of Wight; also two other bills, to abolish the office of Commissary General of Musters, and to regulate offices in Ireland.

The other orders of the day were then disposed of.

May 6.-Mr HEATHCOTE presented a petition from the Wool-growers of Hampshire, praying for a revision of the laws on Wool.

Mr F. LEWIS thought that all parties interested would do well to let the matter rest; but in the next Sessions he hoped the House would investigate the matter seriously.

Sir CHARLES BURRELL was of opinion, that some alteration should be made in these

laws, which were extremely oppressive in their present operation.

Mr CURWEN said, he was a Member of the Committee of last Session, and the general opinion was, that there existed no reason for complaint. There had been no petition from the Wool-growers last year; but certainly it was a matter of very considerable importance, involving a great number of interests; and though he was happy to find that it was not intended to press it this year, yet whenever the question came he should not oppose going into it. The misfortune was, that we had always been legislating on particular interests; but in future it would be wiser to take a review of all our commercial and manufacturing interests, and not to encourage monopolies. The woollen manufactures were now looking up; considerable orders, he understood, had been received from Russia; and therefore he deprecated all discussion on this subject at the present moment.

The petition was brought up, and ordered to lie on the table.

MR CANNING'S MISSION TO LISBON. Mr LAMBTON rose to make his promised motion. He begged that the question might be considered, not as an attack upon an individual, but as an inquiry into a measure highly censurable, as being very expensive, and utterly unnecessary. The Hon. Gentleman argued at considerable length on the subject, and concluded by moving the following resolution :-That on the 18th July 1814, a despatch was forwarded from Lord Castlereagh to Mr Sydenham, ordering him to confine his personal expenses within the usual allowances, as no public grounds existed for continuing the expenditure of his Majesty's servants at Lisbon on the same scale as during the war. That it appears, that shortly after the date of this despatch, the Right Hon. George Canning, under pretence of congratulating the Royal Family of Portugal on their return from the Brazils, was appointed ambassador to Lisbon, at an expense amounting in the whole to £18,880. That such an appointment is inconsistent with the previous despatch to Mr Sydenham, uncalled for by the circumstances of the time, and a most unjustifiable abuse of the public money.

Lord CASTLEREAGH justified the transaction on the ground of the then affairs of Europe, and contended that the expense was as small as was consistent with the occasion.

Sir FRANCIS BURDETT said, there never was in his knowledge a more complete failure in an attempt at defence than had been exhibited by the Noble Lord. The Hon. Baronet went through the question at large, and ridiculed and censured the transaction as a palpable job.

Upon the question being again put, Admiral BERESFORD testified to the fact, that the Prince Regent of Portugal had sig

nified to him his intention of returning; : and had detained him (Admiral Beresford) at Rio Janeiro a considerable time upon this expectation.

No other Member offering to speak, Mr CANNING rose, and said, that in a question like the present, however disguised in forms, he believed he felt in common with the Hon. Mover, and with the Hon. Baronet also, who had spoken out more plainly, that it was individually and personally directed against himself. The Right Hon. Gentleman then entered into a general defence of his conduct, and of this transaction in particular. The motion implied, that Government pretended to entertain a belief in the return of the Royal Family of Portugal to Lisbon; and had availed themselves of this pretence, corruptly to appoint him to a mission which he had as corruptly accepted; but he declared before God, that he had most firmly believed that the Prince fully intended to return to Portugal: but the existence and the reasonableness of such belief did not rest upon his veracity. Lord Strangford had intimated it to have been his conviction that the Prince would return, and that he waited only for a squadron to convey him. Could he imagine that all this was a dexterous artifice? He then recapitulated all the facts; and asserted, that he had made arrangements to go to Lisbon as a private person before he heard any thing of his appointment. After arguing at great length on the principle of the case, the Hon. Member concluded by observing, that if he had not succeeded in removing the charges that were brought against him, this would be the last time he would claim their indulgence. At the conclusion of his speech he was greeted with loud and general cheering.

The debate was then taken up by Mr BROUGHAM, who went over the principal grounds, and re-stated the main objections; and insisted that the transaction was precipitate, and that the whole expence might have been saved. It was this point, he said, upon which the judgment of the country would finally be formed-whether any real necessity had existed for the embassy, or whether it was not a mere pretence to suit the interest of individuals?

Lord MILTON desired to say, that he should not vote for the motion, though he could not acquit the Right Hon. Gentleman of all blame; and he thought the negotiation between him and the Noble Lord, which led to his subsequent appointment to the Lisbon mission, not very creditable to either.

Several other Members spoke, when the question being frequently called for, the House divided:-For Mr Lambton's motion 96; against it 270. Majority 174.

The other orders of the day were disposed of, and the House adjourned.

BREACH OF PRIVILEGE.

May 7.-The order of the day was read,

for the attendance of the Rev. Thomas Thirlwall at the bar of the House; and, the question being put, a long conversation arose respecting the principle and extent of the proceedings in the present instance, at the close of which the Reverend Gentleman was called in, when the SPEAKER informed him that a complaint had been preferred against him for a publication which contained reflections on one of the Committees of that House. The offensive passages having been read, the Reverend Gentleman apologized to the House, and implored its mercy; in consequence of which he was allowed to withdraw, and the business was dismissed.

A new writ was issued for Eye, in the room of Sir William Garrow; and one for Dorchester, in the place of Sir S. Shepherd, who had accepted the situation of Attorney-General.

On the motion of Mr C. W. W. WYNNE, a committee was appointed to consider of the best means for shortening the duration of polls, and other regulations with regard to elections.

On the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, leave was given to bring in a bill to lower the rate of interest upon Navy Bills, and shorten their date to two instead of three months.

[blocks in formation]

STEAM-BOATS.

On the motion of Mr HARVEY, a Select Committee was appointed to inquire into the causes which led to the explosion of the engine belonging to the Norwich and Yarmouth Steam-boat, to ascertain the best means of preventing similar accidents for the future, and to report the result of their investigations to the House.

MR HERRIES' APPOINTMENT. Mr BENNETT made his promised motion in regard to the retiring salary of Mr Herries, late Commissary in Chief, and at the close of his speech, moved a resolution to the following effect:-Resolved, "That the allowing of the late Commissary in Chief, on the abolition of his office, to retain £1,350 a-year, was an excessive remuneration of public service, &c." After a considerable debate, the motion was negatived. Ayes 42; noes 93.

Mr D. GILBERT brought in the bill for the abolition of certain offices and sale of public buildings in Scotland, which was

read a first and ordered to be read a second time on Tuesday next.

The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the House adjourned.

STATE PRISONERS.

May 9.-Mr GORDON, seeing the Under Secretary of State in his place, begged leave to inquire whether any communications had been received at his office from the Magistrates at Reading, respecting the treatment of the state prisoners in the goal subject to their inspection?

Mr H. ADDINGTON replied, that he was not aware of the circumstance alluded to by the Honourable Gentleman, but if he thought proper to move for papers, no objection would be made to their production.

Mr GORDON hoped the Right Honourable Gentleman would be able to give the required information on Monday.

Sir W. SCOTT presented a petition from the University of Oxford, against the Roman Catholic claims.

On the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, after a few words from Mr J. P. GRANT, there was ordered to be laid before the House an abstract of the net produce of the revenue of Great Britain, for the years and quarters ending the 5th of April 1815, 1816, and 1817.

CATHOLIC CLAIMS.

Mr GRATTAN made his motion on the Roman Catholic Claims this day, which produced an animated and interesting debate. The motion for going into a Committee was finally lost by the small majority of only 24, the numbers being on the division; ayes 221; noes 245.

BIRMINGHAM POOR'S RATE.

Monday, May 12.-Sir C. MORDAUNT, in moving the second reading of the Birmingham Poor's Rate Bill, insisted on the very unequal pressure of the rate at that place. Of 18,000 ground-renters, 14,000 paid no rate; a great part of the town consisting of small houses let from week to week, and tenanted by occupiers so poor that it would be useless cruelty to distrain on them: it was therefore thought advisable to apply to Parliament to make the proprietor pay.

After some conversation, in which there was much difference of opinion, the motion was negatived.

FLAX DRESSING.

Mr CURWEN presented a petition from Samuel Hill and William Bundy, of Camden-town, praying that an invention of theirs might be examined by a Committee of the House. Their machine would be a great saving in cultivation, and in the dressing of flax. It was not liable to the general objections against machinery, as the use of it would give employment to 40 or 60,000 people, with many other advantages; and would create a saving of £20,000,000. Many prisoners might also be employed by it. The petition was brought up and read, and referred to a select Committee, compos

ed of Lord Castlereagh, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr Curwen, Mr Rose, Mr D. Gilbert, and others.

ARMY ESTIMATES.

The House resolved itself into a Committee of Supply, and the Army Estimates, and the Second Report of the Committee of Finance, were taken into consideration.

Lord PALMERSTON said, he had arranged the statement he was to submit to the Committee into four classes. The first referred to the amount of military establishments at home. The second included the army in France and the army in India. The third related to expenses incurred by past services, such as Chelsea pensions, widow and orphan allowances, and the Military Asylum. The fourth class regarded the services of military establishments that were now to be reduced. After detailing the items, his Lordship stated the reduction in point of numbers at 55,000 men, and the saving at £1,800,000.

Some debate ensued upon the several resolutions, which were finally agreed to.

TOLL ON MANURE.

Tuesday, May 13.-Mr D. GILBERT obtained leave to bring in a bill to exempt the passage of manure from tolls. He meant it as a declaratory bill, to amend and explain the act of the 53d of the King, and to remove doubts, &c.

POOR EMPLOYMENT BILL.

Some important discussion took place on the measure proposed of loans to parishes upon security: in the conclusion the House resolved itself into a Committee upon the bill, when the names of the following gentlemen were read as appointed to the Committee for the_object in view: Lord R. Seymour, Sir T. Acland, Mr W. Lamb, Sir C. Edmondstone, Sir James Shaw, Sir J. Perring, Mr Gooch, Mr Edward Littleton, Mr Luttrel, Mr C. Grant, sen., Mr Curwen, Mr Estcourt, Mr Casberd, Mr J. Smith, Mr H. Swann, Mr Benjamin Harrison, Mr Reid, Chairman of the E. I. C. (not a member of the House), Mr Thornton, Mr Phillips, Mrs Angerstein, Mr C. Baring, Mr Joseph Tierney, and Mr Bosanquet.

The report was afterwards brought up, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer named Wednesday next for the further consideration, which was agreed to.

FURTHER SUSPENSION OF THE HABEAS CORPUS ACT.

Mr PONSONBY, after observing that the present act for the suspension of the Habeas Corpus would expire in July, and that the middle of May being now at hand, a period was approaching at which, according to all experience, a number of members would retire into the country, begged to ask the Noble Lord opposite (Lord Castlereagh) if it was the intention of his Majesty's Ministers to apply to Parliament for a further extension of that power of imprisonment which had already been given them? He did not enter

into the question, as the rules of the House forbade it; but he hoped the Noble Lord would give an answer one way or the other.

Lord CASTLEREAGH replied, that after the holidays, about the 1st of June, a communication would be made to the House concerning the internal state of the country; after which, the same proceedings would be proposed as had taken place in the early part of the Session, and it would be referred to a Committee to enter into an inquiry a to the measures proper to be pursued.

Mr PHILLIPS moved, that the House should be called the 2d of June.

Mr J. P. GRANT, after reminding the House that the first law-officer of Scotland had stated that the conspiracies at Glasgow were not confined to the poorer classes of the community, said, that he (Mr J. P. Grant) knew that only one person above the rank of an operative weaver had been taken, and he had declared that he had no communication whatever with political clubs £3000 had been offered for bail, in order that he might continue his occupation, but this was refused, and properly enough, as the man was charged with high treason; but he was now told, that without any farther information, the law-officers of the Crown, after having confined this man six weeks, discharged him without farther statement, and without bail: so that a respectable inIdividual had been incarcerated six weeks without cause, discharged without inquiry, (hear, hear!) and left to seek redress for the loss of his trade, character, and health, in what manner he could. (Hear, hear!) He hoped the House would consider in what manner the powers of the Act had been applied, and what was to be expected from the law-officers of the Crown: he did not impute motives, but mentioned facts, and he trusted some explanation would be given.

The call of the House was then fixed for the 2d of June.

May 16.-Lord LASCELLES withdrew his original Bill for rendering the Proprietors of Lead Mines rateable for the relief of the poor, in proportion to the profits, and substituted another, which was read a first time, and ordered to be read a second time on Friday next.

On the motion of Mr ROSE, the Saving Banks Bill was re-committed; and after some conversation, several of the clauses were read, and the blanks filled up. The report was ordered to be received on Monday.

The Committees of Supply, and Ways and Means, were postponed to Monday.

CLERGY RESIDENCE BILL.

In the debate upon the motion for going into a Committee upon the Clergy Residence Bill, Mr MANNERS SUTTON moved a clause, that the Clergy should be allowed to farm land, which was carried by a majority of 38 to 35. After some further conver sation, the quantity of land to be so farmed

was limited to "eighty acres." The Chairman then left the chair, and got leave to sit again on Monday.

Mr GILBERT brought up the Third Report of the Select Committee upon the Public Expenditure and Income of Great Britain.

Ordered to lie on the table.

The second reading of the Bankruptcy Bill was postponed to the 8th of June.

Monday, May 19.-Sir S. SHEPHERD and Mr GIFFORD took the oaths as members for Dorchester and Eye.

LORD SIDMOUTH'S CIRCULAR LETTER.

Sir SAMUEL ROMILLY moved that an

address be presented to the Prince Regent, praying, that the circular letter addressed on the 17th of March last, by the Secretary of State for the Home Department, to the Lord Lieutenants of counties in England and Wales, together with the opinion of the Crown Lawyers referred to in it, be laid before the House; and gave notice that he would submit a motion on the subject on Tuesday, June 3. Ordered.

OFFICES' COMPENSATION BILL. Mr D. GILBERT moved the second reading of the Offices' Compensation Bill, which was opposed by Sir Robert Heron, Mr Brougham, Lord A. Hamilton, and Mr Douglas. Upon the division there appeared-ayes 105; noes 45; majority 60. The bill was then read a third time.

The House resolved itself into a Committee of Supply, when the following sums were voted: £17,000 for the employment of convicts at home, and £18,000 for bills drawn from New South Wales.

The other orders of the day were then disposed of.

PARLIAMENTARY REFORM.

May 20.-Sir FRANCIS BURDETT made his motion for Reform in Parliament, which stood for this day. It was seconded by the Hon. Mr Brand. Lord Cochrane, Mr Curwen, Mr Tierney, and Sir Samuel Romilly, spoke in favour of the motion; and Sir J. Nicholl, the Hon. Mr Ward, Mr Lamb, and Lord Milton, against it.

The debate was cut short by cries of question, and the House divided. For the motion 77; against it 265; majority 188.

The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the House adjourned at two o'clock.

DURATION OF PARLIAMENT.

May 21.-Mr BROUGHAM gave notice of a motion for the 5th of June, for the repeal of the Septennial Act. After some private conversation, he fixed the 10th of June as the day for his motion.

Mr PEEL obtained leave to bring in a Bill to continue the insurrection act in Ireland for one year.

CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE HOME

DEPARTMENT.

Sir J. MACKINTOSH moved, that there be laid before the House, copies of all communications between the Home office, or persons connected with it, and a person of VOL. I.

the name of Poole, regarding the conduct of the latter in his informations against three individuals, called Parkinson, Fletcher, and Deacon, before a Magistrate of Staffordshire. [This is the case in which the Rev. Mr Powis is concerned, against whom an action is now pending.]

Mr H. ADDINGTON opposed the motion; and on a division there were, for the motion 13; against it 47; majority 34.

EXCHEQUER BILLS.

On the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, the House went into a

Committee on the Bill for providing employment for the poor, by the issue of Exchequer Bills on adequate security, when

Lord MILTON objected to one of the clauses, and proposed an amendment,—that the word "parishes" should be omitted. He thought it would place the country gentlemen in an awkward situation, as they must either become responsible for the money borrowed, or incur the odium of not assisting the poor of their neighbourhoods.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER defended the clause; observing, that the Commissioners would not feel themselves called upon to advance any sum, except in particular cases of extreme pressure.

The House divided on the question for retaining the clause as it originally stood. Ayes 23, noes 15.

Mr LYTTLETON objected to the clause which respected the securities to be given, and moved an amendment, omitting that part of it which allowed extents in aid.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER agreed to modify the clause, and the amendment was accordingly withdrawn.

The remaining sections were then gone through, and the House being resumed, it was ordered that the report should be received on Monday.

In a Committee on the Woollen Act, a

resolution was agreed to, to allow the exportation of bale-yarn from Ireland.

May 22.-The Metropolis Paving Bill, and the Edinburgh Police Bill, were read a third time and passed.

Sir JOHN NEWPORT gave notice, that he would, on the 5th of June, bring in a Bill to abolish the cottage tax in Ireland, and a Bill to regulate fees in civil courts in England.

EXTENTS IN AID.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, on rising to give notice of his intention that the House, at its rising to-morrow, do adjourn to that day se'nnight, was desirous of stating at the same time, that it was in the contemplation of his Majesty's Government to propose, immediately after the holidays, some new measure to the House, for the purpose of regulating the application of extents in aid after that time. They were perfectly aware, that the uses to which this remedy had been applied were foreign to their original intention, and were such as could 3Z

« PreviousContinue »