Star. — London, England, 1811-04-06 00:00:00

Pr - - PARLIAMENTARr PROCEEDINGS. HOUSE OF LORDS, APRIL, S. Soveral Private and Local Billi Were brought •p front the Commons, and read a first thee. PLACES tN ItECERSTow. The Order of the Day being moved, The Earl of GROSVENOR rose, pnrstiant to no tice, to move the second reading of the Bill for pre. venting the granting of P laces its Reversion. He felt that the present moment was not the most auspicious for carrying that salutary measure into effect ; but he was not therefore discouraged from endeavouring to do his duty, and to redeem the pledge which he had -given to that effect to the public. There were, be- Sides, many circumstances connected with the present Measure, which he could have wished to bring under their Lordships' consideration at the same time; but neither was the present the moment for entering into that discussion. He should, however, persevere in the line he had chalked out to himself, and persist in Moving the second reading of the Bill, let the result be what it might. He knew that it was the intention of the Noble and Learned Lord on the Woolsack to oppose his motion, hut he trusted that Noble and Learned Lord would not forget that in proposing the suspension of the same Bill last Session, he had in a great degree acknowledged the justice of its princi ple. Their Lordships well knew that the measure which he had the honour of proposing, originated with the Finance Committee of the other House : a Com mittee to which the people at large looked up with ccnfidence for m any, salutary regulations in th e ex penditure of the country ; acv although their patriotic endeavours had not met with the success they de served (for many difficulties and di?cotiragements had been thrown in their way, perhaps even by those who should rather have promoted, than obstructed the measure), still that Committee had deserved the thanks, and obtained the highest approbation of the p eo ple. This it was no more than justice and can dour to avow. He should not betray their intention nor their labours ; and when a more favourable time arrived, as arrive he trusted it would, be should again bring forward a measure which the public had such just reason to expect would be adopted. The Noble Earl concluded with moving, The second reading of the Bill. The LORD CHANCELLOR never had, and• never would say that the principle of the Bill was not a good one, and fit to be acted upon ; but he ob jected to it as attempting at the time to carry only one part, and that comparatively but a less important and less urgent part, of a great measure with which the present was but slightly connected. If the power of granting places in reversion were taken from the Crown, he was at a loss to see why places in posses sion nt:ght not be taken away also. This power had been vested in the Crown for three, four, or five centuries ; and had often been exercised for the best of purposes : he was not, therefore, for withdrawing from the Crown, without being sure that such a de falcation from the power of the Crown would lead to some general measure of great public utility. Be sides, in consequence of the provisions which Parlia ment had thought proper to introduce into the Re ' gency Bill, the power of granting place's in reversion was now in abeyance. To agitate the question, there fore, tinder the present circumstances, would not, in his o pinion, lead to any practical good. The Earl of GROSVENOR briefly replied ; and the question being put, that the Bill he read a second time, it was negatived without a division. The Earl of LIVERPOOL then Sioved,That the Bill be rejected. Earl GREY thought that would be going too far, and in direct opposition to the principle of the Bill, and to the expectations of the public. His idea would lead him rather to consider it as more proper to move, That the Bill be read a second time that day six months. Lord LIVERPOO L could not but think, .that is tconsequence of the restrictions now imposed upon that power, in the hands of the Prince Regent, the Bill should for the present be rejected. He had no objection, however, in acceding to the opinion of the Noble Earl. It was then moved, That the Bill be read a second time that day six months ; which amendment was agreed to. The Earl of LIVERPOOL then presented the Militia Inlistment Bill ; which was ordered to be printed, together with the other documents connected with it, which had been moved for. The bill wo e inuld e printed by M onda y ; on which day the p. ciple of it might be discussed, on the motion for going into the Committee. It was his wish that the bill be sow read a second time. Lord ROSSLYN renewed his former objections to the second reading of the bill, until aU the informa ticn requisite to the right understanding of it was be. fore the House. He likewise lamented that no ropy, as in the other House of Parliament, was kept of pa pers and bills laid before that House, but that the original was sent to the press, and the House left in the interim without any record to refer to. The Earl of LIVERPOOL admitte that, with r espect to some papers, some inconven d ienee might arise from that circumstance, and that perhaps it might be better to adopt in that respect the practice of the other House. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE suggested the propriety of referring the matter to a Committee. The Earl of LIVERPOOL acquiesced in the sug gestion ; but thought it better to consider of the mat ter for a few days, and then to propose the adoption of some measure. The bill was then read a second time, and ordered to be committed on MondAy. DISSENTING MEETING 1101,311. Some of the papers respecting the nuraPer of Dis senting Meeting Houses were laid on the table, and ordered to be printed. DISTILLERIES. Lord HARDWICIE moved for an account, to the latest date it could be made up for the present year, slf the quantity of Brown and Muscovado Su gar need in the distilleries. Also an aseount of the quantity of Spirits imported from Ireland since the let JAMMU, 1809. Ordered.—Adjourned. r •••• - • ROOM OP COMMONS. The ;feral* of the Privately Stealing, the Navigable River) Robbery, the Bleaching Ground Robbery, and Irish Bleaching Ground Robbery Bills, were brought up, and the Bilis ordered' to be read a third time on Monday. SUITORS IN CHANCERY. Mr. M. A. TAYLOR gave notice, that he would, after the mess (he thought on the ith of May), renew the notice which he had brought forward some weeks since, respecting Suitors in the Court of Chancery. Mr. MARRYA'rr presented a Petition from the Ship Own ers of the Port of London, against the construction of Wet Docks lin the Isle of Thanet. The Petition was laid en the table. On the motion of Mr. CALCRAFT, the Weald of Kent In closure Bill was potoponed till the 30th April. Mr. WHAR'I ON presented an account of the sums of money granted by Parliament for the Colony of Sierra Leone ; an 4 also of the appointment of Chief Justice of that island. TRINIDAD. Mr. B. BATHURST presented a petition from the merchants of Bristol, praying that the British Laws might be extended to the island of Trinidad. , The Right Hon. Gentleman observed, that the sub ject was already under the consideration of his Ma jesty's Government ; therefore, for the present, he should naive, That the petition be laid on the table, intending on some future day to call the attention of the Howse to it. Mr. MA RRYATT thought his Right Honour able Friend near him (the Chancellor of the Exche quer) ought to have said something satisfactory on the subject. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER did not think it necessary to say any thing, as his Right Honourable Friend had already stated that the subject was under the consideration of his Majesty's Government. The petition was then laid on the table. .. lIRISTOL COAL TEAM On the Motion of Mr. H. SMITH, the House went into a Committee on the BristolCoalTrade. The Hon. minable Gentleman proposed to extend the exemption from Duty on Coals to those Ports,E:tst of the Holmes. To this proposition Sir Charles Morgan moved an Amendment, which went to restrict that privilege,. 1 and to confine it to the Monmouthshire Canal. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER disapproved of both propositions, as injurious to the revenue ; and considered them as resulting from a dispute between the two canal proprietors. The Resolution proposed by Mr. H. Smith was opposed by Mr. Rose, Mr. Thompson, Mr. Hall, Mr. Whatton, &c. and supported by Mr. Bathurst. Mr. Adams, &c. After considerable time, consumed in discussion, Mr. Smith withdrew his Resolution ; and the amendment of Sir C. Morgan was also withdrawn upon an understanding that the subject would under go further consideration. The House then resumed. Mr. H. SNI LT li gave notice, That he would, on the 25th of April, move to repeal so much of the Act as gives to the Proprietors of the Monmouthshire Ca nal exemption from Duty on Coals. PRINTERS REGULATION 1111. L. The House went into Committee on the Printers Regulation sill, and the clauses were read, when the Attorney-General objected to the clause which went to impose only one penalty on Printers and Publish ers, convicted of publishing any work, kc. without the proper description of the Printer's name affixed thereto. Mr. H. MARTIN wished to remind the Hcrnonr- I able and Learned Gentleman, that the Bill, in elect, did not go to alter the penalties ; for that in fact whatever penakk•s the former Act inflicted would :es main untouched by this.. Bill. The Act alluded_ to was passed at a time when there was reason to appre hend danger to the State in consequence of the meet ings of the Corresponding Society ; that danger was now gone by, and therefore he saw no reason why the heavy penalties which that Act had imposed, should remain. It Was certainly a very hard case upon Printers that for every paper they circulated of this description, they should be liable to separate pe nalties, and the Legislature thought with h;m, for an Act passed some time since for indemnifying certain persons from the oppressiveness of that Act. If the , Honourable and Learned Gentleman thought ,C2O was too small a sum, he had no objection, in order to secure his approbation, that a larger penalty should be imposed ; but he could not think that for every paper published, a distinct penalty should attach.— He could not see the degree of moral terpitude which existed to warrant it. The Government had already provided sufficiently for the security of the subject against libels, by imposing niany restrictions upon persons entering into business as Printers. In the first place they were obliged to register their printing presses and types at the Office of the Clerk of the Peace for the County, and their names and places of abode ; they were of course, as well known as any set of tradesmen, and if they acted wrong were easily made amenable to the law. The Honourable Gen tleman contended strongly against the injustice of continuing a temporary Act, when the necessity which authorised the passing it no longer exists. Mr. D. GIDDY was of opinion, that the penalty should be limited to a single copy. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER slid not think that the exaction of a single penalty would in all cases be sufficient. It might be enough to prevent those Printers who had good intentions from violating the law, but the chance of being com pelled to pay sC2O would not deter men who were influenced by criminal motives. He would propose rather in the succeeding clause, to leave to the Ma gistrates the power of mitigating the penalties incur red, even to the amount of a single penalty, it they should think fit so to do ; and to give an appellant •inrisdiction in such cases to the Court of Quarter Sessions. Lord FOLKSTONE objected to the enormous power which would be vested in the Magistrates by the proposition of the Right Honourable Gentleman. He regretted that the present Bill did not go altoge ther to repeal the 39th of the King ; an Act which was introduced at a particular time for a particular purpose. The ArroRNETGENERAL could not coin cide with the Noble Lord in the opinion that it was advisable wholly to repeal the 39th of the King. He read a clause, which it was his intention to pro pose, by which the Magistrates, on conviction, would be empowered to mitigate the penalty to a sum not less than le 10. Sir S. ROMILLY declarei, that if it were intend. ed to leave the law in such a manner as to allow the possibility of the accumulatico of penalties to the I enormous amount of 20 or £30,000, it would be es. - i! • tternely objectionable. Many tit the °genets against \ the law must of course proceed from inadvertence ; but even on the supposition of the greatest crimina lity, surely the House would not consent that the publication of a libel should by possibility draw down on the publisher such an enormous fine. A strong objection which he had, to the existing law on this subject was, that it punished indiscriminately those who violated it inadvertently, and those who violated it criminally ; although the fcrrier would necessarily be detected with the greater ease. He concurred in the regret expressed by the Noble Lord, that the mea- , sure had been made a permanent one. Before the period during which it was enacted, such restraints on the useful and honourable occupation of a prtnteri had not been deemed necessary, nor did he think they were necessary, at present. Mr. LOCKHART agreed with the Noble Lord, that it would be inexpedient and dangerous to leave' Ito the Magistrates the power of convicting in penal ties to an unlimited extent. •It would be taking from Juries the right of determining on libels of any de scription, and giving that right to the Justices and to the Courts of Quarter Sessions. To this he could never consent. Determined esemy as he was to the licentiousness of the press, be could never agree to vest such a power in the hand of the Magistrates and the Courts of Quarter Sessions. The only cor rection which suggested itself to his mind was to li mit the extent of the penalty in which the Magistrates should be empowered to convict. Perhaps one hun dred pounds might be found a proper limitation. Mr. MARTIN begged the Conti ittee to consider what would be the effect of allowing the excessive pe nalties which the present Act permitted. The penal ties did not belong wholly to the Crown. A moiety went to the informer. If therefore the Crown were disposed to remit its share of these penalties, a com mon informer might sue for his proportion, and this would operate as a perpetual imprisonment on the parts offending. Now it was well known that in cases of libel the term of imprisonment adjudged by the Court of King's Bench, seldom exceeded two years. Let the Committee recollect the time, and circum stances, under which the existing Act pissed. Its object was to prevent the gratuitous distribution of papers of a seditious tendency, by certain Societies, which were er.umerated in the Act. These Societies had ceased to exist—the evil to be ,pprehended must' therefore have ceased to exist—and he was at a loss to.discover on what principle the continuance of such severe enactments could be maintained. If continued at all, the extent of the penalty should be limited.— What he was anxious to establish was, that the of fending party . should be sued for only one penalty.— .. If the single penalty at present enacted were insuffi cient, let it be increased. Although he should con sent reluctantly, yet he would agree even to the et sent of the penalty being made £5OO, leaving to the Magistrates the discretion of mitigating it to £5. He would also propose that it should not be ia the power of an informer, under any circumstance, it the Ma gistrates were so ill 4 advised as to levy the extent of the penalty, to prevent the Crown, if it thought pro per, from remitting the whole. He adverted to many cases in which the law might be, and indeed had been, inadvertently violated ; and particularly in stanced one of an Hon. Member, a merchant of ex tensive dealings, who for many years had ignorantly' I violated the law, in printing his Bills of Lading. &ea and another of an Hon. Member, who when a Cast-, dictate for the East India Direction had violated the law in a similar manner in his addresses to the Pro- 1 prietots of East India Stock. Would it be advisable to leave to Magistrates the power of levying on per sons so circumstanced, or indeed on persons other wise circumstanced, the enormourfines, which, by the existing Acts they had incurred ? The ATTORNEY GENERAL to chew his Ho nourable and Learned Friend how disposed he was to conciliate him on this subject, agrated to introduce a clause by which no person should be liable to more than '25 forfeitures. (8500.) Mr. WILBERFORCE thought, that if secrecy 'were allowed to the operation of the printing-house, no penalty could be too high to repress its licen tiousness. Mr. ABERCROMBIE expressed his satisfaction at the concession which .had been made with regard to the limitation of the penalty. An amendment to that effect moved by the At torney-General, was adopted, and the Resolutions agreed to. The SPEAKER having resumed the Chair, the Re port of the Committee, with the amendment, was co deted to be received on Monday. FOREIGN MINISTERS' SALARIES SILL. Mr. LEACH moved the third reading of the Fe. reign Ministers' Salaries Bill. Lord F. OSBORNE felt it his duty to express his decided disapprobation of the Bill. No claims what ever had been urged which thus required the interfe rence of Parliament. Not 24 hours had elapsed since that House refused to go into a Committee to consi. der the claims of the Officers of our brave Army ; and the money which they had refused to the claims of these gallant men, they were now called upon to vo►e to individuals who had advanced no claim what ever. He trusted that the House would pause before they acceded to a measure of this description ; and he would therefore m wil'as an Amendment, That the Bill be read a third time that day six months. Mr. MORRIS replied to the speech of the Noble Lord. Individuals, he said, had not advanced any claims to Parliament, because it was impossible that they could do so, as such claims could not be made a subject of consideration by the House. Before the Act of last Session, although the services of indivi duals who had been employed in a diplomatic capa city had ceased, the Crown was enabled to continue to them a portion of their allowances ; this 'Act, however, deprived the Crown of this prerogative.— The circumstance which distinguished the indivi duals to whom he had alluded from all others simi. lady situated in other respects, was, that their retreat from service was not voluntary, but depended on po litical accidents, over which they had no controtil.— He heartily supported the Bill ; and he was persua ded that no man would suppose that he was influen ced to do so by the circumstance that an Honourable Relation of his (we presume, Mr. Erskine), might come within the scope of its operation. He As ac tuated by motives of a much more public nature. Mr. BANKES observed, that the House bad no sooner passed the first measure of reform, which was founded on the report of their Committee us► that unjust, imhject, than they were required to repeal it. Never thele%s, if that measure could be proved mi g ht to be repealed. That was the point in t which he t wished to examine.—Unquestionably there were pre cedents for the measure which it was proposed to re scind. Those who reci elected with him the Parlia. mentary occumencesof 1783, would remember, that a Bill was then brought in for the Regulation of the Offices of the Exchequer, and for the Reduction of the rmolhment of the Tellers. When that Bill came from the Committee, there was a clause in it, provi ding that it should not operate against a grant in re version by his Majesty to Lord Thurlow of a Teller. ship of the'Exchequer. To this clause the House disagreed, notwithstanding the extraordinary exer tiont of a great lawyer (Lord Kenyon) who then ad vocated the rights of individuals as other lawyers now advocated them, and as he ( Mr. Bankes) thought, with too much eagerness. On a division upon this clause, the number in favour of it was 49, that against it 57. He Would repeat what he had stated in a for mer stage of this Bill, namely, that if Parliament took one step in the repeal of the principle of the Act passed last Session, they must take many more steps. There were many persons affected by that Act, whose claims were much stronger than lithe of the diplomatic individuals to whom the pending Bill ap. plied : for instance, previoni to she Act of last Ses. sion, the old stores were vested in the Crown, which had power to grant pensions to various Deistic offi cers on it; that Act (very wisely in his opinion) de prived the Crown of that power ; all, therefore, who had what might be called an expectant right under the former practice, possessed a better claim on the House than the individuals whose cane was under con sideration. But a still stronger circumstance existed. 1 —There were individuals who bad been deprived by the Act of last Session of the expectation of emolu ments to which they had a title under two former Acts of Parliament. By the Act of the 49th of the King, c. 36, and by an Act passed only twe weeks before the Act of last Session, founded on the 'Report of the Finance Committee, the Crown was empowered to grant allowances to certain Officers of the Excise in England and Scotland ; it was em powered to grant those who had served ten years three-fourths of their salaries. By the Act of last Session, these allowances were reduced to one-half of the salaries of these Officers. Had not the individuals thus affected, therefore, ten times greater right to complain than the diplomatic individuals who were the objects of the proposed measure ? Did any ono suppose, from this reasoning, that he (Mr. Bankes) entertained any wish of opening agar h the Act of last Session ? Far' from it. By that Act a proper system of superannuati m had been established ; and the relaxed habit in which Government had previous indulged on that subject was corrected. The Act last Session had passed with the general approba tion of the country ; and it was nut to be disturbed t because a claim was made for two or three indivi deals, who, he had shewn, had not suffered by it so I extensively as many others. Besides, the supporters 1 of the Bill asserted, that all they wanted was to put these Gentlemen in the same situation as that in which they were before the Act of last Session. Now that was impossible. To agree to the proposed Bill would be to give to the claims of tha Foreign Minis. ters a sanction which they had never before enioyed. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER contended, that whatever might be the merits of the Bill before the House, it would not afford such a d in erous precedent as was apprehended by his P.r.O. Friend. With respect to the operation of the Act of last Session, on those individuals who had expectances on the Fund of Old Stores, he did not believe that the previous practice of Government had been such as to induce any of those individuals to imagine, that they had a claim on that fund to a greater extent than that which remained alter the passing of the act. And as to the Excise Officers, of whom his Hon. Friend said, that the Act of last Session had deprived them of expectant rights vested in them by two for mer Acts, the fact was, that in some respects the claims were increased by the last Act,; for it was pro vided by it that, after a certain age, not three.fourthe merely, but the whole of his salary should be allowed to an Officer. It was obvious also that the number who had the slightest shadow of justice for complaint must be confined to those who entered as clerks is that department of the public service during the short period, a twelvemonth. between the passing of the first Acts alluded to by his Hon. Friend, and the passing of the Act founded on the Report of the Fi nance Committee. Nothing could be more clear than that those who had entered the service before that pe riod were not at all entitled to complain of disappoin ted expectations. • The House then divided—For the Amendmera.‘2 l -a-Against it 50—Majority 27. . The Bill was then read a third time and paseaa COSIIIITTYX OP SUPPLY. Oo the Order of the Day being read for the Hose resolving itself into a Committee of Supply, ' Lord FOLKESTONE rose. He wished, before the House resolved itself into a Committee, to call their attention to a subject which had already bee n mentioneSby him once co twice in the course of the Session, but on which he had received no satisfactory information. He alluded to the case of a person car victed some time ago of selling guineas—a Mr. Pe Young. This circumstance took place during the last Session of Parliaman. The question, however, had not wren finally decided Upon; a point being re served to be argued in the Exchequer Chambers. — Early in the present Session, he (Lord Folkestone) had inquired of the Attorney-General if any father proceedings were likely to take place? To this tit Auorney-General had replied, that he was ready to argue•the case whenever called upon by thej Juda,es to do so ; but as he had not been called upon, l'e wished now to give ncitice, that if the point were net decided in the course of the ensuing term. it was bit intention to institute some proceeding on the wain:. He did not wish to'dwell on the peculiar kardbhip ct the case ; but lie could not laelp observing, that thii man, who had no friends, had been selected as tl.e subject of a prosecution for that which almost evt”,. banker and principal tradesmen had be en guilty el for years. He had been convicted on an Ella Act Parliament made in the reign of Edwar d VI. lie could have wished to have entered more at large iata the subject, and to have argued on the nature of tae provisions of that Act, to ascertain if they weic 10' ficiently comprehensive to reach such a cast. flare' peated it was his intention to give orifice, that if al oat W he sho merely order I a rere; been t The who h When ti When p rifec r g o i c iito e y a rigl speec A Store to th Or say N , him Tl , elourr The *hots M of di insta Opt' indu no d to tl T one plea *cm 1 WWI mity I 1-10 don him pro sees a cl 1 Lo Ito' he Sot' he cur des pas xr: a& le( of e s. to es I,e A ` i