Star. — London, England, 1819-12-22 00:00:00

pc; :,. on th ,S, a nd t i e c. , he s , ItiPec , be nt' , than bi l r,sel th., CA , if, afte ~ from I erfizY ' c ra C ; stirred .; b of tli , a ze t i in ~,, ,, ,-d in er thi S., Ali .'n. ;lon ...:- , .!ie 111 „ : ,.. , .rilis c qitic . otem gr. C Al '..e of th -,0 , dal' ;,:;ion t : dated J ;also or the L tri C/ ,if , : tilt .iron Cc comr :•,, time CO the 1 t son 'iced th name skate. its pro • before Mr. CA 2 pare this c No .ble •cY.oble 7xic'n.‘sto 'Cries ' • '-:- m o - [ Lrr.l C , an ov I gr. C. for g .g aqil .y alit • prod', not ti •• i lord A tion o primal • fne I mist ..trapte st,.:lit atie., o [ er:. o F ... 0., •:.r., ....i: I . r r3T . - -...,. c , .1:11;. rald •da ! a ;:e.,:e :lord , :LT.: .. than tst - ttnese the d..., re rec.': : &sale: , ' Ali 2.c.: a . .ileir ti , f tr4yed .ae -; er : le 1 Le. :arm b a. sur R Ca , ✓ ". In: tt - ''..s c • .-nie,i I 'ad r,o . • .. s liaa aa • 'ir. .h- ! ct 'Flo • Iflr. it • 'met i.ll ' ent po itrir(• th : arse La ej ia tietit se roost rel :le ss ; t tLe.o H : L i t 1 , ,e ~ ig .. Mc', a . stn, t ' Si t it .. 11r. o, s ii i:Corie. tt be a !I 14 IC V.lii , . a to th e, tiott • t • lu re isi. P42t 1 t. ' , h¢ f B ... ch , lr.d ad= X....) t trr ha 11,3., Ala . :,e , d:iunion. He could not look with appro . the practice of preaching sermons to such a nd the sooner it was put a stop to the bet !e character of the Clergyman, in this in , he was nor/ perfectly convinced, was of the / ipectable kind, and no one, he was sure, more averse to the propagation of religious thin that Gentleman, whose name he did not ir t self justified in declaring. CANNING said, the House would excuse after what had been said, he should read the rem the Clergyman. The writer denied that in , appeared in the procession dressed as a 'a Cardinal, and that these mock clothes had red in the church. He supposed that the the Honourable Member had been misru led in the report--but he denied having been NI in any practice for the inflaming of animo • that tended to disturb that peace and good strictly recommended by the Gospel. The 1 .1(m. Gentleman said, that what had fallen :c lion. Member, both in the way of disavowal ~ raise of the Clergyman's character, would be Liticient to remedy any injury which the for gement might have effected. MANCICSSTER SIAGIST RA TES. CALCRAFT reminded the Noble Lord op the question that he had asked on the pre day, and now desired to know if he had any m to produce the letter written in answer to Lcd July Ist, from the Manchester Magistrates; so one written in answer to a letter received le Lord Advocate of Scotland? .1 CASTLEREAGH said, if no ground were , r the production of such a paper, it was not to give it. The letters laid before the House :ommunicated to skew the state of the country time. If the answer were called for, it must the ground that something had been cnnitr.cd, :some improper answer had been given, which hl the House to call for what the Executive r,ment had not • thought it .necessary to cam ate. Ilc did not (as no ground had been laid production) propose to lay the letter in goes !fore the House. . CALCRAFT knew that if he made a motion paper, a ground must be laid for its production; his he had not thought necessary on asking (Me Lord a question across the table. Since ~ble Lord refused to give the answer to 'the '.ester Magistrates, he should feel it to be his ..:tsr the Holidays, to move for its production. nies of " Move, Move,') —lie did not know might not as well move for it now. J CASTLEREAGH thought the Hon. Gen ought to give notice of such a motion. CALCRAFT, - though he protested against the or giving notice being absolute, would do noH against the ordinary usages of the House; but alter the recess it was his intention to move for roduction of the papers he had mentioned. He Lot then give a notice. • DISTRESS IN SCOTLAND. d A.H AMILTON, before bringing forward the in of which he had given notite, had a Petition ,Assent, to which he begged to call the attention to House. He begged to call their attention to misery, wretchedness, and. degradation (in cir stances he meant) of the Petitioners, which he of a nature to demand the most serious at of the House. The Petition was from a Pres or Assembly of the Ministers of fourteen wl:o were bound by law and by the practice Church, to inform themselves of the state of parishioners, and from their report it appeared, that part of Scotland It was impossible for Imings of one man to support** family. It also .t'lat the poor could not attend Divine Service, nerly, from the want of decent clothing to ap :, while the educatioti of their children was .:ed from the same cause. Now, though he A. Hamilton) was aware that nothing could a.e :gainst the principles of political economy :flake an advance from the general stock to tree Cie distress of a particular district, but still e d;•,-. , n of these Petitioners ought, if possible, to !:•cc: - :‘ , ed. The Petitioners further stated, that no It - Fez:ion had appeared among their parishioners ~ i.c,:going persons attempted to take advantage of sr tr , obles to inflame their minds. The Petitioners !kl the House, by finding employment for the fen., or by o ther means, to afford relief. The le Lord observed, that that House would per but half its duty, if It enacted only coercive .sums to repress disaffection, while it overlooked oases from which that disaifectinn sptung. In ithion, he begged to say, that there were waste contiguous to the place where these Petitioners Mi which might maintain them, and which he no doubt the owners would willingly give up that purpose, if it could be made effecwal, by 1g them tithe-free for a number of years, or by ether arrangement. The Petition was then brought up. Mr. KENNEDY said, he was acquainted with tea tbe Petitioners, and a more moral and intel :ent set of men did not exist. Nothing, but some traf‘rdinary circumstances, could induce them to forward in this manner. He thought thatthe of withdrawing from Public Worship, and ab .'in:! from the education of their children,„was the At to: cible of all proofs, of the extent of the dis , : esS at:lnngSt a people, who were distinguished for peculiar attachment, to religious observances, 43 h the education of their children. When a peo ' .1, surrendered long confirmed habits, the exi -34Y which forced them to it, must have been, in 0, eXt.tertle. W. DE CRESPIGNY hoped that the Plan of IT. Owen would be acted upon to relieve the Peti '4'nets, nr that some other equally efficacious would be twit. lArd CASTLEREAGH was sure that no man -41 kel more for the distress of the sufferers than ' lll, i, but he hoped the Noble Lord would see that de:lniient could not bring forward any measure ren,:ve those persons at the expense of another .. art 0: t h e ki ng d om w i t h out transgress ing against 1 . ' 4 . f , ; A rules of political economy. The case now ve them was not peculiar to Scotland. Many ' , I England had. to complain of similar distress, 11 ;;:at distress had not been relieved by the pro ,,t the neighbourhood, as strong a-caae would ~,, ''-e n made out as that now ht before the '"' ein the present Petition. I ) t r° •: l Zuld naturally je "';ii•lAittect of in England, if relief wcrc afforded • by a Parliamentary grant, where the wealthy inha bitants of the district were not assessed fOr the sup .pott of the poor. The law, though not compulsory, allowed such an asessment to be made in Scotland. If such an assessment were made, the Government would be disposed, on reasonable security, to make an immediate advance to any amount that might be necessary. They were able to do so, as they had at present unexpended in their hands not less than .0500,000 which remained of a grant made iilBl7, to meet such cases of distres. They would make an advance, and he content with security for its pay ment in four or five years, or in any other reason able period. Before the House separated, his Right Hon. Friend intended submitting a motion to the House, the object of which would be to remove any legal difficulties that taight stand in the.way of such an arrangement, during the coming recess. He shewed that it would be unjust to other parts of the Empire, if a grant were to be - made for the relief of the poor in Scotland, while in this country the pro perty was assessed for the maintenance of the poor, even to the extinction of that property. If, for man) years, Scotland had been' free from the burden of , Poor Rates, while they were submitted to here, he thought it probable that even all which the benevo lence of the Gentry in Scotland had prompted them to do, had not made their sacrifices equal to those made b 1 the People of E Igland for the support of their poor. These things considered, would he thought' be likely to induce the Gentry of Scotland to assess themselves;and every facility would be afforded to them to do so Mr.- W. DOUGLAS hoped some method would be found for relieving the casting distriss, but felt that many objections existed .to the introduction of the Poor Laws into Scotlankr.:-. Mr. J. P. GRANT said, the case of .the sufferers' had not been overstated by his.. Noble Friend.. To him it appeared, that such ealamity had been proved to exist,:tbat it was the duty.of the Empire at large to relieve that distress, whiell"-had been throvgiritra' particular district by gcbti al Course of its Wit. He believed the landed interest ia that district mad not by possibility meet the distress. The introdoc don of our system of Poor Laws into Scotland, he contended, ought to be resisted as Most impolitic. The Government, he thought, at - a time like the pre sent, were bound to bi ing forward measures of re lief, as well as those of coercion. Lord CASTLERE AG H had not denied the existing distress. He had only contended that it was a little too hard on England to expect that she, being dis tressed by the heavy pressure of the Poor Laws, should take upon herself the extra burden.of the Poor of Scotland, to save Scotland from being subjected to the Poor Laws. Mr. ELLICE thought it would be difficult to give security for the re payment of a sum advanced to relieve the existing distress, as he did not believe the calamity to be temporary, but feared, that if some inquiry did not take place, the result of which was to afford great financial relief, the difficulties would in crease. He thought it right to state, that since he had been in the House he had been informed, that a general search for arms had taken place at Paisley, bUt none had been found among that class of persons in whose behalf the present application was made. Mr. V. DL AKE thought the Commissioners should be authorized to advance money on the security of the tolls in Scotland. Mr. Vs'ILBERFORCE thought an inquiry into the state of the commercial districts, and the cause of the present commercial distress, would be attended with beneficial effects, by putting the House in pos session of useful information. Mr. CALCRAFT said, before the Gentlemen con nected with Scotland came to Parliament to ask relief, they should recollect that they paid no Poor rates, while the estate of the English Gentleman and Farmer was burthened with a very heavy tax on this head. There was money ready now to be advanced to the distressed in Scotland, if the Scotch Gentle men would come forward with security tor its re payment at distant periods. The Hon. Gentleman then adverted to the cry which had been raised against the Poor-rates. He was favourable to the system of Poor-rates ; it was the abuse of the system which he objected to; and if any one should move to repeal the Poor Laws, he should most certainly oppose the motion. Sir J. MACKINTOSH stroney reprobated making this a national question. It was a question relating to the distresses of a portion of our fellow-subjects ; and would the House of Commons now say they were not to be relieved till Scotland consented to adopt a system - of Poor Laws? And not only not relieved, but their distresses were not even entitled to . Parliamentary consideration, till this preliminary step was taken. Lord BINNING said, the Hon. and Learned Gen tleman had misrepresented the argument of his Noble Friend ; all his Noble Friend had said was this, that when the Scotch Gentry came here to ask relief, the English Gentry had a right to say, " before you ask us to support your poor, put yourselves, at least, in the same situation with respect to your poor, as we are in with respect to ours. " Mr. PHILLIPS was decidedly of opinion, that in quiry into the causes of commercial distress, could alone enable. Parliament to apply a remedy. Mr. FORBES was of opinion that the distress of the country ought to be relieved, either by a Parlia mentary grant, or a voluntary contribution. The Petition was then read. . Lord A. HAMILTON said, he really believed the' Proprietors of land in Scotland had contributed more for the relief of the poor than they would have been liable to under a regular assessment. Last year the Chancellor of the Exchequer proposed and carried a vote for rlOO,OOO for building Churches in Scotland. The Right Hon. Gentleman now ought to consider of the propriety of a vote of the same sum to put the ' poor into decent clothing, to enable them to attend those Churches. Mr. MABERLY said, the manufacturers in Scot land had become rich by the labour of the workmen, and ought now to support them in their distress. The Petition was ordered to be printed. Lord A. HAMILTON then brought up anothet Petition to the same purport, from the Ptoprietorsof Rutherglen, which was laid on the table., SCOTCH BURGHS. Lord A. HAMILTON rose to move the appoint ment of a Committee on the subject of the Scotch Burghs. He had not been aware of the absence of the Lord Advocate; but there was the less cause of . 'regret, as the motion, he understood, would not be opposed. He had nothing to state additional towhat he had formerly mentioned on the .subject, except that the investigation that had been gone into, cor roborated all that he had formerly advanced, relative to the abuses of the system of self-election. The sub ject was not connected, except collaterally, with Par liamentary Reform. At present, Edinburgh, Aber deen, and Inverness, were in a state of disfranchise ment; and the question as to the first of the three might happen collaterally to affect the return of the Member for that city. At the last election Aberdeen had .no vote, and Inverness had been in the same si tuation. The Noble Lord concluded by moving, that the Petition to that House from the Royal Burghs in Scotland, in the last and the former Ses sion of Parliament, be referred to a Select Commit tee, to report upon the same to the House. Mr. W. DUNDAS (Member for Edinburgh) said, that the Noble Lord, not satisfied with the success of his motion, had grown quite wanton in conse quence of that success—(Laughter). With respect to Edinburgh, one of the Electors had been absent at the last Election ; but by that circumstance the me rits of the Election could not then be at all affected, as th e time for presenting had gone by. On the sub- 1 ject of Burgh Reform, he had no objection to the state of things that had subsisted before the Union. la3rd-CASTLEREAGH observed, that 'as there was but one opinion on the subject, there was no oc casion to 'argue the question. Gentlemen ou his side of the House were disposed to co-operate cordially with the Noble Lord. _ Mr.j. P; GRANT %vas inclined to think that the Member for= Edinburgh had gotten into a place where belied no right to be—(Flear, hear). Mr. FORBES stated, that Aberdeen then paid four per cent. for all the debt due by the town, while the Scotch Banks only paid - three. The inquiry ori ginated by the Noble Lord had already cost £2OOO. Lord A. HAMILTON stated the expense to haie been exactly £looo.—The incition was agreed to. ' CHELSEA PENSIONERS. Lord NUGENT rose to move, pursuant to notice, for a Return of the Persons liable to be struck off the Chelsea Out-pension List, in consequence of the Royal Proclamation of the 28th of October, distinguishing those who had enlisted for a limited* period, and stating the amount of the Pensions to which they were entitled in consequence of wounds. He applied to the House in behalf of those men who had come forward when a new and more- vigorous organize,. tion of the Army had taken place; and who had con tributed largely.to the trophies of the country. By the last Proclamation, It had been stated, that all these men, unless they reported themselves within a certain time, would lose their pensions ; in conse quence of which, those who had enlisted for seven years, and had been entitled to pensions on account of wounds, would be deprived of this pension. He would not then enter on the question of the power of the Crown to deprive of this pension those who had enlisted for life. But he would contend, that those men, who, under Mr. Windham's Bill, had enlisted' for a limited time, aid had been wounded in the ser vice, were entitled to a pension, by the words of that Bill...the rules and regulations of the service, and the authority of the most eminent men of that day, when the Bill was enacted. The men who had enlisted for a limited time, ancr e at,,the end of- that time had been discharged, were no Toner soldiers, nor subject to the operation of the Mutiny Bill; and, consequently, could not be recalled to the service. That had never been attempted in the case of those who had no pen sion, and could not, according to the Act, be done in the case of those who had received a pension in con sequence of their wounds. The circumstance had been stated by Mr. Windham, as the very spirit and essence of his system. That had also been the opi nion of the men' by whom the Bill had been opposed, among whom were the present Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, the President of the Board of Controul, and the late Mr. Perceval. All these had opposed the enactment in the Bill, on the subject of the pension, as tending to limit too much the power of the Crown. No power was given in this Bill to the Commissioners of Chelsea Hospital to withdraw the pension, except in the case of, enlistment for life, or the period of service not having been completed.. He hoped the motion would not be resisted by ab stract opinion's, but by p, denial, if it could be done, of the facts he had stated. Lord PALMERSTON thought the House would agree with him in opinion, that the return moved for was not expedient to be granted ; and the order from the War Office would be completely justified by the laws and regulations of the service. The object of Mr; Windham had been to add to the inducements to enter into the service by limiting the period.— But the Crown had full power to make what arrange ments it thought proper, only under certain regula tions, giving the soldier a right to a pension. Pre vious to the passing of Mr. Windham's Act, a pen sion to the soldier flowed entirely from the sponta neous bounty of the. Crown; and it was necessary he should have a recommendation from his Officer, the want of which was fatal to his claim. Both Mr. Fox and Mr. Windham thought, that' the necessity of the recommendation should be done away, and that had been the object of the Act. The regu lations subsequent to the Bill had the same ob " dud stated distinctly that the pießion would taken away in the event of non-epinpliance with Certain conditions, unless the full _period of the serviCe had been completed, which was twenty one years. The House could not at the time have agreed to the Bill,. had the view taken of it by the Noble Lord (Nugent) been correct, as men in the prime of life would have been entitled to pensions, and the Countrj would have had no claim to their &mit service. The expense of the Chelsea and Kit= mainham pensioners was at the present time net less than £1,200,000, and that was divided among 75,000 men. It was absurd to' think that these men were not bound to render their service to their Country when called upon. Similar Proclamations had issued from the War Office in the years 1809 and 1813, and he must certainly think that the question had been much better discussed then than at the present mo- Inisnt, when the public mind was so much inflamed. A message from the Lords signified their Lordships Assent to the Amendments made in the Misdemeanbur Bill; and that they had assented to the Seditious Nicetiess with certain Amendments to which they desired the concurrence of that House. On the motion' of Lord Carrt.camsosi,the Lords' Amend- . aunts were ordered to be taken into consideration to-morrow. Lord AtTHORPE obser;zedi thatt was from the regulations.A.the service; that thitro — wn had no right to call for the services of &man who had completed the period for which he had been en listed. In the case of a person ivlio had enlisted fi the term of seven years, that was to he regarded t.‘i the period of his service; and in the case of any doubts, these doubts ought certainly tti be inteiptited in favour of the soldier. Mr. LONG. observed ; that the soldier wit un doubtedly entitled to the. conditions under which 1 - . e had inlisted. But all the perisiorts were conditional except in the case of those who had completed tte three periods of service, amounting to 21- years. There was nothing in the speeCh made at the time by Mr. Windham, to bear out the opinion cf the Nob Lord ; no maimed man had been called out, and no rigour had been employed. The men themselves had shewn the greatest alacrity, and had endea voured to conceal their wounds lest they might Le accounted unfit for service—( nr ). • Mr. J. P. GRANT was of opinion that seven years were the proper period for a man who had ehlisted for that term of years, and that they could not be required to Serve the full period of 21 years. Mr. CALCRAFf thought the House much in.; debted to his Noble Friend for having brought the subject forward, that it might be finally settled. The , periods of service were three—for seven, fourteen, or twenty-one years. The man who enjoyed a pension for length of service, was undoubtedly liable to serve till the twenty-one years had expired. But he was not satisfied that the class of persons alluded to, who, having enaged to serve for seven years,.bad been wounded in that period, were not exempted from being called on to se -ve again. The motion was then negatived without a division. STAMP DUTIES BILL. Lord CASTLERbAIiti moved, that the Report on the Newspaper Stamp Duties Bill should be then received. Mr. DENMAN stated, that-the House had had no time to consider the Amendments. Lord CASTLEREAGH said, that the Amend ments were but few in number, and well understood and the Bill, as amended, would be in the hands of Members before the third reading. The Report was then brought up.—Upon the - question that the Amendments be read a second time, Mt. PRIMROSE stated, that the Bill presumed a complete change in the character of the People bf this country. But the freedom of the Press was the great safeguard against popular commotions, 'physical force, and the subversion of the-Constitution. When there was no free Press, a constant opposition invari ably took place between the Government and the People. Had there been a free Press in the time of Charles I. there would have been no change of Govern ment, and no attempt would have been made against' public liberty in the time of Charles 11. and of James. Soon after the Revolution, in 1694, Parliament had refused to continue the restrictions on the Piess; though the re-enactment . of these 'restrictions had been recommended by the Committee on Expiring That example ought to befollowed at the present time, when the machine of the Constitution was enabled to work practically by means of the in. luence of public opinion over public men. Freedom of speech should be allowed as to all public transae.; tions, not even excepting the Tribunals of Justice ; and there could be no security for the country, nni less its institutions, and the conduct .of the Judges, should be subject to a very free Preis. At the' pre sent day it was too late, as had been done by the. Member or Corfe Castle, to look back for precedents to the times of the Stuarts. If public opinion be stifled, and the channels be choaked up, by which it flowed through the country, he should look upon such a measure as the first step to a Revolution. By the Bill before the !louse, the Crown might allow any individual to publish whatever he pleased, with otit any -recognizances; as the option of prosecuting remained with the Attorney General. He thought the measure should be deferred till after the recess. Mr. R. MARTIN was sorry to be obliged to state that Ireland was not so tranquil as had been asserted by many Gentlemen in that House. He had then a letter in his hand; no, it was in his pocket—(A laugh) —mentioning that emissariesfrom this country had gone over to Ireland for the purpose of disseminating their principles, and to endeavour to disturb the peace of the country. He thought such a statement a good reason for passing the Bills before the House as speedily as possible. The Honourable Gentleinan, who had just sat down, had spoken, much in favour of a free Press. But he was afraid that many peO ple would swallow whatever they saw in print; and even, if they should be told that the Honourably Member had made a speech but little to the purpose, they might be disposed to credit it ! (A laugh).—The 'Amendments 'were then agreed to. Some Clauses were then brought up by the AT. TORNEI-GENERAL ;. one of which went to fill up the blank relative to the penalty for neglecting to fur nish a copy of any pamphlet to the Commissioner of Stamps, with the words " one hundred pounds."— The Clause so amended was made part of the Bill. The Bill was then ordered to be read a third time to-morrow. BLASPHEMOUS LIBEL BILL. On the motion for the second reading of this, Bill; Lord EBRINGTON begged the House would pause, before it added this to the general system of measures pursued by Ministers. 'lbis he considered as one of the most daring attacks which had ever been made on British liberty. The measures had been adopted without any inquiry, and established on reports, not wholly unfounded, he admitted, but, in his opinion, grossly exaggerated. He trusted he need not say, that he held the publication of blas phemous libels in the utmost detestation ; but were they not counteracted by other means than those in this Bill ? Let them look to their Bible Societies, theii new Churches, Chapels, and Meeting-houses, and then would they say that blasphemy had nrade any progress in the land ? He contended, that the ardi nary laws were quite sufficient to punish offenders for publishing seditious or blasphemous libels, espe cially when they recollected the punishment passed on the last offender in this way—( Hear, hear). — They had already passed Bills to prevent Military Trainink, and for the Seizure of Arms; and they had all .but pasied a4ll imposing new and unbend of restrictions on the Press. Surely these were enougFi He therefore thought that the House would do well to pansy before it proteeded With this Bill. He then k 1 F I • • . ~.