Star. — London, England, 1804-02-03 00:00:00

RUSSIA. ST. PETER SDURCI4, Dec. 3c.—Count Tot slam, Governor of this City, lyin7 now tick without any hope of recovery, it is thought, that in cafe of his death, his place will be filled by General Bu %now ,Daa, itow defigned as Governor General of Livonia, who, dnder the lag reign, fined this oflice to uni verfal fatisfaaion. A few days ago a fire Bloke out both in the little Italian Theatre, and in thc- great Theatre, but was fpeedily extinguithed without do ing any damage. It is a great lnfs to the diplomatic department. that old age and lianas oblige this ai9ive Miniiier and upright man to renounce public Wuxi's. The fevere pains to which the Criudie fubjea. has never prevented him even in bed from either writing or dic tating. Death alone can put an end to his exertions. Jaw. 3.—Yefterday arrived Prince KUILAK for. Blerly Vice Chancellor. The cold is now fallen from 23 deg. to 6. DENMARK. Comeaoew, jaw. to.—lt is affirmed, that the goods on board the lad Engli(h convoy are to be fold at any price, on account of the Englifh Government. The frigate which convoyed there veils failed away immediately. We expeil fhortly a great fleet from Hull, which has been at fea fince the toth of December. An Englifh armed packet boat, commanded by Captain Hostizrow, is arrived at Runfwig, in Norway, de- Rined for Gothenburg. Jaw. 14.—We ezpeß fhortly the appearance of a new criminal code, in which only three crimes will be made spunilhable by death, viz. rebellion, blaf plumy, and murder. The Police of this city has difcnvered a (pecks of robbery, which has often been pradtiCed in other great cities—a new grave, in a great church-yard, near the city, was found to be empty • and upon farther ete rnisation. many others were found in the fame condi tion. The grave diggers being united, have con fided that they have carried on this Ihatneful pro/lice many years, and not only firipped the dead of their clothes, but alto burnt the coffins. People are per. .mitred to ezamine the graves of their relations to fee in what condition they are. This crime is not men tioned in the Danifh law, and the public are, there fore, curious to know what puniChment will be ad judged to it. Enstuaust, jaw. to.—ln the year tifoj there ar. rived from the North Sea 5,654 Ibips in all, of which , 9ot were Danifh, 984 Swedilh, :,065 Englifh. 1, 112 l'ruffians, 95 Americans, 56 Dutch, s French, &c. —from the Baltic 5,975, of which 3,058 Englith. 988 Danilh, r French, dec.—from the Baltic and North Sea t t,629 in all. PARLIAMENT:IKr PROCEEDINGS. HOUSE OF COMMONS, TUESDAY, FEE. 3. QUINTIN DICK, Efq, took the Oohs and hie Seat far the Maroagh of Wcft Loe, In Cornwall. JOHN WILLIAM ANDERSON prefented a Petition from the Diredors of the Weft India Dock Company, praying for !care es bring le a Bill enabling them to rade farther fume of Money for the eopepletien ofitse Works =arty to tuna the Docks. The Petition was referred to a encomium. Sr J. NIIWPORT moved for an Account et the Sums of Mo w odd kedge Support et Honks of Induftry to Ireland, by the Onad Jades of that Cosnuy, in the Years slos.a and 3.—Or dered. Mr.-FOX then role, agreeably to his notice of yet. terdsiy. to call the attention of the Houle to the Pe tition of certain perfons. dyling themfelvea Freehold ers of Middlefex. complaining of the Return for that County. The Hon. Member began by lacing, that the point to be confidered by the Houfe was one fo Oen, and fo little liable to any poifibitity of diffe fence of opinion. that he did not conceive it necef fary to occupy the time of the Houfe with any de tailed arguments. It would not, he conceived, be attempted to be denied that Alts of Parliament were in every cafe to be interpreted in a manner as nearly as poifible agreeable to the precife letter, and if this was admitted as a general principle, it could not be denied that fuck a mode of interpretation was more 1 , afpecially proper, when the art Welt - was framed for the exprefs purpofe of putting an end to vague ideas 1 of the intentions of the Legiflatore. The Hook had, on the prefent occanon, a very fimple duty to perform. They had only to lay out of their confide ration every idea but the pofitive mandatory injunc• Lions of the Aft, and then their decifion could not, even for a moment, become a matter of doubt.— Gentlemen he was convinced need nut be reminded of the circumflances which originally gave rile to the Grenville Aft. It was an Aft expref,ly founded on the bad opinion entertained of the Houle of Commons in the exercife of its judicial powers. It was an Aft originating in conflitutional jcsloofy, and sic tinned , eforreel an evil, the etillence of which an parties admitted. Having laid this. it was p►eper for him go add, that the AA. which originally encountered the droned opprifition. bad from reperiesiet been found poclutlive of the molt bt . eficial effeas.— Thole who had or:gin lily railed it ssi•S I/4 ...;rs.a:cit veal, had fern reafon to 'ter their vs, and thufe whu were, in the fit i:i.lancc, its me,l ..p. ponents, had become its ssu.tt flncere :tomirer,. Fie bad no hefitation in that w ss i:e Ue. if among this number. it t..ic tue%r'ore Med that the oragin of the :VI v.„ 4 T i r fom that the 1-la4c veer.: ; ..f law, fo far AS it cor.cetnc.l ti:: •:.11 •h the fai►ncfs of elcaions wa. 1.1 Ai ter palling of the Gienvi:lc Ar•. in ;h: fira the obvious conclu•i•+l Ai: dis . ll , •Z'oll 9. AS fallen away Iron, the I; .1. 2. at.l that et•iry th;:77 snorseacd ezt.:i.ns 11* .11 C. .4C t.g.tla•cd by the precife provittot.s Mt. It •••,. qt:;:e inip.,P.le to clotploc tl•is .1111(11. iIOWCVCI. WA , !: ike idca th this O.Zt it W 4 1.1411 C.! 1.. C. . U34ttet. it fi‘ .INcos. -1:r C:r F'. oloe le vasty .11)' c. c•cr p t I c.. 1.. 't 3 t L•f;r, L 4 ,1;,: pt.l . •.1,1 t 1 1 , de 0 'W. 412. t 11/..1641.Z AZ , I IL Nu kJe; ~ .1 • ; t Wit I 11 u ;Ls: it, it of ptelituinary judgment Ihould be taken away from ' the Houfe. It was declared, that, if petitions were of firth and loch a nature, they Mould be laid before a Committee ; but that if they were of a different de fcri;tion and chara&tr, they Gould be declared in continent with the provifions of the aft, which was to regulate :ill proceedings rcla'ive to controverted eledions. 'Mete original provilions might perhaps, in interprztativn, have been conceived to be finficLnt ; but len any poftibility of mitlake Should ari fe, le ft any citeumllancesfhould occur which might endanger a recurrence to the decition of the Houfe, which was taken for granted to be highly liable to error, the aSth of his Majelly had in view the dire& prevention of any fnch inconvenience. It was meant to declare all preliminary decifions beyond their reach. It was to bind the lioufe to teceive petitions under certain fpecified circundlinces, and to reje!l others, in which particular allegations were not dif tindly laid down. With thistnew of the Cubic& he felt himfelf called to fate hit:preliminary objetlion to the Houfe's entertaining the petition. The Houle was bound by pofitive ftatute ; and if Co, he was not to be told-of precedents which, even if they did 'es , ill, could prove nothing againft a dire& eneament of the Legiflature. But, with refped to precedents, he really could not conceive that, in the fhort in. terval of fixteen years, fine the palling of the aft of the 28th of his Majefty, fuch precedents could be found, or attempted to be urged on the prefent oc ' anion. Admitting, however, that they exit, it would be monftrous and abfurd to urge them as rea fans for contravening a law drawn up in clear, Intel ligible, incontrovertible terms. To limit the jurif diftion of a Court, anal to dire& the mode in which its future proceedings were to be regulated, might be wife, under particular circumfiances. After there re gulations were formed, however, they mutt be obli ptory. It was needlefs for him to imprefs on the Houle the abfiirdity of fell forming rules for the di. re6ion of a particular Court, and then fuffering the decifions of that Court to go direaly in the face of the previous rules for the condua of its proceedings. In this cafe the original ad was rendered totally 6- dieulous,'and the decifions of • Court defeated the re. gulation which was meant to prevent its irregulari ties or errors. The claufe in thee& on which be reft ed his motion, was one fo couched as, in his mind, to remove all pogbility of doubt. It (truck him as' be ing one of the molt fimple and conclufive in the th tute book. In the chute of the aa it was difiinaly de. dared, that the Houfe were not to admit to the con ,fideration of a Committee, a petition in the body of which it was not flitted, on behalf of thofe who figned it, that they had a right. at the time of the eleCtion, to vote as unexceptionable Freeholders. Now in this cafe, the perfuns figning the petition in queftion had done no fuch thing. If they had even claimed their right indiredly, there might have been tome roam for confederation, how far the petition could, confill ently with the law of Parliament, be received. But here there was adually nothing alledged which could at all authorize the Houfe in receiving the peti tion. It was, forfooth, figned by Freeholders I— , He did not mean to deny, that thole who figned the Petition were Freeholders, or that the) might not have had a right to vote. But why had they not fated this in their Petition ? He himfelf was 1 Free holder of Middiefez at the time of the Eledion, but under circomltances which prevented him from eve cifing his eledive franchife. Many others, he believ. ed, were in a fimilar fituation ; and bow then was the Houfe to prefume. that thofe who figned the Pe tition were not in the fame circumftances, fence they had not themfelves produced any proofs of their qua. lificitions at the time of the Eledion ? There were many perfons Freeholders now, who were not entit led to vote when the Eledion took place. It was the fimpleft procefs in the world for the Petitioners to have declared, in the body of the Petition, their right of voting, if they did at the time of the Elec tion pollefs it ; but it was too much to call on the Houfe to prefume their right, in ezprefs contempt of an Ad of Parliament. A freehold property of forty fhillings a year was what the law required as a qua lification to vote for a county Member ; but in the tint intlance the Houfe had nothing whatever to do with thi. qualification, when a Petition was firft laid on their table. He would, in illufration of his opi nion, put a ftrong cafe, which, in proportion as it was firong, would more clearly illuftrate his idea of the meaning of the Ad. If a Petition were prefented, not by the real Freeholders of Middlefez, but by a tu multuous crowd ahlembled at the door of that Houfe, affirming the name of Freeholders ; even if an outrage of this audacious nature were praaifed, he would af firm, that in the fira ;nth= the Petition mull be received and feat to a Committee. The paper, fuch as it was, purported to be the Petition of Middlefez Freeholders, and the Houfe had nn authority to take cognizance of the fraud in the firft inflame. It was with the Committee to afeertain and to punifh futh an attempt to impofe on the Legiflature. Even ad mitting that the prefent Petition were figned by ha rah or Judah, inked of William and Thomas, fill it meal go to the Committee, and with them relied the ultimate decilinn. The Petition contained allega tions. and till the Committee had determined on its merits, the float had nn tight to prefiime that they were talfe. With the fait the Hoefe could have no interference. The law required that every Petition throill contain certain allegations, and the quellir W4c, whether thufe who finned the Petition had cam• with its requifitions ? Had they claimed their ; to vote at the lad Eledion ? If they had, then t..c Argument was At end. If they had nor, then the ,;- c..ion was equal) , refnlved, ludas the fl..ufe were deci,:e in the face of a pofitive law. The' rni : , ,ht be very relpeelable individuals, as :.c '.ad no doubt they were, and it might appear on liur.ati , rn that their right to vote was undoubted; aLI this mirl.t be lately admitted, and hill the rinef tii.:, would nand precifely where it did before the Ma:: Cr was it. The only point was to coat ficier I uw far the petition W2i drawn in (itch terms at emrl.l ;.tin:; the cc.ntidcra•inn , •1 its merits under pruv:,i(l. of the Grutviile Aft. There might .re am., araricc nt c parity in the cafe, but cI. • molt be permittc,.. 1,. have its force. If y etc t.. fu p cticd. a:Atitte , . the benefi. .ch tra .:Jrnitted, Lc. 1., avti J rte Tare which eti I ~.' J►J 1.4 I 7-tot .:41n :cht e. ti i: 141 ' :iL a 1. I: : rf Wt ttr f,:frroiS ti ; a 4. never was a cafe Lim down in arty petition of crave obvious .and Itriking equity thiat,.that petition con tained. The majority ot the Houle were convinced of this, even wink they refilled.the achnillion of the Petition. They vetted their oppothion inlay on the ground of the allegations which it contained not be ing fuck al the Grenville Ad had fpecified to be ne edify, previous to the intruduAinn' of any Petition. So fentible were the Hattie of the necellity of ri gidly adhering to the provitions of the Ad, that a Petition collided to be equitable in itfelf was re jected, and a fhort time afterwards a new Ad was introduced, to remedy an admitted inconvenience. As the law now flood, the matter was reduced to the fimplea principles. Whatever was the matter of the Petition, the Hone %vete to leave it wholly to the Committee. They were not to deliberate or to decide. They were t., admit or reject a Petition,nnt becaufe the tohniiTion or rejeCtion was wile, or the contrary ; not beeaufe it vi as or was not founded in equity, but becaufe the provilions of the Ad were pe remptorily mandatory, and were not under any car cumflancts to be dithbcyed. The Legiflature was now aridly bound to the Maier +ranee of a particular mode of proceeding, and it was quite ahfurd to think of get ting rid of it. He had heat d of Petitions of a defcrip tion fimilar to the prefent having been admitted, and afterwards fttbrnitted to a Committee. For his own part he was ignorant of the exiDence of filch prece dents; but even if they did caill, their exigence did not at all invalidate his argument. It might have hap. pened accidentally, but was that to be ferioufly urged as an argument to (hew, that when an error was dif covered it was not to be refined ? If the Ad unequi vocally pointed out a particular mode of proceeding, was a precedent directly in the teeth of its provilions to be brought forward to judify fubfequent irregula rity? It would hardly be contended, that if an evil was found to exia, that nn means fhould be taken to cornet it, becaufe it had &aped übfervation in a va riety of preceding intlances, and when the means of correction were at once eafy and efficacious. The proper :node of admindiering the correction in the prefent inflance was by difcharging the Petition. On this matter his own mind was completely fatisfied. He willed, if there floold.be two opinions, which he hardly expected, that Gentlemen who fhould take a view of the ruble& different from what he did,'would explain what other meaning could be attached to the claufe of the Ad than that which he attached to it. If the conftruCtion which he had put on the claufe was not correct, be vas &flouts of being informed what drfcription of Petition it was to which the claufe referred. He really was at a lerfs to conceive how the Ad could exprefs any 'nearing, if the meaning which he had affixed to it were objcped to. He would put a cafe in illurtration of his opinion. He would put the cafe of a Petition figned by perfowt who were merely copybolders, ligning a Petition, in the body of which Petition they claimedla right of votin6 at the Election. It was clear that they had no right of voting, and perhaps Gentlemen would immediately contend that fueh a Petition was to be initantly re lated as a matter of courfe. He could not, however, at all accede to this opinion. It was clear that the Petition would be found to be eventually frivolous ; but it did not at all follow, that in the fiat inflance it was not to be fubmitted to a Committee, :a judge of its merits. There was anti her cafe Dill more impor tant, the confederation of which, indeed, would in all probability form the bafis for the final decifion of the Committee of the bliddlefex petitions. This was the cafe of the joint tenants, which was known to have excited a great deal of interelt. If it had been the cafe of a body of electors who were in a fituation to be rated, but had never actually paid the rate, prefenting a Petition, he was not at all prepared to fay that the Houfe would be entitled to reject the Pe tition, becaufe they entertained an opinion that the Petitioners would ultimately fail in proving the fair nets of their claims. The fame principle he would apply to a Petition from perfons claiming a right of voting at the Elation for the County. It would not be argued for a moment, that a Petition from there joint tenants was to be rejected, becaufe the Houle might imagine that their claim to the right of Elec• Lion was altogether erroneous. Such a decition would be equally irregular and unjtitl. It would be pre judging what was afterwards to come before the Committee. It would be an attempt to execute that very office which, by the palling of the Grenville Ad, the Houle was declared incapable of performing with fairnefs and impartiality. The Houle could not argue the qnellion of the competency of any Petitioners complaining of an undue Election. They had not the evidence on which any fair decitit n could be formed. They were not the Court before which the general queaten was to be tried. It was very clear that copyholders had ni t a right of voting; but of a Petition figned by copyliolders the Houle were not entitled to hold an opinion. H ei mentioned this cafe from its being In clear, and when he Dated this be meant to include in the ibb:trvation the incompetency of the Houle to affume to II -nih.lves that right of de. termining the mci its of Pe; u.r,s whit:. v. as rcfcr% for a rpm*, tribunal. Whether liv.'li,ners had or had not a right to vote, was the id lutme confideration. The Houk had a lion I. t.dle to . cote. They were to detettnine v I -.! c: a Peti:h:r. complied with the the term. o; in inllxncc he puffed that hal t t!;), lion was irregular, aid he 11 lit th.r (I) rc ("tick:A with moving, that the cider of tl e d. y 1... the vol. fidcration of the Petit . ), n r I certain i'crf• its Itali.% themfelves Freeholders of hliddlcfi,, he ri.ad. The order was read accordingly. Mr. FOX then moved that the f..• 3 r.rd:r I.e di( charged.—The m,.ti.m being put fr .:), tile Ch.):1„ The CHANCELLOR nt the 1 . .!•_C1 lEQyt Sir, having litlencd uith the t ,, the Hon. Gentleman, I think it r;•e:, cr in anfwer, to Rate, that the uhicti I h.lrf entertained yefletday on this quellii.n, rem.iins )tt unaltered, or, I may even fay. 1141 I t C:I tail .r flrengthened. I cr•ncnr with the H. n. foam particulars; nod fed all that is t•, this ii-). portant queltion, which involves one cf r. tend tights of the fulijeas of this 1 , 411111 y, it enables them to reprelent their griev.r•'ecs •• Cleeit:lls to Padiamert. 1 aytree Milt the I i.,u. Oman with regard to the of iginal loonda..ion Ut t:.e Grenville Aar, and viol 1,, with hint. that ihcs c•riginaicd in a certain degree o: jlalouly .1% I 7 c.•;,. fining on- difcretionaty IN:wcts in CAICS dein iiin . ; bct 4..ic I am defirouc of excludin.; that right the Houk Las dcbaucti Will L 4-1 4a) La hcari,,i; • ibis pethion. If we ntonld nfl inhere/Ile, we eflablifh a precedent dangerous in the highed degree, and we null interfere with the fundamental mincip:es on which there Ads are founded. It was not a part of the principles of :he petitioners then% A.N. that the omithon excludeinali fi li t es in ra te " i u ide d d. (;.rest inconve niencefo froftauch reaping w tr a i s nig u thf n e d ulbe to n l e se experienced by petitions be ing brought forward, which were figned by thofe who were not entitled to'pefition againn any election ; and thee Ads were inier&J to rectify thofe evils The claufe requires, that perfons Mould not be en. titled to come to this Houk complaining of an undue elation, unlefs they chains a right of soling at Each elcition. The Hon. Gentleman has contended that they man nate their actual poffeffion of a right to vote at the election; and, for my part, I &mild argue, there petitioners have dery ibed their grievan ces an fuch a way as to ellen thei. &dui ; I fhould fay, that the mandatory injunaion of the Ad has been fatiafied. The Hon. Gentleman is extremel4- unwilling to give any weight to precedents; but aver, that we mutt look to precedents for the pro'. per interpretation of the meaning iinpofed by Parlia. ment on its own Routes. Thele petitioners are cer tainly entitled to have a hearing ; but what is the fad with regard to precedents? Precedents of this defctiption are fo numerous, that it is har.:ly pollible to and any cafe which has not been acted up to by tome limner one on a former occafion. In the cafes of Stirling, Orkney, and Shetland, in which the pe titioners reprefented themfelves as freeholder; o f a county, their petitions were admitted, and ordered to be confidered by the Committee. The cafe of Radnor was alto tomewhat similar to the prefent, though afterwards difchargei by the confent of the parties. In neither of thaefe cafes did the petitioners ,Itate that they had a right to elation ; but forne de feribed thcmfelves as eledors at the time they fumed the petition, but not at the time the eledion had taken place. Witk there,' and many others, forming a body of precedents. I am forprifed that any doubt can be entertained with regard to the propriety of admitting the prefeot petisirm. The very defeription of free. holders eflablifhes a sight to vote; but in cafes where no fuch title was Bated, ahete was evidently no doubt entertained of the panics having a right to vote. 1 underhand that there is no inflance where perfons calling themfelves freeholders (though not claiming a right to vote) were e”er excluded from being heard by this Houle. Are we not to confider the proceedings of the Houle as a record of the mean ing of the Houfe ? It would be laying, that it would benecefrary to fee elide eletiions which have been already decided by the Houle, and fe its deci nuns. With reference to this particular cafe. it is obvious that the pasties pretested their petition con ceived in the terms in which nomcrous others were prefentod and armed op.n. The petition had been renewed, and now, at the very moment whils the petitioners are about to be heard, it is alledged that they have no tight to figs, and that the petition thould not be admitted at all. • But. Sir, I aver, that there petitioners have drawn their petition ac cordieg to the Journals of the Houfe, and to its eflablinted rules and practice. Lct us look, bethles. to the practical confequences of the proceedings of the Hon. Gentleman, and compare them with thole which mull accrue from a Beady adherence to what has been adopted by the Houfe. The adop. Lion of the former would be to affirm, that there might be grievances complained of by a part of the people of this country, to which redrefs could not be afforded ; for if the ender be really difcharged, it would be doing a manila injunit... to many in dividuals. By the adoption of the latter alterna tive, the petition will go to a Committee to confi der the rights of the patties; and though I do nut prefume.to contend that the Committee are bound, on their part, to enter into all the merits of the pe tition, yet if thofe parties have fucceedcd in pi.tc tiling a fraud, they are not debarred from confider ing them as, difqualificd; for the Committee can Wray object to women, minors, or perluns not poffeffed of an income of forty thillings. I do ti • k the Han. Gentleman carries his propofition too far, by laying. that thcfe petitioners, declaring themfels es only to be freeholders, mull be (truck rff altogether. I fay. that the continued practice of the Houfe has rejected loch an interpretation. The Journals (hew the prac tice of the Houfe ; and the con:lmo:lces which would ultimately refult from adopting the one mode in pre ference to the otaer, may eat - ay he appreciated.— By attending to. and following, the precedents of the Houle, we will only perferete in rectifying er rors or entiffions in out own zlEts of Parliament. 0. thefe grounds, therefore, I mon (till perfesere in being of a different opinnin wish the lion. Member who has faoken at confider:dile iength upon this foh jed ; end I entertat: a :tope tF.at the Houfe will take the matter up in the fame point of iiew in which this impot tent n appears to me." Mr. FRANCIS cvnt.nded, that the Houtz WAS bOI . IIJ, in the ,Illeuro•n nt the cci.:flion, to confider the teem, rf fiat ore PS they vete. uere their deci!h.ti to he ;1,4.n...tr.'5: !) .t tAretent cantina - - I titan, and mote;tame:A.4l4 It• • 1:1.1t whim Way. .tt *rtepied to toe SIVO Ito 0., V. 1:...y vw.ovlJ redo( (homy: e. to a rcl litg to 111.: a:: C•:' t t i I t t in y cttt Mlde /U pA,t t...: Eder tic t.tzr Ire Lel t•! at:l:etc to t si t. ute:-ir • ip;; but to; 1 vin . ••• !!. r.....utt'un. •.1 I,v tl.c R;1,I the 1 {mite !:inJ of ttoistrZt , o; Y. ,r are n to 1x;u11 !incnt 4/1 .41-1 . ; .h v.....411L: I a. crilift,a, .\.i afi.~t i Frk.cdents, :c'icr. Ti•n du pro - d:e motion C fn .1 ostattali,n . no•. aft cr •1% tip . ill: Gi.sl 4 - 7!::• 1 171 . .!: r ~ .: H • ~ ,1 :' 'll,c 1 1.4%c ihc in t (14;n1. v tit-12cl al tea th-r I.' t