Star. — London, England, 1811-03-23 00:00:00

"f!', WANTS a Place, a Young Man, as Footman, or Footman and Valet to a Single Gentleman—has no ob jection to have the care of a Horse. H.t lived Eve years in his last place.—Letters, post paid, directed to W. D. No„ 5, Clifford street, Bond -street, will be immediately attended to. PARLI.4MENTARr PROCEEDINGS. MOM OF LORDS, MARCH ,22. The Royal Assent was given, by Commission, to the MutittY Bill, the Royal Marine Mutiny, the British Population, the Silk Weavers' Wages, and to several Bills of a private or local de ecriptlon. The Lords Commissioners were the Lord Chancellor, the Duke of Montrose, and the Earl of Aylesford. The Sugar Drawback and Bounties, the Linen and Yarn trade, and the Expiring Laws' Bills were read a second time, commit ments negatived, and ordered to be read a third time to-morrow. The Great Snoring (int•losisre) 'Bill was read a second time, and referred to an Out-dtaors Committee, upon Whic# 'all the Lords present this Ses.ion were ordered to be etigibli. , Mr. Newton, from the Post-office, presented Accounts of Ba lances and Arreari in the hands of the Deputy Post*Mastereg and Mr. Peayse, from the Admiralty, an Account of the Increase and Diminvtio'n of the Salaries and Emolument, oroffices, wish* were ordered tilt lie en the table.' Sonic local aisil private Bills were brought upirbin Abe mons by Sir &Unto Folkes, Sirs. Charter Btinburyo,aper other Members, and r tad a first time.--Aaijousned till toinoirtiti '• - `HOUSE or common The SPEAKER ' the House having beeri sbmmoned by the Usher of the Black Rod, went to the House of Peers, to bear the Commission read, m.ben the Royal Assent was given to certain public and private Bills, for which see the Lords Mr. FOSTER brou gist up returns ut the several branches of the Irish Accounts for the last year, which were ordered to be laid on the table. Mr. WHITBREAD postponed his motion respecting a provi sion in case of i recurret. :e of a similar misfortune by the King's illness, from the 27th Ina Int to the ist of April. • The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER gave notice of a :notion for Monday, for lam to bring in a Bill to amend the 43d of the King. In a Committee on the Papers respecting the Advance of Money in Ireland, the Resolutions wtre agreed to, and were ordered to be reported on Monday . 'the Exchequer Bills Funding Bill wag read a third time and pa. t d. The Committee on the Militat y Commitsioncre Bdis Was post- pined till Monday. 'the Alinual Indunnity Bill era: brought In, read a first time, and ordered to be . sad a second time on Monday. MILITIA PINGS. Mr. BURRELL asked across the House. how the Mil hi* Fines were appropriated? Mr. GOLF)IiV RNE rtplied, that they were paid into the Ex ohequer, and afterwards applied to the purposes of the Consoli dated Fund. Mr. GEORGE VANSITTART said, that by the Act they ought to be applied to the purposes of the Militia. He then moved, that there be laid before the House an account of all the Fines received and levied in the General and Local Militia far the yskr . s 1808-9-10, dlstiogidshing each yew', together with an Ac count stating how applied.—Ordered. Mr. ASHLEY COOPER postponed his inodon respecting a certain portion of thwMilitia Estimates, till Monday. MARKET MARSOROUGII CANAL BILL. On the motion "of Lord HENIKER, the Order of the Day for the second reading of the Market Har borough Canal Bill was read. The Noble Lord, after an animated and lucid de scription of the advantage which would be derived koni the formation of this Canal, moved that it should be read a second time. Mr. CARTWRIGHT. strongly opposed the bill. He. remarked that stich speculations were too often undertaken without any consideration of the value of the laud which must inevitably be sacrificed. in the formation of the plans. He contended, that the ca nal% which were already established in the neigh bourhood of the line proposed by the bill before the House, were fully adequate to every purpose to which a canal could' be converted for the interest of that district. It would, he said,. be recollected by the' House, that many petitions had been presented against but pone in favour of the bill. Under these circum stances, and with a full impression of the.ill effects which would be experienced by the landholders, he moved thatthe Bill should be read that day its months. Mr. ORD disapproved of the bill,,from the Ineal-1 'culable injut y certain individuals would sustain from 'the destruction of their With and estates, for which no adequate compensation could be made. • Mr. VANSITTART priderstoMPlhat every pre :union had been taken in the formation of *chill, to Tuard the individuals that had been alluded to bl the ion. Gentleman who had spoken last, from any of to evils which had been anticipated. With the con; iction on his mind that this was• actually the case, he Jcl give his vote in favour of the bill. Lord A. HAMILTON urged some further argu tents in favour of the Lill ; when the question being .iferously called for, strangers were ordered to;wial !raw, and a division took place. The numbers were s follow In favour of the bill 48—Against it 92—Majority igainst.it 44. The bill was consequently thrown out. SUPPLY-4M NRACKS-- ESTIMATE% B&C..—NAVY • ISTIMATES—•-ADMIRALTY. ishou Mr. YORKE (the House having gone into Com duce) rose to correct an inadvertency which had :cured in voting the last Navy Estimates. The ommittee would recollect his having then stated the zw and improved form in which the Estimates was en to be presented—the Navy Ordinaries were then ivjded by himrin:o three heads : one of these had .to omitted I and he had now to move, that a sum, ►t exceeding £1,157,751 for the Ordinaries of the Judinz the half-pay, &c. The Resolution 11 in poi justice, to the most complained that the proceeds of the six ships taken in the battle of Camperdown remain yet undistributed; of these there was but one respecting which proceedings had been had; the claimants were various, living in dif ferent parts of the world, and the claimshad been put in at different times. ' In 1799 the capture took place, and final adjudications were made on the 13th May, 1801. Upon this question there had been a strong di. versity of opinion,,antl this diversity had been expres- __pt sed cn several occasions with more than ordinary -th _ _ warmth. At length the parties made the proper re ference, and appealed to the Courts of Admiralty.— The cause came on to be heard on the 12th July, 1805, when the Court delivered its opinion, but de. ferred pronouncing its judgment. If the circumstan ces which formed the grounds of this postponement were known, instead of the indulgence, he would in vite the severest judgment of the House. Which ever _way the Court had decided, discontent and complaint would have followed from one of the parties. No formal decision was therefore made. It was certain that this arose merely from a regard to the interests of the claimants, since the agents no more than the Court had any interest whatever in the delay. The matter went up in thonatural course to the Lords Commissioners of Appeal, where, he was sorry to say, it remained six years. • But whatever was the cause of this, no blame on that account could be imputable to the Admiralty Court, which had of late years been subjected to every species of unfounded accusation.— Charges of the most vague description had been made and discussed in almost all the coffee-houses and ale houses in London, by one Noble Lord, who was now, he trusted, better employed in the defence of his country, to which he had already so meritoriously contributed. It ought to be known, however, that the Court of Admiralty was no more answerable for any delay, or proceedings of any kind, in the Court of the Lords Commissioners, than the Court of King's Bench for any thing done upon matter carried by writ of error before she House of Lords. Having, however, so far exonerated his own Court, he would likewise add, that the Court of Appeal could not be justly accused of any improper delay. Such insinua tions uniformly proceeded from men ignorant of the peculiar nature of its jurisdiction, and of the princi ples which governed Courts of Civil Law. Within the last few years, owing to the new And changing relations of foreign states, more questions had arisen for adjudication than had been decided for a century. (Hear, hear.) The Court of Appeal was composed of individuals high in rank, and Members of his Ma jesty's Privy Council—persons who received notonsi deration fOr their trouble—no return besides the cla morous censure which was so often and so unfairly bestowed on them. The tact was, that necessary wit re sses were of Left at a great distance, and their exa minations were often taken in very remote places, at she instance.of the agents. There was a great error in supposing that the rules of Civil Law could be as similated to the principles of municipal jurisdictions. In the.preselit extended scale of maritime warfare, It was impossible to enforce any additional restrictions iii point of time. Twelve months had been found the shortest period within which the litigations could Froceed to distribution. These were considerations that should have been well weighed before char .ages were made before the Legislature, and echoed through the country. He bad deerned.it necessary to give this explanation of the proceedings of a Court which bad to decide between, suitors of very opposite charac. tern, between thole gallant men to whom every thing was due, but whose lively passions might be roused by uncontradicted statements, that they were unworthily treated, and on the other hand, foreigners, to whose claim* he need not attempt to convince the House, were entitled, botl, ' licy and avY, jut .. 8 ..._ .titicu, aving been put, . . I impartial hearing. ' Sir WILLIAM SCOTTtose, and, adverting to I Mr. ROSE vindicated the conduct of the Couit of complaint which had • been made on the former; Admiralty, and thlught that the darerent parties ight, when the Navy Estimate; were under their 1- ought to be muck obliged to the Learned Jud ge f ur msicleration, hi said he regretted that, as that - com- I ; delaying his judgment till the decision in the Court aint was directed against the Admiralty Court, ! of Appeals had taken place. lie did not believe that ..? hfmself had not been present . , to hear and meet it,: there was any country in. the whole world where bu. might be said, .tha; he ought to have been in his I sipess was carried on with.mare purity and more dbl.! lace to, answer any such objections : but lie really patch than in this country, and particularly in the ul4 not foresee that his conduct could be br6ight l Court referred to. - He here entered into the details question in a discussion on the Navy 4stisrates, ; l4, B f.*cause which had been selected for anlmadrier, everAeltadnoright to con, pll i n of t h is,h e cianteliglett . ..filinsi:aql .dwelt upon the, .iWegritY of the Court :Dif he had a right tQ complain of the imespectillitlqsstrlTO Appgals.. Of the proeeedinge of that coustlst the attack, Because hts had always understAM tifti44;reralits repori :ode court 'of 44.Wrakzoiii l in onl;age of that House, when one Hottotsiabk,J9r. tin trutho4lr . stattesttetlt•'he tabMirifeetiliir • • . - . , • •• ....- - ' • -.., ~y RibHonourable Frien& who sat beside him. He confeslell he felt much anxiety in repelling any insi nuation thrown out against the adjudication of causes in which the navy were interested. Gentlemen ought. rendek to be very cautious bow they made those charges ; the cir- because if the seaman once got it into his head, or read Tected - any statement made to that effect, there could be no all its possibility of persuading him to the contrary. :Fir . The himself he could say, that he paid every attention to rhich the claims which had been_made on him in an ()racial - ago, 1,. _ 4 pro- capacity; and he coulefely say, that no seaman, ceeds had not yet been disposed of, and that thibdeJ or wife, or child, or wiuow of a seaman, had ever ad-' lay was owing to the Court of Adrniiiky. the dressed to him a letter, to which they did not receive Honourable Baronet who had preferryl.this - eharge, an immediate answer from himself. drew this inference merely from a cor4arison of the a Sir C. POLE observed, that he had not attached time of the capture with the present ala i , fig • mialarne to the Right Hon. Gen tl eman indivi fallen into an error. For instance, this ver Ur! on the contrary, he had given hi; warm (Sir W.) had sat for four or five hours in the mendation to the mode in which the lee,;n2ss of of Admiralty, upon a case which originated six years hg' Admiralty Office had been lately conducted. He ago ; but then it had not been entered into the Court had certainly at ple same time expressed his regret of Admiralty till a year ago • besides, there were va- and the aebrys in the Courts of Admiralty had stlil rious causes which might pr oduce delay : the parties enntinued without remedy or alteration. Was he to may be more anxious to harass one another, by liti- be debarred from declaring his sentiments by the ab gations, than to make good their respective claims.—isence of the. Right Hon. Gentleman, or was he to he It was to be recollected also who were the suitors in compelled to communicate to him his intention when that Court—they were either, on the one hand, men ever he entertained any, of making such remarks as actively employed abroad, in the public service of hieduty as a Member of that House might induce' their country, or, on the other baud, they were mu- him to make, because the Right Hon. Gentleman chants living in - very remote countries; and when the might possibly conceive himself to be personallv in parties were thus circumstanced, summary 'dispatch terested,? He had talked of the constitution of Tunis could not be always expected ; the witnesses, too, and Algiers, and there was perhaps, more resemblance were often beyond sea, and the cause was often ob- between them and the proceedings of the Admiralty liged to be stayed till their return, and where the pct. Court than he would-be very willing to acknowledge.' tick_ were foreign merchants, the present circumstances The Right Hon. .Gentleman had stated, that ships. of tick_ would explain the difficulty of communica- brought in by i blockading squadron in 179 t, had dort with them. He was aware that dispatch was to been condemned in the same year, but that they were be wished for, but then it must be dispatch con s i s - afterwards tried before the Court of Appeal, where the tent with justice. There was no complaint of want delay arose. Was he not one of the Commissioners of dispatch at Tunis or Algiers, or in .F`rance, but the of that Court himself ? What stronger case could Court of Admiralty in this country did not sit for the be made out to justify his former observations, than purpose of condemning only, it sat to check spolia. the statement that 9000 cases were in the register of tion, and controul the hostilities of war by keeping arrears, waiting for decision ? The Right Hon. Gen them within the rights of nations. With respect to tleman (Sir W. Scott) had gone from the noith to the comp l a i nt of the Honourable Baronet, he had the south pole, in , order to find apologies for the gla. _ . ring instance of ships taken in 1799, not a sixpence of the value of which had been received by the cap tors in 1811. The Treasurer of the Navy had stated that abuses had been committed in 9000 cases, a scene of pilfer ing and cheating such as he had never heard of. It was a cruel hardship on the sailor, and a most im politic circumstance, that the soldier should be able tt, say to a seaman," d—mme, I have got my prize money, and you have not got yours." He conceived • his di • these thi the Hi how it his duty to state iings to , _ douse, ever he might be opposed by the splendid talents of the Learned Judge and his friends. It was perfectly parliamentary to do so, he apprehended, without con sulting the Learned Judge or any other. At the end of twelve years these poor men had not got their prize money. Indeed, many of those interested were now no more. Lord Duncan, Sir A. Dixon, and several more were gone. He insisted, that in this case there had been both delay and abuse. Mr. ROSE denied that he had mentioned' 9000 cases of abuse. He had stated that this number ON , cases had been registered by him—that 600 had been carefully investigated, and that some abuses hailbeeni discovered; but none had been attributable to .hel Admiralty Court. It was impossible forthat Court to drag parties forward against their will. . In the ' whole of the cases which he had examined, there was' not an instance in which blame was attributable to' any Officer of the Admiralty Court, much less to thel ! JUdge. The Proctor had not been in any way blame able. The vessels had been condemned the sacred year they were brought before the Ciant ; and the oniy ground of delay was, the fresh claims by Offieent tof the Navy, which rendered it impossiMe to procure I the decision of the Court of Appal sooner. Of all !the Courts in the world of a similar description, the Court of Admiralty here was the most expeditious; I.and its decisions were not only just, but had excited the admiration of the whole world. Sir C. POLE said, , he had admitted that the sltipe had been condemned in 1799, but still the fact was undeniable, that, to this day, the seamen had not g ot their money. . 1 Mr. STEPHEN said, that when he considered the nature and tendency of the disctbsion that had taken place, and reflected, (to use the Hon. Baronet's own. ' words) that it might produce discontent and riot, and was calculated, as he had strongly observed, to blotii I the world into a flame ; he could not resist the incli nation to !hake a few observations which came withie his own personal knowledge. Atter his Right lion. and Learned Friend bad expressed himself so cooly, dispassionately, and clearly, he did expect that the individual who made the charge would have been the first tddisown it. The Hon. Baronet had maintained that he did not feel himself bound in parliamentary duty, to state his intention of bringing forward suth a charge.; but whether, in strictparliarnentary pro priety be was bound to do so or not, undoubtedly the consideration of the consequences, which he seemed to appreciate so justly, ought to have induced him to . inquire Into the facts before be stated them, and to have ascertained the truth of his case before he re solved to make it public. What surprised him Most however was, the hardihood with which the charge was renewed, even after the explanation.. The Ho. nouraMpjicember then went over the same ground which the Hon. Baronet (Sir W. Scott) had already stated in his defence. Having accounted for the delay in the Court df Admiralty, he next came to that in the Court of Appeals, to which he could speak from his own personalexperience; and which, like that in the Ad miralty Court, was not the act of the Court, but of the parties. Thecause was decided in six ruonthsafter it was put dowt► in the list. If there were any impropriety in dela• lor- h; the li that _:ying so long to have it pi _ tu the list, .uak impropriety attached to himself (Mr. Stephen) and the late Dr. Liwrence. The reason ot. their conduct was, that they did not think the case in a state to de. mand a decision. This difficulty W 45 chiefly caused by a very difficult question, which was, Whether the vessels were in sight at the time ?. The evidence upon this subject was necessarily of a difficult and dilatory nature ; and the delay, though considered by the gal lant Admiral in so dttferent a light, was adopted for the good of the parties to which it ultimately tended. \ stett was , * charge which t his Right Honourable lAtedLearned Ftieqd,had so vitoupbantly defeated. liThett was iiaOtlier Tact that should not be forgotten °RI, teqvatablir;the decision of the Superior !hie+Wbottne4"stiettfriend gave his dcs alon‘; r that he aveiled himself of the first optcnl nity. He (Mr Stephen) acquitted the Ham Baron et of any personal hostility towards the Judge o f ow Admiralty Court ; but be could net help obserrira that he chewed a good died of prejudice in hi s duet. He bad allowed the greatest praise to e l .. Treasurer of the Navy for the activity he l ai d sham. Pat he ought tOTave-recollected, that much was d , to his Host. and Learned - Friend. With respect ta the complaint of delay, the Court of Admi t , 'could not act ev tf.zio ; the parties should come 4efe:a. it if they' wanted jttstice, for they could rot be drag. ged into Court against their will to make their J. mands. He concluded with deprecating the rasln tesg of bringing forward such chargo. arid expressing an opinion that the gallant Admiral inft - lit do more mi ; .. chief by such proceedings than would ite counterba. lanced by any effects which his naval taleerfa great as they were, could produce. Mr. FREEMANTI-E declared that the exriana. don of the Right Honourable and Learned Jut 4 g..- fippearcd to him completely satisfactory. Delay was not always abuse. It might be necessary to justice, as in this case. He (I...fended the 'character of the • King's Proctor, who, he was sure, was utterly inca pahk of acting improperly. • Mr. G. JOHNSTONE said that the Honourable Admiral had do/tells duty in mentioning this su'uject. The fact, that the money had been unpaid for twelve years, was a strong prima facie case ; andahough the matter had been, in this instance, explained. yet these discussions always did good. Nut •a fain(' the int. piovements which others had takenic - rediefor, wen:, perhaps, the effect of the Hon'airal.ile • Admital's statements in that House. The C•airt App_ :1 certainly requited some alteration. A: onetime there were 200 causes lying over, many of them 'more than three years standing. The neutrals gro tiled Uri= this delay. Of seven millions of prize money which were taken in 1793, three millions were found to be wrongfully taken from America, Denmark and Swe den. The Court of Appeal should be canstituted like other Courts; it should not depend upcn the creme nience or the engagements of the Judges, whether they are to attend ; but the Court should be open at all times to suitors. He admitted, however, that the arrears were now greatly, if not wholly reduced. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, the Hon. Member who had just sat down, had told them that the Court of Appeal required reform, and yet, he also told them what certainly redounded not a little to the honour of that Court, that in a time of war, when additional causes were perpetually flow. ing in, the number of arrears had been reduced. It was proper to state what was the fact. The arrears were so far reduced that at present not more than twenty. five causes were in the Court, which was, properly speaking, no arrear at all. The grievances which he states neutrals to labour under no longer exist, and directly the reverse was the fact. In attempting, therefore, to reform a Court that had had the vigour to wipe away so great an arrear, they might alter, but could hardly amend it. It seemed rather strange to him that the Hon. Gentleman should think tail accusation honourable to the gallant Admiral, and that it . was prima facie requisite.. Perhaps it siaml.l .bavelpoked as well had the gallant Admiral Made stand prelious inquiry before bringing such a charge ; ho'wever, what astonished him was, that after ail the *-explanation which was given, and certainly most sa tisfactory explanation to the mind of every man who heard it, the gallant Admiral should still repeat his charge, and complain of an abusive delay. He ex pected from that gallant Admiral that, after hearing that explanation, he would express his conviction and his regret at having made the charge, not so much on' account of his Right Hon. Friend (Sir W. Scott) whose character could not be affected by it, but for the sake of 140,000 men, on whose minds the most dangerous impressions might be produced by it, and who ought to be the objects of all the attention and all the consideration of the country whom they serve. Mr. GEORGE JOHNSTONt explained. Sir FRANCIS BURDETT said, that they had heard from the Treasurer of the Navy of the existence of abuses, for the detection of which that. Gentleman very deservedly took credit.. Whatever might be doe to the Treasurer of the Navy and to the Right Hen. Judge for the measures of reform introduced by them, he had no doubt that much also was due to the Gal lant Admiral who on former ecca.:ions hai frequently brought these subjects before the House. It would not be easy perhaps to persuade Gentlemen of the learned professions, and particularly the Learned Mas ter of Chancery, of the evils of delay. Thought these Gentlemen may panegyrise one another, as was quite common on occasions like the present, though the commendation might be deserved, this was altogether beside the question. What was it to the gentlemen of the navy or seamen, that the Judge cf the /Um:- ratty was' possessed of so great ability and was tree from blame, when they were, notwithstanding. op pressed with a ruinous delay. Fur the delay of 12 years perhaps nobody was to blame, and the Ho nourable Baronet imputed no blame to any one. The country was, however, greatly indebted to persons who, like the Honourable Baronet, exposed them selves to obloquy by bringing forward grievances.— Whether these grievances were real or imaginary, it was generally seen that some amelioration was the re sult of the inquiry, whoever might afterwards take credit for that amelioration. The Right Honourable Gentleman and the Treasurer of the Navy were there fore, in his opinion, much indebted to the Gallant Admiral, who brought forward, from time to time, these charges ; and its his opinion he ought not to have been the subject of so much hostile animadversion. Mr. CROKER said it was not singular that the Honourable Baronet who prides and piques himself on standing alone in his opinions, should congratu late the Gallant Admiral, but what was singular was, that after hearing such satisfactory explanation as had been given that night, he should continue to re peat:the charges. It was not difficult, to be sure, to repeat at the - end of the-evening what had been said in the beginning, but what was strange was that, at tke end, he should continue to repeat what had been ten times „refuted, and•should omit recry word of that explanatitin. . .Mr. WHITBREAD said that the Honourable Gentleman who had just sat down had told than that it was easy to - yeptat at the end or the evolsi.l* what had bees. Said to tLe beginning ; • but be kid woe strewn thenk,tbut it .was difficult for lint to re peat justly what had been said itt the itd. He • • . • r _ • • . . . . • • • t ql"."*"'"••••••••••''''''""'"'"""" i Gentleman preferred a complaint against apathy, to I , . CITY DISPENSARY, ! givethatotherpreviousnoticeofsuch hisintention. If,in c f GROCER'S-HALL-COURT, POULTRY. i general, such notice was necessary, it waspartictilarly n AVACANCY having takes place in the Office o f Iso lii this case, on account of the number and variety ii PIVSICIAN to this institution in consequence of the Re. lof the causes tried in--his Court, which would rendet t signation of Dr. lIERDMAN, any Gentleman desirous of he. it impossible for him to earry in his head all the cir- l coming a Candidate, is requested to produce his Tertimonahl cumstances of each case, so as upon an unexpected - a r .re the Monthly Committee on Wednesday, the 3d of April I reference to any one, to he able to recollect all its c next, at Six o'clock in the evening, precisely. Further particulars may be karst en application to the Seem_ trearings and distinguishing c i r c umstances. The I tary, Mr. A. E. Tv RNBVI.L,Bolt.Court, Fret-Street; or at . the coMplaint he alluded to was that of six captures which t Dispensary, in Grocer's-Hall-Court. had been made several years ago, in 1799,—the pro- c