Star. — London, England, 1825-03-29 00:00:00

..~ It I t: ( • ;t X • :, I r Ifs. IitURTEIS moved for Returns of the Sale of Corn, for the last two yea. in the town of Ipswich. '. j,m4k BA RN ARD presented 'Petition from Bandon, age shy futitlevr conce..ionv to the roman Catholics. Sir A. CA Al Pl3El.Lpresented a Petition front the Incorporated Trades of Glasgow, against any further coecesgioni to the Roman Catholics; also a similar Petition from the 11.unmermen's patty of Glasgow. CORN LAWS. Mr. CU RIVEN rose to pi e ,eht a Per ition from the'' . Merchants, Corn-r!ealers, and others of the City of Lon don, Al t iinst the Corn Laws. He (Mr. Ctirwen) ac knowledged that formerly he was in error on the sub ject of the Corn Laws, but he confessed he was not able to resist the practical measures of his Majesty's Minis ters in favour of flee trade. The Petitioners complained f the effect of the present high price of Corn on the condition of the laborious, and expressed an anticipation that ere lone the ports must, under the existing system, be thrown open to foreign grain. lie (Mr. Curwen) thought, in that case, there would be a repetition of the calamities of 1819 on the landed interest, and that we were now, from the apprehen4oe of foreign grain being admitted, in a state of the utmost jeopardy. Mr. ELLICE said, he could not agree to the pro pos-As of the l'e itionets; The fact was, many of them had go' corn in store, and wished to have an opportu nity of bringing that into the ruatket. He stated this from having looked at the names at the foot of the Petition. Mr HUSIUSSON said be was glad to find that the Honourable Member for Cuniberiand (Mr. Curwen), who, in ihe Committee of 1821, bad been such a zealous friend to monopoly, had changed his views. He hoped, - when the discussion came fait ly before the House upon the motion of the Honourable Member for Bridge. . _ north . t! e opinions of the Honourable Gentleman would have weight with those who had concurred with his former senti ments. Upon a question thus raised by the presentation of a Peti tion, he would nut enter into so important a discussion; but he hoped it would he deeply considered before it engaged the attention of the House for decision. Mr. CUR ['EIS said, he was sure some mischief was coming either to the West Indies or the Agricultural Interest. He argued this from the expression of those liberal sen timents he had just heard, and which he always found to be the harbinger of evil—(A laugh.) Mi. T. WILSON thought that it was impossible to lea •e the Corn Laws out of the general alteration which the Government were now effe ring in every department of trade and commerce. He thought the subject deserved the most serious consideration. Mr. A. BARING said it was absolutely necessary that some permanent system of Corn Laws should be adopted, the most <erious evils resulted from the flue tuat.ons of the subject in the minds of the people. He was sorry that a notice of motion upon this question had be n put upon the paper, as it had the effect of ex citing expectation for which there could be no immediate satisfaction. Sir THOMAS LETHBRIDGE hoFed the House 'would be inf.rnied, before tt.ey separated for the recess, t,+-hether the notice of the Honourable Member for Bridgenorth had the concurrence of his Majesty's Go vernment, and would be supported by them? Where such vital interests were concerned, the country were at least entitled to know what they were to expect. • Mi. HUSKISSON felt no he itation in saying that the llonourable Member for Bridgenorth acted entirely upon his own discretion for aught he knew, in the no tice he had riven. He had not entered into any expla nation with him (Mr. Huskisson), and he believed he had had no intercourse whatever on the subject of the Corn Laws, with any Member of his Majesty's Govern. mem. He could have no controul over the Parliamentary motions of the Honourable Member for Bridgenorth, but he preferred dis cussing the question on a regular motion, to doing it on a petition. At present he would say no more; when the subject came fairly before the House he would deal with it in that way which his public duty should dictate. - •!--.."-, CATHOLIC EMANCIPATION. Mr. SPRING RICE preserved a Petition from the Nobility, Gentry, and Inhabitants of Limerick, in favour of the Bill before the H. use, fur the removal of Catho lic D sabilities. The Petitioners represented in amount o' landed property upwards of 200,000/. and what was more remarkable, the Petition contained the signatures 'of many respectable individuals, who had hitherto been, from hereditary association and the natural bias of min.', the steadfast opponents of the Catholic Question. He was required to state by some of the Petitioners, that they would have been better pleased had they seen two other 13111 s brought in along with that now before the House; one to regulate 40s. freeholders, and the other to make a provision for the Catholic Clergy. He knew that a reformation of tke 40$. free holders would excite a latent public opinion in Ireland. He would support it as a measure of rational reform. Mr. LITTLETON would, after the second reading of the Bill, submit a measure for regulating the Elec tive Franclii..e in Ireland. He conceived the qualifica tion should not be less than 51. cr more than 101. He was one of those who thought that emancipation would bring with it its own security. He and many others believed that no measure would contribute more to the purity of elections in Ireland. On this subject he bad no communication with any one, and perhaps owed an apology to the Hon. Baronet (Burdett) for interfering in a measure that be had commenced. Mr. M. A. TAYLOR must protest against the mea sures with which emancipation was to be accompanied. He had sat 43 years in that House, and had ofttn voted for Catholic Entancipat'on, but it was for Emancipa tion as originally set forth. Now it was coupled with a change in the representation, and a provision for the Clergy out of the funds cf England. To a provision ' out of the funds of Iceland, he did not object. How could he, who lad always opposed taxation, consent that his coostiu. nts should be saddled with taxes to the amount of 230,0001. more ? Though ft iendly to the new churches, he had opposed the grant of money, as he believed the money could have been raised by voluntary contribution. Toe English ens. Freeholder was to vote, but not the Irish. He had only £3 in the county of Durham, and looked on his vote to be as good as that of the Member for the County. He would tell the friends of Emancipation, of which be was a friend, that they had taken the most effec.usl way to defeat the measure. Sir R. oIIAW s..id, that the alteration in the elective franchi e, and a provision for the Catholic Clergy, would be 11104 acceptable in Ireland, and serve to conciliate those most opposed to the measure. Sri J. NEW .OR'!' was a sincere friend to the elec tive franchise, and had once intended to submit a mo tion to the House, similar to the one of which notice had been given. lie would ask the Member for Dur ham, whether it was better to pay three millions to sol. thers, or V. 50000/. to the Catholic Clergy? The present: was the happiest lime for carrying the measure into effect, irons the stare of the public mind, both in Bd..' tai and Ireland. The continuance of such a state was Liie to be caku'ated upon. Ile could prove, that the elective fran chise, as at present exercised, was uo boon, but a curs as the electors, as they were called, were not free agents. Mr. S. WORTLEY hoped his Honourable Friend would not be frightened by what he bad heard, as he ousted he would have the support of a majority of that House. Sir R. WILSON w ould go into a Committee to en quite into tie nature of the elective franchise, and to do Away all qualifications that were not real, but wished the Act of P.) 1 ament to be maintained, and would not consent that a difference •hould be made between inland and England. Lord .1. RUSSELL said, that the state of the fran ebi in cities and boroughs might also be necessary to be er.qniied into. pot l.e wished that the measure should be carried with the greatest possible speed, and when he 71" ~:.~s . WS found that those best ae c lnted with Ireland thought a provision should be made for the one Clergy, be felt himselfiallettas to assent to the prored measures. Sir FRAN IS BURDETT would be ready to agree to raise the rate.of freeholds in Ireland, and also to the payment of the Catholic Clergy, if it appeared that those measures were necessary' to carry Catholic Eman cipation. At the same time he must say, the measure he proposed to the House was distinct and simple, and he considered himself not implicated in any other ques tion. In consequence of a statement by an Honourable Friend of his (Mr. Tietney) a great misconception had gone abroad, that Mr. O'Connell had nothing to do with drawing up the Bill. He wished to explain that fact. He, and others of the Committee, consulted with the Catholic Delegates, and it never occurred to him that by Mr. O'Connell's drawing the draft of a Bill, any disadvantage could arise to the measure. .Mr. O'Connell did draw the draft of a Bill before he re turned to Ireland, but it afterwards occurred to some of the Committee that it might not be proper to avail themselves of it, and in consequence it was Hot used. This sheaved that the statement of his Honourable Ft lend and Mr. O'Connell a ere perfectly consistent.— He hoped no one who agreed in the great measure of Catholic Emancipation would withdraw their support because it might possibly be followed by other nsea sates in which they might not agree. Mr.. Secretary PEEL said, that nothing was farther from his view in rising than to discuss indirectly and incidentally any of those important questions that were touched. It was his opinion that such questions wi,hout notice, were unfair in themselves, and even injurious to the question. His own views on the subject of Ca. tholic Emancipation were well known, and he w i-hed to have it known that he would not accept the conces sion of those measures, whatever he night tiink of them, as a ground of compromise—( Henr,hear). If he were certain that the proposed measure for the disfran chise ient of the 40s.freehold-rs, and the Stat.• provision for the Catholic Clergy would form part of the Bili for the Emancipation of the Catholics, he would relax in his opposition to it —(Hear,hear). But supposing chat his objection to the principle of that Bill would be over ruled, he would then come to the consideration of those two measures. When the proper opportunity arrived, he would be prepared to give his opinion on them ; his mind was not made up at present. He for the present could only say, that he would not accept these mea sures as a compromise of the Bill for Catholic EMAi,ci pation; but if his objections to that were overruled, he would still reserve-to himself the consideration of those other measures. Mr. TIERNEY said, like the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Peel) he would reserve his opinion on the subjects, and give them all the cons.deration in his power. He beg ged to say one word as to what he on a former night said respecting a distinguished Member of the Catholic Association. He would be sorry that anything could have fallen from himself that could be injurious to Mr. O'Connell. He would not have said one word on a former night, if the Right Hon. Gentleman had not called on the House to watch the Bill, not so dangerous in itself, but as it was drawn by Mr. O'Connell. He (Mr. Tierney) then said that Mr. O'Connell was not concerned in, nor consulted about the drawing of the Bill. He then, however, thought that there was some mistake, as he had no doubt of the veracity of Mr. O'Connell. The House heard the facts from the Hon. Baronet; some of the Committee communicated with Mr. O'Connell, than whom certainly there was no one more competent to prepare the Bill. For his own part, he did that which became his situation, but he did not find fault with those Hon. Members who adopted a con trary course. He was glad to hear the justification of the Hon. Baronet, Mr. BROWNLOW would not pledge himself to sup port the proposed measures, nor yet to oppose them ; at the same time he believed that the altera.ion of the franchise, and a provision for their Clergy, would tend much to reconcile its enemies to emancipation. The forty shilling freeholders exercised no freedom of elec tion; it was an abuse of terms to call it a franchise. Mr. C. GRANT was of opinion, that the state of the elective franchise, and the want of a provision for the Catholic Clergy were two of the main causes of the disturbed state of Ireland. Mr. DAW SON said, that the two measu res, though of great importance, had not removed his objections to emancipation. He should like know what the Pro testants would gain by an alteration in the elective franchise, which ssould extend to them as well as to the Catholics? In the North of Ireland, many Protestant electors had the elective franchise in the same manner as it was enjoyed in this country. He doubted how far the alteration would be acceptable to them. At present he should give no opinion on the subject, but leave him self perfectly free as to his future conduct. Mr. COURTENAY would support both the mea sures. He believed that the proposed measures would have much weight with those men. He believed that his Honourable Friend had no intention of meddling with the forty shilling freeholders in Ireland, any more than with the real freeholders in England. Mr. LITTLETON explained. The Petition was tbes read, and ordered to be printed. Mr. S. WORTLEI presented a Petition from some town in Yorkshire, against the House and Window Tax.—Ordered to be printed. Mr. S. WORTLEY Ireeented a Petition from the same place, against the Corn Laws.—Ordered to be printed. Mr. H USK ISSON gave notice of a motion for to-morrow for a Committee to inquire into the effect of the Combination Laws. On the motion of Sir J. Nawronr, the House went into a Com mittee on the Apothecaries' Bill, which went through the Com mittee, and was appointed to be taken into consideration on Friday, the 22d April. -- 7 1 1IRTIV• v - Immrr'.%l Mr. HUME said, what he wished was, that some' prOvision should now be made, in caffiranfticauty should happen by the death of the Marshal. Sr; M. W. RIDLY, aUbding to the new edifices in Whitehall and Downing-street,-wished to know to what ' purposes the space id Downing.street was to be ap... plied? If it were not inconsistent .pith the plans already prepared, be should be glad to see some residences erected there fur the higher Public Officers of the State. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, it certainly was the intention to complete the line of building on one uniform, and, as it appeared to him, well-digested plan. He was aware of the extreme propensity of most people to criticise architectural erec tions, and he felt it not the easiest thing in the wend to answer such criticism. The misfortune of architects was, that their works were submitted to the public in spection during every stage of their progress, and ob jections were called forth which never would arise if the works were put out of hand at once in a state of completion. Since the commencement of these build ings it had been found necessary, in consequence of some great nuisaoces and defects, to make some altera tions in the plan, and to pull down the old and unsightly bu:lJing, the Home Office. The plan now was , to unite under one facade the whole line from the Board of Trade, the Treasury, and the Office of the Home Department. With respect to the space on the right side of Downing -street, it would be occupied with some small offices for the Exch , qtier, instead of the old un• ainly offices which now stood near Westminster-hall. niere was not room enough there to build any houses for the Officers of State. He agreed with the Hon Ba. one , that it was a matter worth considering that resi.• ..ces should be provided for such Officers. All the high-r Officers of Sate were called upon to keep up a cm tai,: d(gree c.f state, and it was not always the case Vat t.e were able to de it out of their private fortunes. It would, in many respects, be a great relief o have such reidences provided. Hitherto houses had only hecn pr .tided for the First Lord of the Treasury, the 'hancelor of the Exchequer, and the First Lord of he Admiralty. There certainly ought to be furnished r,sidei.ce the Secretary of State for F. reign Af fair., who was required, from his office, to receive a great deal of company. The principle, however, should lot be pushed .o tar as t • hrtig any large expense hn the country, though on the other hand it was beneath the dignity of Parliament to chew a niggardly feeling on the subject. LOk KIIART said, that by giving splendid Mill:1011s to Ministers, a feeling of hauteur would be engelid , red, which would close up their doors to the ' Memb rs of that House who might have business to oansact with them. ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE. Mr. HUSKIIISON, on the part of the Right Hon. the Secretary for Foreign Affairs, gave notice that he should move on Wednes day, that the House be adjourned nntil the 14th April. COMMITTSZ OF SUPPLY. On the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the EX CHEQUER, the House resolved itself into a Committee of Supply on the Miscellaneous Estimates. Mr. HERRIES moved, that the sum of 40,0001 be voted to defray the expenses of the Worts and Repairs of Public Buildings, fur the year 11125. Mr. HUME wished to know whether the repairs of the King's Bench Prison were to be defrayed out oi the fees of the Marshal, as was required by an existing Act of Parlia ment, or out of the public money? Mr. HERMES said, that some doubts existed as to the exact application of the Act in question; that Act WAS passed in 1724., and required that part of the tees received by the Marshal should be appropriated to thy repairs of the prison ; the prison, however, was desttoyed in 1780, and many doubts had arisen whether the pro- visions or the Act applied to the present building. From 1780 to the present time, the repairs had been defrayed out of the public money, the present prison being much larger than that of 1784., and it would not be fair to require the Marshal to defray its expenses. However, the subject was one most At for the consideration of the House. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, that Ministers were not so very inaccessible to Members of that House. Although the Honourable Member for Oxford (Mr. Lockhart) might not have occasion to trouble him often, yet most other Members contrived to have frequent interviews with him during each Session. Mr. LITTLETON agreed in the propriety of giving new residences to the higher Public Officers, and par ticularly to the Secretary for Foreign Affairs. Their salaries ought also to be raised, and he was sure the Public would not object to any reasonable augmentation. Mr. W. SMITH condemned the uncharitable way in which the works of architects were criticised. Gentle men who knew nothing of architecture passed the most sweeping judgments on the works of men who had de voted the whole study of their lives to such produc tions. He wished such an injurious course of criticism might be discontinued. Mr. J. MARTIN begged to know what had been done with respect to the new Custom House? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, the building had been erected at a vast expense by se veral individuals, who had contracted to build it with the ordinary surveying Architect of the Customs. This was an injudicious practice,which would not be repeated. Henceforward, all such buildings would be under the controul of the Board of Works. The surveying ar chitect contracted with another person who built the Custom-house, and afterwards the architect certified to the Treasury that it had been built according to the contract. The Long Room gave way, and on examina tion it was discovered that it had not been built ac cording to the contract. and that a most scandalous fraud had been practised. The Long Room was to have been supported by arches resting on piles. Each arch was to rest on nine piles, but under the arch which gave way it was found that instead of nine piles, there were only four and a half. These piles ought to have been regularly placed, which they were not, and should have been made of solid and sound timber like the masts of a ship, but in fact they were no: thing but trees with the branches lopped off.— This was most disgraceful to the individual he alluded to. Every means had been tried to secure the payment for whatever the repairs might cost, and as the individual was possessed of some property, it was to be hoped that the loss would not be great. An inquiry had likewise been instituted to ascertain, if possible, whether there was any collusion between the Architect and the Con tractor, and if so, they would be tried for a conspiracy. That point was now under the consideration of the Law Officers, and if they should report unfavourably to she parties, Government would feel it to be a duty to institute a pro secution. In the meantime they should attach their property fir the purposes of indemnification. Mr. Alderman WOOD said, that he knew Mr. Peto, (for there was no use in concealing his name) very well. He was a person who had executed many important public works for the City of London, and had applied for more. It was most important to Mr. Peto's charac ter that an opportunity should be afforded him for vindication. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER pro tested that the subject did not originate with him, nor had he mentioned the individual's name. Mr. MABERLY said, that returning to the sugges tion of the Honourable Baronet, he would say, that a residence ought to be furnished at least to the Secre tary for Foreign Affairs. But generally speaking, large mansions would lead to fresh expenses, and then appli cations would be made for incteased salaries. He was aware that some of the higher public officers were under paid,and if a specific motion were made, be would give it his support. Mr. BERNAL said, that he had spoken with Mr. Peto on the subject of the Custom-House, and that Gen tleman's statement was somewhat different from that of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. That Gentleman had brought an action for 30,0001. against Government, and it was not fair to throw out general charges of this kind to affect that claim. Mr. Peto was at present executing several large works—the Mercers' School, the Pano rama in the Regent's Park. But it should be recollected that in all public works there ought to be on the part of the Government a superintendent, and if there was any defect, the contractor was not the only culpable person. Mr. BARING said, that the answers of the Chan cellor of the Exchequer were the natural result of the questions put to him. The injury to the public had . beea great, and it was a false delicacy to gloss over the ',7 4 r l '! TJME 'T matter. As to the residences for the higher officers of the State, it was very desirable they should be furnished. He could speak from his own experience, as a man of business, that it was of the greatest importance that the dwelling and the office of a Minister should be near each other. It was not a question of money but of convenience. Sir M. W. RIDLEY explained. With regard to the accessibility of Ministers, he had always found the access to them easy, and their conduct to him most attentive. Mr. HUME said, he was sorry to find that Ministers had so much difficulty in getting to the Public Offices. They had nothing to do but attend to their duty. NU houses should he built until the public debt and the taxes were reduced ; 1,000,0001. had been voted during the last Session for Public Works-500,0001. for Churches, 500,0001. for Windsor Castle, and 200,0a0t. for the British Museum. At present there were quite enough of public buildings. Mr. I. WILSON thought this was a case'vviiere the Hon. Member would save a penny to spend a pound. The application of the proposed vote would be money well laid out, and would be a great public economy in the saving of time.—The vote was then agreed to. The next resolutions were for a grant of £1 0,000, to defray the expenses of the College of Edinburgh.— A greed to. For the expenses of Port Patrick Harbour £15,950 For the same of Dotiaghadee Harbour 19,150 Fur the same of Kingston Harbour 45,000 For the expenses of the British Museum • 40,000 Mr. It. COLBORNE expressed a wish that the pie tures placed in this establishment should be removed to a place bet ter adapted for their exhibition. Sir C. LONG said, that the pictures in the British Museum were well worthy a place in the national gal lery, and he saw only one difficulty in the way of re moving it. The collection had been given to the Trustees of the British Museum by Sit G. Beaumont, and no one could be more proper to ha , e the csolody of those or any other valuable works of ajt. With regard to the other collections, he had seen that of Marshal Soult, and the Murillos were certainly splen did works; but the others were not woroy a piace in the national gallery. He had a great objection to the Government becoming picture-d,alers, and %hat could they do with all the inferior works if they did nitt sell them ? He was for giving a liberal price for the best specimens of art, but he would not elicumbei the gal lery with others. Private colleen its genelaily con taioed works of all classes, but !rat 0! Mr. Angerstein was an exception. In that he believed it cool I hardly be said that there eas one indifferent pictut e. With regard to the erection of a building to receive the new national gallery, if the House was disposed to vote the sum necessary for it, he should be found one of its strongest advocates ; the on', objection to its practica bility was the one he had mentioned. Mr. Secretary PEEL thought that the pictu t es should be removed from the place which they at present occu pied ; and that no one was better qualified to superin tend them than the Trustees of the British Museum, to whom they had been left. He considered it to be of great importance, that they should be removed from Russell-square to Pallamill, or the neighbourhood of Charing-cross, where was to be seen what Dr. Johnson had called the great tide of human existence. He thought, therefore, it would be better to have another establishment, where such persons could go and see them upon another day. For these reasons he con curred with his Honourable Friend ; and he thought the public, who had so readily and so liberally commenced the pur. chase of the National Gallery, would, in the same spirit, go a step further, and provide a place for their reception. Mr. HOBHOUSE thought the public, who had paid for the pictures, ought to have them in a pl ice where they were of easy access. He agreed with the Right Honourable Baronet that Marshal Souk's collection, with the exception of the Murillos and some other fine specimens which that General plundered in Spain, was not a desirable one. As to that of Cardinal Fesch, there was nothing in it, except a few Flemish pictures, worth having. Mr. HUME hoped that the expense of the building would be attended to, and that it would be placed at Charing-cross. Mr. CROKER was glad to find the objections of his Right Hon. Friend (Sir C. Long) against removing Sir G. Beaumont's pictures from the BritishlMUS6 um, nar rowed down to the fact of their having been given to the Trustees. Sir George Beaumont gave the pictures to the Trustees of the British Museum, because there existed no other Corporate Body (if he might use the expression) through whom they could be given to the public. There was another collection quite as valuable as Sir G. Beaumont's, which had been sent to Dulwich, because there was no place to receive it in town. Works of Art should be so placed as to be a standing lesson to the public, and to be so, they should meet' " the tide of human existence" where it flowed most strongly. Sir C. LONG said, that to shew his Hon. Friend that the British Museum was not so much out of the tide, he would refer him to the returns which stated the number of persons admitted within the year to be above 100,000. Mr. CROKER said, he understood that the acquisi tion of two white bears had added several thousands to the usual number—(A laugh). Mr. MABERLY hoped that the Right Hon. Secretary for the Home Department would propose a measure for erecting an appropriate building upon an appropriate spot. Mr. Secretary PEEL said, the superintendance of these pictures, wherever they were placed, should con tinue under the same management which they now possessed. Mr. BERNAL wished to ask the Right Honourable Chancellor of the Exchequer what was intended to be done with the King's Mews at Charing Cross ? As this was Government property, he thought it could not be better employed than for the new galleries of paintings. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, with regard to the questions put to him by the Hon. Member for Rochester, he had paid great attention :o the subject of the vacant ground occasioned by the re moval of the King's Mews, in order to see how it could be best applied to the public use ; there was no room for such a building as that required for the National Gallery, if they meant to preserve an area or open square, which he thought extremely desirable.— The prop. rtv did not all belong to the Crown, or they might know better how to proceed. If they had all that great monster of a place the Golden Cross, and all the houses extending to St. Martin's-lane, which belonged to many different rroprictors, there would then be a wide field for the display of taste. But that not being the case, it was not so easy to decide upon what was best to be &lie. With regard to the Royal Academy, he be.ieved se one heard it, without feeling that it was the worst possible place for an ex!•.ibition. In the first plate, only one carriage could drive into the gateway of Somerset House at a time, and any which happened to be in the itiside must wait until they had turned before they could get out. The works of sculpture, from the weight of the marble, were obliged to be placed upon the ground floor, and the only room which could be obtained was most unfit for such a purpose. — Then the large room for the pictures was so high up, that no gouty Gentleman or corpulent Lady had a chance of seeing them. He thhight, therefore, that it \ E