Star. — London, England, 1825-06-07 00:00:00

, I` carried on in those countries to an unlimited extent. lie was no: prepared to say content or not content on the 4nerits of the clause. but he should say not content if pressed to vote viiti t informa tion or inquiry. The Earl of LIVERPOOL observed, that the ques tion was one of the most important that cog Id br brought under,tbe consideration ofP.srliattent. It was not in any way connected with the system of our Corn Lasts, which would be as open to discussion sew thi ne: determined as before. He would say melting upon the principle of adopting a free trade in corn—a principle which no one had asserted without attachieg to it one condition, that of affording a fair and reason able protection to the agticulturists; but this lie would say, that even if it should be the wish of Parlian.ent not to alter the present system •at all, they wild do well and witly to adopt the present measute. He would go further, and say, that even if the grows rs of corn were to act upon the mo-t selfish view tin their own interest, d.ey would find their advent •ge In pu.- suing the'most liberal system towards America gene rally—(Hear,hear)—and towards their own colot.ies in pat ticular—(flear, hear). - So far from exposing ti em to any danger, it would trove their security rgainst the only danger that could he suprosed to exist—the danger of the agricaturist—it any wan to be t 'end in • the state of the Eurorean market.; and even in that view of the suhj .ct a l'besal policy t wards Anse ica and the Colonies was the most likely ta,lte serviceable to ourselves. After al, when they apprehended &et . - ger, th.y were bound in mason to look to the amount of the danee., and then the real question was, to what extent did CanaJa carry on the expertation of waits ? lie found upon an average of the last twenty years, that the amount was 16,000 quarters 4 year, and that the largest atootint exported rn any one year was 47,000 quarters. If, tl erilose, the present Bill was to Jess, it would take a number of years before Canada could export one I died th-usand quasters. Besides, there we e other cireumeancec which must prevent the trade from et er becoming formidable to the glower in this country. There was the distance between the countries. The n ere height and insurance would arnnunt to 12s. 6d. a quarter, and there was a duty im posed by that Bill of ss. a quarter. In addition to,this, the House should recollect that, durirg is mentlis in the sear, all intercoerse was shut out, and tiat the trade itself was exclusively confined to British ships. Was the Noble E irl, who proposed the amendment, aware of the importance if the mercantile slat igation with Canada ? The whole of the mercantile naviga tion of this counts y - amounted to six martins seven 'hunched ant fo ty-five thousand tons; that with Canada amounted to one million three hundred and eighty thousand tons, which was between a fourth and fi di of the whole mercantile navigation of the country. — Canada was also of great importance to this country as a nursery for seams n a so that of all things they were bound to avoid that narrow policy, the result of wh:ch might be to lead to a separation. The trade was of utmost inipm tat ce to us. S te- was a flourishing Colony,' and he wished to make her feel that her pro sperity arose from her conrexion with this countryeHe ha.fstated, on a former occasion, that the two subjects were classed together in the present Bi 1, because the present Bill 104 reference iv i, former Act, in which they were also united, but 1 .01 1 .11 i to lithit operation to three years, in order to ascertain whether any mischief was likely t 3 :rise from it. The Noble Lord had said that the Corn Laws would come under their revision next year. Ile hoped so, though it was possible to con es tee a case in which it would not be judicious to revise them; but if they should conic under their review, as he hoped. the Corn Laws should be taken up on their own merits, and not in conjunc tion with this, which was a mere question of colonial policy, though he would allow a most I.nportant one. Lord DACRE laid, from information which I.e had received, he bel'eved that on a rermanent system, the Americans could celuge this country with Corn of the fine t quarry ; how far that might be under a limited system he could not say. Ills objection to this Bill was, that it went to legislate for the admission of American Corn for three years to tome, at an inadequate rate of duty. ' Earl ' BATHURST contended, that the prices of *heat at the' exporting Country, whilst the ports were shut in the importing country, would not form any ground on which their Lordships could legislate for the admission of it into this country. Lista M A LM F.SBU It Y explained. 'the Earl of LIVERPOOL consented to limit the operation of the Bin to one year, and the end of the then Session of Parliament. After a short conversation, it was understood that the duration of the Bill was fixed to one year, and to the end of the then next Session of Parliament. The Earl of Al A LISIF-SBURY then gave up his motion, and the clause for the admission of Canadian Corn was agreed to. On the last clause helve read, The Earl of LAUDERDALE moved an amendment, which was understood to be adopted, directing the certificate of origin to be sworn by The owner and grower, instead of the shipper. • The Douse then resumed, the Report was brought up and or dered to be received to-morrow. IRELAND. The Earl of BHA FTESBURY moved an bumble Address to his Majhty, praying that he would order an abstract of the popula tutu of •Ireland according to the census made inlB4l.—Ordered. The Van Diemsn's Land Judges Dill went through a Committee and was reported—Adjourned at Half-past Seven o'clock. HOUSE OF COMMONS. 1 • Mr. At FITZGERALD brought up the Report of the Cum. valuer an the Atlantic Steam Navigation Bill; as also on the Hi betnian Hitting Company's Bill. The Report on the Brighton Improvement Bill was agreed to, aid ordered tole engrossed. Sir J. NEWPORT gave notice that on Thursday be should call the attention of the I louse. to the atrocious cruelties practised ht the chartered schools 01 Ireland, and should move an Address to the Crown, ssitb the vier► ! re prosecuting the offenders. Mr.. CA LCR AP 1* moved the second leading of the S. Olaties, llitit-stieet. Ti bes Bill. The qiies i• n was, what vas to be etiled on tie itsture incumbent? Thy number of I..c , uses that paid the tithes was sot mole than 160 and the number of inhabitants was not much above 1000. The value of the living had risen from 250/. to '2200f. a yeAr, Nhich had given rise to much ill blood. Ihe incumbent had told him, that he would be satisfied via) 12001. a year, and he recommended to the parithinners to accede to it ; while at the same time , ail th e duties were done by a Curate at 1001. a y ear. 'As to she salary of the successor, a difference of opinion had arisen betwe, n the Palish and the Bishop of Lon don. The incumbent, the parish, and the patron, were all agreed ; *and he wished the Dill to be read a second time without the con sent of the Bishop, which would probably be obtained in the pro gress, of the Bill, as the difference was only about 1301. a year. It - that a claim to 9s. 9d. in th e pound had been. - - the Chards. All the parties were ,setisGed with the proposed ar rangement, but the asberp of London, who demanded £3,550 for be successor, instead of £1,200, which was proposed on the part of the parish. He hoped the Bill would be allowed to be read a second time. Mr. W. WYNN said, that the house of Commons was not the proper tribunal for a question of that kind. if it decided in the present case. ft might do so in any other. lle could not see why the future incumbent should nut have the same amount of salary as the present. The Bill was an attack on private property, and would establish a must dangerous precedent. Mr. DEN NI AN explained. • Mr. W. COURTENAY said, the question was one of fact, whether there was a vested right or not, and whether the de cree had been enrolled within the time prescribed by theAet ? Two successive Juries had f d that the decree had been enrolled. Mr. W. SMITH was in favour of the Bill, which materially af fected the interests of the Public. Mr. Secretku y PEEL said, that the inattention • f the II use, probably, proceeded from the opinion ilia• they were not the proper tribunal. Why iiid not the pasties qo into the Cuittt of King% Bench ? WHatever was the ] clsaracter of the Bill, he roost r.-sist it. He could 11'1' see how the Act of Ilenry VIII. could he limited to.the reign of .that Monarch. The 11111 would establish a most fatal precedent, as to the right of private property.' The consent of the Bishop seemed to him to be indispensable. He should oppose the Bill. Alderman WOOD said. the parties had not the power to go into a Court of Law.—lle should support the NIL Alderman BItIDG ES thought the 13111 should be sent to a Cum ! mittee above stairs.— Mr. CA I.CR A FT replied. .V.it J. NICHOL said, that the consent to give £1,330 was some proof of the right; and yet, after the present incumbents £1,200 a year was to be given, and that arraugement was to be adopted with out the consent of the Bishop. The Gallery was cleared fur a division. The numbers were— For the Bill 55 Against it SS Majority in favour of the Bill 19 The Bill, was read a second time, and ordered to be committed. Tie . Amendments of the Lords to the Limerick Water Works UPI *sr.. on the motion of Mr. S. Rica, tead and agrecd to. Mr. HUME presented Petitions from Tohacconists mid Ship wrights of Dublin, praying to be beard against the Masters, and against any renewal of the Combination Laws.—Ordered to be printed; HI N DO4 WI Dr3VB. - -- - Mr. HUME-presented a Petition on the subject of females in India immulatiog themselves on the funeral piles of their hu+hands—a subject which, like many otl:ers, he had expected would have attracted the atten tion of Parliament during the present Session. In Bengal, in one year, eight hundred and seventeen women had so burnt themselves ; but in those parts of India where the Ilindno religion was the purest, the fewest sacrifices took place.—'lltere had been a mass of evidence laid before the House on the subject . ; and to-morrow he should move for abstracts of the numbers who; according to the papers, bad sacrificed themselves. The practice might be easily put an end to, and without any danger. Ile wished to know whether the Honourable Member (Mr. Buxton) had given up this subject? Mr. F. BUXTON replied in the negative. He bad by no means abandoned the subject. He pledged him , self to bring the t i nt stion before the House next Session; and to prove that, in the I ,st five years, in the single province col Bengal, 3,400 women were sacrificed on the funeral piles of their husb inds. This was the official return; but he was well informed by those who had the best means of ascerta;ning the fact, th .t the actual number was not less than 10,000. Our Civil Officers in Bengal had been consulted on the subject, and the majority had given their opinion, that the practice could be suppressed without. a murmur. Mr. WYNN said, there could be no difference of opinion ori the propriety of putting down the practice, if that were practicable, and if not, of checking it as much as possible, but be was certain that the interference of Parliament would be injurious. Sir CHARLES FORBES said, not one in a thousand of the unfortunate victims went voluntarily to be sacrificed.and be was satisfied they would rejoice at the passing eta law in tMs country to preserve them from the dreadful death—(l - lear). - Sir E. EAST hoped the hlisssionaries that were sent out to ' India would be able to persuade the Indian Ladies that it was better to marry than to burn. and thus put an end to the practice. Mr. W. SMITH thought the strong repeated expression of the sense of Parliament on the subject would have such an effect on the Government in India, that the practice would speedily be sup pressed—( Hear). The Petition, whisk was from Crail, in Scotland, was then brought up, and ordered to be Laid on the table, and printed. The House resolved itself Intl, a Committee of the whole House on the Irish Church Rates Bill. The several clauses were agreed to. Tke House resumed The Report was ordered to be received to-morrow: Report on the Pirates' Head Money Bill was brought up and arced to, and ordered to be read a third time to-morrow. • IbIAURI*IIUS TRADE BILL. The House went into a Committee on the Mauritius Trade Bill. To a restion from Mr. Basket., Mr. HUSKISSON replied, that all the advantages to be con ferred, by the Colonial Trade Bill, upon the Colonies, as far as the prohibition of the importation of foreign sugar into them, were to be extended by the Bill before the House to the Mauritius. Mr. BRIGHT affirmed, the words of the Bill were not sufli cieotly explicit ; besides. the present Bill may pass, and the Colonial Blithe thrown out by the Lords. The simplest course of proceed ing would be for the Chairman to report progress, and the Right Hon. Gentleman may then correct his Mr. HUSKISSON conceived this opposition to 'be vexatious and inconsistent, and he would not assent to the proposition. Mr. BRIGHT denied that his - opposition was such as described. Mr. WILMOT-HORTON said, the Lenge age of this Bill really struck him as being very clear. It was to this effect—" that all articles being the produce eif i the island of Mai:thins, or the growth thereof—and all colonial produce, goods, and commodities that shall have been i!rported into the island of Mauritius— (Hear, hear]—shall be put upon the same footing ai all such colonial produce and foreign commodities im ported into Jamaica under the existing law"—(Hear, hear, from Mr. Bernal and Mr. Bright).—And that existing law prohibited the importation of foreign su gars—(Hear, hear, • from Mr. Ellice). Why, then, it dill appear to him that the plain intention of ti is Bill was to declare, that the trade of the Mauritius should be put on the same - footing with that of Jamaica, or any other of the West India Island.. The Hon. Gen tleman's objection, however, was, that prohibited foreign goods, such as sugars, might, under the present terms of this Bill, be imported into the Mauritius, and through the Mauritius, into the United Kingdom, to the great detriment and prejudice of th e West India produce. li nt he (Mr. Wilmot-Horton) must contend, that if that were the fact, then the same obseskation must apply equally to Jamaica—(Hearitear) —To his own mind, however, the real pur port of the Bill was sufficiently clear; but:if the Hon. Gentleman would propose any- form of words that to his apprehension might mate that purport more cleat and decided, they could very well be inserted in the Bill, if approved of by the Committee. The Hon. Gentleman would see that it was not for those who were satisfied with the terms of the measure, as they stood, to propose others in lieu of them. Mr. BERNAL contended that the security he wi,!.ed to have introduced did n t exist in this Boil ; and that, on the contrary, if the tot mer measure shimld he lost, the frAming of this would be found to be excessively detec tive. There was in its present condition this teal and visible defect —that sugars might he imported from China, or from India, into the Mauritius, and from thence into the United Kingdom. Mr. WILMOT. HORTON thought he could suege,t the introduction of a word or two that would meet the objections of the Honourable Gentleman. In he first part of the Bill, two root s seem state.t with rest act to the importai ion to ur allowed : first, all ks (Rik produce, etc. being the growth of the Mauritiu ; and sec . ndlve all goods, colonial produce 4. Btc. that shall have b en kn. pursed into the Nlautitius. And the detect cieseipiai• ed of seemed to be in this—that in the .ecoroi, or latter part of the Bill, these two points were nut speaficallv recapi-ulated, but Only one of them. If they were both repeated, the Bill wotskl perhaps meet the objection. , • .....-.......M.MME1N Mr.-HUSKISSON said, there roald be no apprehen sion on this store, as the trade of the island would be finally regulated by the King io•Council. The object Was t" open the trade of all the West India Colonies, and place that of the Mauritius upon the same tooting. If the other Bill did not pass, neither ought this, as it was a part of the system adopted far the removal of restrictions. Mr. GORDON thought ft hard that this system should be acted upon at once; it would be better to postpone it for a year, or a year and half. Mr ELLICE thought it was but justice to Muni fus to place it upon an equality with the other colonies, and remove thoLe testi ictions that did net affect them., He thou ht it peculiarly incumbent upon the suppor ters of West India produce, for whose interest he was most anxious to support the liberal plans of his Ni•i jtsty's Ministers. There was, at present, an alarm amongst the di tillers in consequence of a promise ni.ttie by the Chancellor of the Exchequer to the West India interest, to allow rum (if he could effect it) to be taken to the rectifiers' stills. If they should support all these liberal plans, and make no technical objections, he would give his cordial support to the measure. Mr. T. WILSON said, be thought the West India interests had a right to complain. When an alteration to.lk place in the laws by which duties were remitted ui-on certain articles, time should be given to have the inteilig,nce reach the Colonies. With respect to the Mauritius, the sugars were taken in Teturn for ship ments sent from this country, and they were shipped under the idea that they could not be consumed here. Ile had known a rise. of 4s. or Ss. the hundred to take place, when it was supposed the iniportations would, on account of unfavour able weather. be late. Sir R. FA RQU II A R thought the claims 6f these interested in tha sugars of the Mauritius should be acceded to. Mr. BRIGHT wished to know positively if it was the intention to prohibit the importation of all foreign sugars into the Mauritius? Mr. NV I OT-HORTON said, such was the intention.—The Rt port then passed the Committer. 'fire House having resumed, the Report was brought up. and ordered to be received to-tnotrew. COLONIAL INTLRCOURSE BILL. On the motion for the third readirg of this Bill, Mr. A. BARING wished to know whether the Right Hon. Gentleman intended to make any alterations in the plan which be submitted to the House before the Holidays, relative to the reduc tion of Foreign Import Duties? Ur. UUSKISSON assured the Honourable Gentleman, that he would find no duty on the importation of Foreign Articles into. the Colonies, which was not imposed ()lithe same articles when im ported into thesUnited Kingdom. They would be placed exactly on the same footing u Ireland stood towards Great Britain. He only wished he could give them the same degree of liberty in all other respects by a single Act of Parliament.—The Bill was then reed a third time and passed. GRANT TO THE DUKE OF CUMBERLAND. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved the Order of the Day for the Committee on the Duke of Cumber land's Annuity Bill. On the question that the Speaker leave the Chair, Mr. BROUGHAM said, it had beetemost truly said, on a former night, that there never was a question on which the general feeling of the country was more com pletely in unison with that opinion which the House of Commons had twice recorded, and which they were now in effect called upon to retract. They were not now called upon to consider the adequacy or the inadequacy of the provision formerly granted to his Royal High ness the Duke of Cumberland ; but they were called upon by an indirect, circuitous, and, in his opinion, by no means a frank, candid, or honourable way, to rescind a former vote of that. House.. If any Member thought that vote a wrong vote, let •him now, in Goo's name, get up and say so.. He had .no doubt of the way in which the House would uptertain such a motion; but at alb events, if any Hon. Member took that course, it would at least be a fair, manly, and dir ect course. But let not any man vote for a provision for the Duke of Cumberland by a ride wind—(Loud cheers front all pails of the House). If no man in that House had the manliness to attempt to get rid of the former vote in a plain, direct, and honest way, let not the House sanction this attempt to effect the same object by a side wind, and suffer themselves to be ensnared into a rever sal of their former decision, under the flimsy pretext of a pi ovision for the child of the DUke of Cumberland.— Ht should not consider that he had discharged his duty to the House, to tt - e country, or to himself, if be did not take the sense of the House on this question, and he should propose, therefore, as an Amendment, that the House resolve itself into the proposed Committee that day . six months. Mr. COKE said, it was perfectly ridiculous to pro pose an annuity of 6,0001. a-year fir a child. The real oSjrct was undoubtedly to add that sum to the in dune of the Duke of Cumberland, and that proposition be coed tiered an insult to the House and to the country—( Hear, hear). Mr. DAVENPORT bad voted against that motion on a former occasion, and should do so again. lie, however, gave great credit to the Ministry for plating the infantry in front of the battle. Mr. H. SUMNER gave his most hearty concurrence to the fall•WG.M.••••••••• Mr. RENEW (of Wiltshire) congratulated the House upon the honest indignation which that proposal had drawn forth upon the present occasion. Sir GEORGE WARRENDER said, great injus tice had been done to the Duke of Cumberland. Re pietentations were sent forth as to his character, and went to the most distant parts of the country, which , upon his conscience and honour, be beli.vel to hive no foundation whatever—(Near, hear). He was en tided to a certain allowance as a Prince of the Blood Royal, and that ought not to be withheld upon any grounds of an individual nature. S r JOHN SEBIUGHT observed, that the Hon.' Gentleman who'had just sat down, had put this vote up ,, n its right tootitig,.viz. as a grant to the Duke 'of Cumberland. He was surprised at the majorities of that . House upon this question. Wherever he went out of doors he heard but one opinion upon the subject, and that was, that it was disgraceful in this manner to attempt to take the House by surprise in a matter upon which they had already decided. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, although his Honourable Friend behind him (Sir Geo. Warrender) had put tire vote upon the footing of a grant to the Duke of CumberlanJ, he begged leave to say, that he did not put it upon that footing—(Hear; hear). He declared that be was re4.:y to justify the ground upon which he proposed this grant. Certainly, if the same grounds upon which tie last grant was tefused, were rtOw . put forward, the Government would dew ve the hard language which the Honourable Memberfor Norfolk had given them. But e.e circum stances of the Royal Duke were now totally altered.— The cis corn tance of Ws marriage had not been thought sofficieot to warrant the grant. Now, how ever, he bad a child, and it.was f r that child, rot for hit marriage, or For himself indiviJually, that the money was reguireJ. Honourable Members opposite declated that this grant. sv..is not to be opposed upon personal grounds ; and certainly it would be impos -it.le ior his Majesty's Milkers to 'say to the King., Site, we advise - you to treat tint of your Royal Bro thers in a d ffe.rnt way to a fiat you do the .oti;eri."-- A..d if they old t.ot speak to the King,.they could not unit making is is p...pobitinn, which il - w•s part et their duty t s make. The Hots,e could dw a. it thought pro;;er with the minion, hat it certainly was n') out .rirge upon the' country or the House, tor thz Ministers 'ot the Clown to ask tliat ail the Members of the Royal Family should be treated in the same m tr-ner. Although, however, where Hon. Members did u'it treat this question upon the personal n e its of the Duke, others did; and he (the Chancellor of the Es chequer) declared that for the soul of him he could not understand what was the ground of ther opposi; tion—(llear, hear). But it really was i l ipa enter into a discussion of this delicate nature. however, Hon. Members, with reerence •to the last vote, were to talk about the House • Leiag .consistonr with itself, he Would call upon them on the same ground of consivency to remember the write they had made to the Duke of Clarence, and not now to refuse the same to another Member of the same Family. He must say it would be exceedingly unjust to refuse this grant. Sir JOHN SE BRIGHT explained. • Mr. T. WILSON said, the clause which bad been introduced removed the difficulty on his part. Ile thought it their duty to the young Prince, in whose birth they were all interested, to nuke a suitable provision for his education. The Gallery was then cleared for a division. During the es. elusion, Sir °lssues FORM addressed the House in favour of the . original motion,.wben the numbers were—For the amendment, 113 —Against it, 143—Majority in favour of the Committee, 30. . . Upon the re-opening of the Gallery, the House was in-Cpm•. mince upon the Bill, and Mr. BROUGHAM objected to the wording of that part of it which went to make a grant of money to the Duke of Cumberland. If it was their honest :mention to give this money for the education of the son of tt.e Duke of Cumberland . , then they would certainly make the grant.for the life-time of the Rince ; hUt as it now sec od, it would be fur the life-time of the Duke of Cum:. berland. Perhaps, however, the Honourable Bar et under the gallery (Sir C. F..ibes) who lewd chits n so criti:al a moment to deliver his sentiments, would !link that if the Prince should not live, the royal father should have the annuity, to make up for his loss of it when proposed on a former o:casion ; and t of oily t6ar, 'but have 60,0001. added to it? This, however, he ve . tad say, that if any man thought the Duk of Cumberland could not educate his son with 18 (00/. or .19,0004., a • )ear, 1;e (Mr. Brougham) would give him the means of doing that. He would propose to give the King, who was constitutionally the guardian of the Prince, a sum which would be adequate to the educatii n of the heir to the richest Nobleman in this country. For a child six years of aAe, he should think 3,0001. a year quite sufficient, and he proposed giving the King and, his Ministers the responsibility of his education. This, he thought, would be the fair constitutional mode of ro c eding. He therefore proposed, as an amendment, that instead of the words 64 Royal Hig'vness," his Majesty should be inserted, and .€3,000 a year, in place of ,Cd,000; payable during the life-time of Prince Ernest. Sir CHARLES FORBES repelled the insinuation that he would say anything with closed doors which he would not say openly, and in the face of the country. Ile had said that the arrears ought to be given to his Royal Highness, and be thought so The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER' said, that as he had otiginally declared that this giant was asked for the bona fide education of the younA Pi ince, he could have no objection in acceding to the introduc- , tion of any words which should dispel any obscutity .• upon that head. Neither did he feel any in Isposition to the insertion of words confining the grant to 'the - minority of the young Pante. But k uas.qtrte im., possible for him to accede to any other pr 'position. which had been mas!e. As to the que:tion . of thite' • thousand instead of six thousa nd pounds it Might, per...* haps, be difficult to demonstrate why 60001. was nece9. . sail, but he • did not think less would do. Frain. ant:. manner in which the g:arit was discussed, it,ras not' likely that the Duke and Duchess would come arid reside pet manehtly in this country ; and 'if a less grant were to be made, there might be a diAculty as to the young Prince going over to visit his per. 'us. lie trusted, therefore, the House would not curtail the vote, and that they would not make this measure a vehicle for conveying such au opinion to his Royal Highness, u that he was unfit to have any share in the education of his child. Mr. H. SUMNER disclaimed, the wish which had been attributed to him, of separating the Duke from his son. If any provision were to be made, he pre ferred that now proposed by the Ii more le and. Learned Member (Mr. Brougham), and also that the grant should be made to his Majesty, and not to the Duke of Cumberland. Mr. BROUGHAM observed, whatever the -fate of this Bill, the King would have by law the custody. and controul over the education of all the Royal issue, and consequently over this young Prince. No kepara tion would, therefore, be Effected by any shape which this Bill might take beyond th it which might be effected un,:er the existing state of the law. He asked them whether it was not more constitutional and safe to make this grant to responsible hands, and to perains who must answer wi h their Leads if guilty of milver sation, than to a man who might 'divert the wliole amount to the payment of his own debts? . In giving the money us the Crown, they were of course giving it to the Ministers of the Crown. He contended that this was the preferable, the fair, and constitutional way of acting under the circumstances. Mr. Secretary CANNING observed, that thete seemed to be three amendments upon the original me - a-' sure in the contemplation of the Hon. and Learned' Member (Mr. Brougham) The object of the first WAS, to make the grant to the Crown ; the object of t h e second, to settle the amount at 3000/. instead of 6"..)00/._ and of the third, to make it appear more clear that the money would be appropriated to the purpose for which it had all along been asked ; and in order to accompliski this, that the grant should be made during the mi . ority only of the child. Now his Right lion. Fr end the Chancellor of the Exchequer had stated, that with re gard to the third object, lie h id no obj:ction to the in troduction of any words, for the more perfect security to the House that this 'Hooey should be applied to the purpose for which it had all along keen demanded, for the special education of the son of the Mike of Cumberland. With regard to the third, thetefore;thede was no difference of opinion; but with regard to the. other ;pounds of opposition, the case WAS different.. Those grounds involved the question of distrust, %shier all those who voted might or might not feel in the rim tactcr-of ti-e father.cf this child. Undoubtedly those who thought that by letting th s money Saw to the clti4i through the natural chanr.el of his father, it would be shamefully squandered. and, perverted fromits origi nai intentinn,would give effect to that feeling to their vote. But it was too much to think that those aho did nor' entertain such an opinion ought to fall in with vs ainendmtnt which it was openly stated was founded upon more than distrust, a dislike ; and even mote than dislike, a persecuting detestation of the Royal Duke—(Hear) —This, however, those who voted for the amendment must say. Then, as to tie amount of the vo te, it tt as difficult to find a rule to settle whe her 2500 was too much or too little fur a particular purpose. Those, however, who went to diminish the vote, on the ground of tii.truw, were only bringing into test those charges with regard to the Royal they s u i c h c should i c e o n u t i Duke which hAd been su lavishly bestowed, but upon wltiat ar. pu t r h po o pg u rro g e h un t rio t uin h f e this stiipuance g rant.rtithye omtAlvknicylitaililsitlciegrstifinvhberratdhebreetanwiii gumtnt could be raised, becauw they assumed no shape for argu gseettolentnotm.initthiliceet watt cknly of late years that a claim to 2s. 9d. in the patina Eau men, frA set up on the part of the Clergy, whirm he did not blame if they; tivi • believed it to be their right. ---1 i t i f orm o f a I ' rivate Bill, would effect a great spoliation of public `"° prop' try. 'llie Fire Act, as it was called, afforded no foundation tor the present ;Lim. Ile should move that the Bill be rejected. t h i Mr. DENMAN said, . that die • Act could only be in force for ob . \ . thelife of Henry VIII. and could never be intended to he per- •• . nranent. IL IV watt! confidently maintain that the decree had never P been enrolled. In the time of Edward VI. there was the draft of tili I a decree fur givin g t h e Cl ergy 2 s . i n t h e petard, which could never &tc , have been the case had they already been entitled to 2s. 9d• all Ttir Serjeant ONSLOW said ; that if the decree had not been • 11 enfoikd, that svas a question for a Court Af Law; and to that tri. Pi' • Waal it ought to be set for deeision.—He should vote ha' the Of it ainewin • tant. , • • pal 1 1 1: fir. BARING thought that dime- who advocated the rights or bin the Cbuteh, should take care to keep the people within the pale a pet c . • .1, , '... 64' ' ... . ea VO COI a', do ba be no L th fin he • HI 95 Sc I I Ai Ai Br a 0 Q G M P+ P 1 Ri - So T 1 U' XI C) dl fry