Star. — London, England, 1813-07-02 00:00:00

and Bill (into which a clause of appropriation was introduced) ern' through Committees, the Reports of which were ordered be reerved to-morrow. 'lite Glass Duty Continuation Bill, the Grand Canal 812, the le of Man Bill, the Scotch Linen bill, Mr. Perceval's Renun ation bill, the Irish Sessions Hose Bill, the Spitit Licence A, the Prisoners' Relief Bill,, and .the Roman Catholic Bill, ,re real a second time, and ordered to be committed to. WOW. he third resuring of the Windsor Forest Bill, and of the Irish amendment Bill, and the Committee en the Spirits uty Bill, Were postponed till to-morrow.. . . . A Message - from the Loids announced their Lordships' assent M the Subaltern °thews Bill, the Manure Carriage BM, the Irish Roads Bill, &c. On Mr.WHARTON's moving that the House should resolve itself into a committee on the Embezzlement of Stores Bill, Mr. HORNER objected to the loose and indefinite manner In which the Bid was drawn up, and contrasted it with the Act of K►ng William, passed for a similar purpose. In the present Bill, Mather the marks of the stores, npr the description of stores which it would be illegal to possess, were specified. A penal measure, and one of a nature so extensive, ought not to be bur ricd through the House. In his opinion, the Bill should be muted. Mr. WHARTON disclaimed the intention of hurrying this, "r any other Bill through the House. If . the Bill were allowed o g., through the Committee, he should have no objection to its ring printed. and recommitted on Monday, in order that the life:ions of the Honourable and Learned Gentleman might be ebber.itely considered. Mr. ABERCROMBIE remarked, that the regular course was always the best and suggested the expediency of postponing the ommittee on the Bill till Monday. • 1 Mr. V* HAR I'ON acquiescing, it was so postponed, aad the was ordered to be printed. 1 MR. HARGRAVE'S LIBRARY. Mr. WHITBREAD rose, in pursuance of the notice which he had given, to submit to the House a oti,on on the subject of Mr. Hargrave's Library.— t was sufficiently known that it contained many books and manuscripts of exceedingly great value. The Committee, to whom the consideration of the prn,riety +,f purchasing this Library for the Public bad been entrusted, had examined a number of com petent wi..nesses, and had reported to the House that the Library was one of great value—containing, among other things, 300 original manuscripts, which were deemed, by those .who were the most able to, estimate them, to be of the highest importance. It was reported by the Committee, that the acquisith.n of this Library, to be placed in the Library of Lin coln's Inn, or in any other place of that description, was very desirable. He wouid sax nothing, for no thing he could say would add to the reputation of lcMr. Hargrave—of that Gentleman's learning and haracter ; they were universally known and appre ciated. e was persuatled that there was not a "Lawyer in England who would not bear testtmuny to the knowledge, to the integrity, and to the proles. sional assiduity of Mr. HargrAve.—(Hear, heer.)— In confirmation of this statement, be would read to kite House a note to a recently published History of Lord Somers, in which the merits of Mr. Hargrave ere happily depicted.— [The Hon . Gentleman here d the note to which he allude..l : it described Mr. argrave as a Man of most laborious habits, of pro ound information, of gentle manners, of pure and atriotic feeliOg, and in every point of view as enti ed to rank among the greatest benefactors of man incj—The Committte of Supply being closed, it was impossible, hrough that channel, to procure the grant which was necessary for the object which he ad in contemplation. He should, therefore, move— " That an bumble Address be presentei to his Royal High. ess the Prince Regent, .praying that he would be graciously leased to direct tin sum of £bOtO to be issued out o! his Ma sty's Civil list Revel:tic, to he applied to the purchase, for the üblic use, of the Library of Francis Hargrave, LAI. one of his ajesty's Counsellors in r the l.uw;. and assuring his Royal I ghnes,, that his Majesty's faithful Commons would make ood the same." Mr. ROSE expressed his hearty approbation of the notion, and his persuasion that every one isho knew dr. Hargrave would concur in it.—(Hear, hear.) The motion was then unanimously agreed to; nd it was ordered, that the Address should be pre ented by such Members as were of his Majesty's ►lost Honourable Privy Council. EAST-INDIA BILL. Lord CASTLEREAGH, in moving that the Or. er of the Day be read for the Base to resume the ommittee On the East India Bill, begged to call the ttention of the House to the stage of that measure. e trusted that the Bill would be suffered to proceed to Committee without any previous discussion on the eneral principle.. Such a discussion at the present omens would surely be thought unnecessary, when twas considered that there were two subsequent , Ca ges, the report and the the third reading, on either r on both of which it mtilt take place, and when to [ his consideration was added the reflection, how ex ! emely mate: ial it was that no avoidable delay should t ake place in the progress of the Bill. He repeated r i therefore his hope that Gentlemen would postponeany ;general reason, and when in theComnottee, that they iwou:d confine themselves to the discussion of thepar. molar clauses of the Bill, and not travel into a more enlarged consideration of the subject. Mr. TIERNEY thought the request of the Noble Lord rather extraordinary. When the Bell was read a second time the House were told that it was desirable not to discuss it, as the debate on the general princi. 'ple might be taken on the question for the Speaker's :leaving the Chair. Now they were asked not to dis cuss it, as the debate might be taken on the bringing up of the report. At least this was not decorous. It iwas not parliamentary. For himself he had no inten ion of saying a word on the question, but he pro ested against such a mode of treating the House. Lord CASTLEREAGH observed, that the re- marks of the Hon. Gentleman would induce any one Alto did not know the fact to suppose that there had clot already. been any discussion on the original motion for the Speaker's leaving the Chair. Mr. TIERNEY replied, that on that occasion there had not been an opportunity afforded to several Hon. embeis whip he anew wished to declare their send eats io the House on this important subject. Mr. Alderman ATK.INS, adverting to the Corn rhittee oa the 4.3 d of the King, which was fixed for at night, suggested the propriety of allowing that Committee to precede the Committee on the India Bill. Mr. P. IrIOORE . declared his intention on the 3d treading of the Lill of delivering his sentiments at sitigtls cn the East India question. He should on that respecting the Committee on the 43d of thriLing. It was for the sake of the manufacturing inteiest, now so materially affected by the introduction of Ameri can cotton, that he was solicitous. A pause ensuing, Mr. CANNING observed, that it would be conve nient that the House should come to some under standing with respect to the period at .which they would resolve themselves into the Committee adverted to by the worthy Alderman. Lord CASTLEREAGH said, that conceiving the East India question to be one of paramount im portance, he cottld not consent to wave the Committee upon it for the purpose of giving precedence to the Committee proposed by the Worthy Alderman. Mr. Alderman ATKINS expressed himself ready to abandon the proposition, which he had given notice he would make in the Committee, on the 43d of the King, if Ministers would agree to some measure that should affect the object which they had in hand.— Would they repeal that Act Would they lay a duty on American cotton ? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER repeated his statement on a recent evening, that he did not think any measure ou the subject was advis able at this late period of the Session. Unquestionably as his proposition early in the Session evinced, his opi nion was, that a duty on,the importation of American cotton, if any measure were resorted to, would be the best that could be adopted ; but, considering that so large a proportion of Members had left town, and that the commercial parties interested in the question were impressed with the persuasion that Government had no measure at present in contemplation, he could not consent to introduce any. Mr. PHILLIPS observed, that if his Majesty's Ministers could render the blockade of the American ports effectual, the British manufacturers would be satisfied. Their objection was to the superjor facility with which the nations of the Continent procured American cotton. Mr. Alderman ATKINS declared that he would abandon his own proposition if Government would agree to the introduction of a short Bill to repeal the Act of the 43d of the King. • The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER once more declared, that lie would not introduce, or consent to the introduction of any measure on the sub ject at the present period of the Session. If at the commencement of the next Sission it should appear that the blockade was inefficient some subsidiary mea sure might then be resorted to. Mr. MA R RYKri rose, and was speaking on the subject of the importation of American cotton, when The SPEAKER called the Hon. Gentleman to order, observing, that that was a topic which had not much bearing on the question before the House ; that 'the Order of the Day fur going into a Committee on the India Bill be read. Mr. CANNING again pressed the necessity of de ciding on the time at which the American cotton ques tion should he brought forward. Mr. DAVENPORT was making some remarks on the effect which the prevention of the importation of American cotton might have on our manufactures, when he was interrupted by The SPEAKER in nearly the following words ••• 44 The House, Sir, seems to be of opinion, that the Cotton question has nothing to do with that befote it." The Question was then carried, and the House re. solved itselt into a Committee. On the first clause being read by the Cliairmin, Lord A. HAMILTON (alio had just entered the House) was proceeding to make some observations on the general principle of the Bill, when Lord CASTLEREAGH informed the Noble Lord, that it seemed to be understood by the House, before they resolved into the Committee, that the discussion should be confined to the particular clauses. Lord A. HAMILTON apologised and said, that he would avail himself of a future opportunity to communicate to the House his sentiments on the mea sure.—The clause was then agreed to. On the second clause, which related to the trade to China, being read, Mr. CANNING rose, in pursuance of his notice, to move an amendment with respect to the limitation of time. The subject had been so much dwelt and dilated upon, that he would not occupy the attention of the Committee, at any length, stating the grounds which in his opinion ought to induce them to except the clause from the general rule, in point of duration, that per►aded the rest of the Biil. It appeared to him, that all the arguments which had been urged iu favour of continuing the Company's monopoly of trade to India, were not only wholly unconnected with the support of a similar proposition respecting the trade to Chino, but were in a great measure at war with that proposition. It bad always been con tended by the advocates of the Company, that they opposed opening the trade to India, because it would affect the political power of the Company. They dis claimed any narrow views of commercial advantage in that opposition, maintaining that the unrestrained introduction of British adventurers into India would sap the foundation of their political power. The Company described themselves not as a commercial body, but rather as an instrument which the country had permitted to be constructed for the government of India. Now these arguments were utterly inappli cable to the China part of the question. By opening the trade to China, the Company would suffer no di minution of political power. Neither by the irrup tion of adventurers, nor in any other way, could the fabric of that power be shaken by the opening of the trade to China, except as the profits of that trade might be considered as the revenues by which the so vereignty of the Company in India was maintained. He willingly admitted that the existing political cha racter of the Company in India ought to be support. ed ; but Le contended that if at the expiration of the perjod to which he should propose to limit the mono poly of the China Trade, it should be found that the profits of that trade were necessary to the maintenance of the sovereign authority of the Company in India, it would be wise, rather than continue the monopoly, to afford the means to the Company out of our own resources at home, to retain their political authority in India. It was contended also by the advocates of the Company, that independently of the preservation of the p.;litical power in India, by the profits arising ' from the China trade, that that trade must be carried on exclusively by a Company. It he could admit this, lie would have no hesitation in also allowing that the Eatt India Company might be the most proper - - • body re that 'privilege. lent the two propos,- twos totally distinct. The attempt to connect the argument arising out of the expediency of main raining the political power of the Company in India, and the argument arising out of the impossibility of the trade to China being carried on but by the Com pany, must naturally be unsuccessful. The question of revenue was the only one that could fairly be dis puted, and this he met with a fair avowal of his opi nion, that if the revenue should be found not ade quate to the maintenance of the Company in the Go vernment of India, the means of mating it so should be furnished by this country. That it was likely those means would be required, he must, however, deny. India would, in his opinion, afford the Company an ample revenue for the desired purpose. But he le peated, that if the revenue of the East India Com pany should be found insufficient for that purpose without the profits arising from the China trade, he should be ready at the proper time to consider of the means by which the deficiency might be supplied.— The question was thus reduced to very narrow grounds, and must be determined by a reference to experience and facts. It had been stated by the Com pany, that the trade to China was carried on with great profit to themselves, and with great advantage to the country at large. This was a prima facie rea son why the merchants of tlis country should be al lowed to participate in the benefit. In contradiction to the general declaration that it was desirable the trade of China should be in the hands of the Com pany alone, was the fact that other nations partook of that trade. The Americans for instance; and in the present relative situation of Great Britain and Ame rica, would it not be highly advantageous to exclude the Americans from the trade to China, and to fill up the chasht which would thereby be created with British traders ? It might be that the American cha racter had something in it better suited to communi cation with the Chinese—something more honest, more straight forward, more polished, ihan the Bti tish. But on those who opposed the opening of the China trade to the British merchants lay the onus pro- Gandi of spewing the motive that induced the Last India Company to consider the Americans as prefe rable co-partners. If it were objected to him that his arguments tended to shew the expediency not of abo. lisiting the monopoly of the China trade at the ex piration of ten years, but of abolishing it at once, his answer would be, that he was not disposed, in the prosecution of any abstract system, to endanger any practical good that might exist. What he wished was, if possible, to compromise opposite interests, and to reconcile conflicting principles. On Ibis sub ject, as on whets, he was an enemy to sudden inno vation, even when it tended only to shake existing prejudices. He should therefore propose the term of ten 'Tars i not as satisfying the principle for which he had contended, but as that period which, making allowance for interest, prejudices, and situation, it ap peared to him not to be too much to concede even to arguments that had not convinced him. On these grounds he moved the insertion in the clause of a Member stating that the exclusive trade to China should be continued to the East India Company during the further period of ten years, frt.m the loth of April, 1814. . - C Lord ASTLEREAGH said, he would shortly state to the Committee why he could not accede to the proposition of the Right Hon Gentleman. He used the word shortly, because on a former occasion he had spoken at length on the subject ; and he had heard nothing since to shake his opinion upon it.— His conviction was, that the duration of the exclusive trade to China ought to be coextensive with that of the Company's Charter. Although he would not contend that, if necessity required the change, the danger arising from it would be of such magni tude as should deter Parliament from opening the . China trade ; yet, he contended, "that in wisdom and ' policy, nothing short of an overruling necessity should induce Parliament to disturb the existing' mode of commercial intercourse with that Empire— a mode by which an amicable understanding had been preserved with a country jealous and prejudiced. Though he would not maintain that it was impossi. , ble to devise another system under which the trade might go on, he contended, that, without some very strong motive, the existing system ought not to be broken in upon. The mode of communication adopted by the East-India Company had secured the confidence of the Chinese, and it would be most unwise and im prudent lightly to risk the loss of such an advantage. The argument adduced from the participation of the ' Americans in the trade, was without foundation. They, no doubt, derived protection and security from the establishment of the Company, the abolition of which might probably lead to the most disastrous consequences; fur it was well known how cheap commerce and foreigners were held by the Chinese Government. if this country had no other resource, then the hazard of a change ought to be run, and he confessed that he should not despair of seeing a mode I devised by which the benefits of the trade to China might be preserved ; but the existing system was so' valuable, that he could not consent to its alteration, unless on a specific necessity, and not on the general ground of commercial advantage.—Looking at the question in a financial point of view, he contended, that the public would benefit more by the continu ance of the monopoly than by the opening of the trade. He could not agree with the Right Honour able Gentleman, that it would be better to increase' the revenue of the Company by direct taxation, than to permit them to keep that revenue up by the pre- I servation of the, China trade. Undoubtedly, the' Company could not administer the government of India unless secured in some wav or other. There was a large debt for which the - Company and the country were jointly responsible ; and the best way to secure the payment of'it would be to give to the pri vilege of an exclusive trade to China the same dura tion as to the Company's Charter. On the fullest reflection that he had been able to bestow on the sub:. ject, he was persuaded that this was the soundest po licy ; and he should therefore oppose the motion of the Right Hon. Gentleman. • Mr. PHILLIPS supported the Amendment. Mr. PRESTON said a few words iu favour of the Amendment. Mr. FINLAY could not see any farce in an argu ment which bad been used in the course of the dis cussion, namely, that if the trade with China were to be opened, a quarrel with that country would be likely to be the result. What virtue there was in a monopoly, by which a quarrel with a people engaged In trade with us could be prevented, remained for explanation. Mr. BARING stated, that to his certain know ledge the trade which the Americans carried on with China was a losing trade: it might, were it to conti-. nue, become otherwise ; but he could assure the House, that at present Americans who had brought. cargoes to the North of Europe. would be happy to. dispose of them at a considerable loss. Mr. THOMSON hoped that the trade with Co chin China was nut within the prohibition by which the private merchant was to be affected. He wider.. stood that it was a healthy country, and produced many articles of commerce, from the carrying of which to China I considerable profit might be deri. ved. It appeared, from arguments that bad been urged in the House, as if the advocates of the Com pany were now disposed to assert the immutability of the Emperor of China, as they did that of the Hin dons ; for his part, he did not conceive that this ar gument was of any weight in either case, and he was quite sure that the private merchant could carry oa trade both with China and Hindostan at half the er pense of the trade carried oa by the Company. He hoped, therefore, that his Majesty's Ministers would keep in their own bands the power of opening the China trade, whenever it might appear to be expe dient that it should be opened. Mr. MARRYAT was decidedly adverse to the granting so valuable a monopoly for so long a term as twenty years. Mr. OIkANI' said, that the mannply of the China trade was absolutely necesiary to enable the Company to carry oti the business of the government in Hindostan. Mr. PRESTON said, that the state of our woollen manufactures, and that of some others, was such as rendered it imperative on us to consider rather the improvement of the condition of the lower classes of our own population than that of the Indian Peninsula. Mr. ASTELL defended the conduct of the East- India Company ; with respect to our manufactures, they had been, he said, extremely useful to the ma nufactories of the West of England in particular. After a few observations from Mr. Foarnts, Mr. PHILLIPS, and Mr. CANNING, the House divided, when there appeared—For the Amendment, 24; for the Clause in its original state, 61•—Majority, :V. On discussing the Second Clause, Mr. PHILLIPS observed, that it would be of great advantage to our territories in India if the Com. pany were to be divested of their commercial character altogether. He conceived that the Charter about to be granted, was to be of much too great duration, whether as to the trade with India or China. and moved that the Charter be limited to ten years. Mr. P. CAREW tvisheil the limitation to ten years to be applied to the Company's trade generally. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER objected to the Amendment • and some observations were made by Mr. Fousts, Mr. GRANT, and Mr. W. SMITH; after which a division took place, when the numbers were—For the original Clause, 59; for the Amendment, 18—Majority, 41. Mr. A STELL expressed his intention of proposing a clause on the bringing up of the Bill, by way of making provision for the Lasears. Lord CASTLEREAGH observed, that any pro vision to that effect would be rendered unnecessary by the regulations which were under consideration. Some observations were made on the clause vesting the power of licences in the Board of Control, as also on the clause respecting the tonnage of ships. Lord. ,-, i..,asroeneeou could not consent to allow the tonnage to go below S 5) tons. A conversation took place on another clause respecting the production of the log . hook s of the private ships. These clauses were passed ' with some amendments. The clause respecting the . importation of saltpetre being confined to the Com ' pany's vessels was lett out, Lord CesTesexaou wishing to introduce a proposition on this subject on the rs-• ' port. This chose had not. originated in a suggesting of the Company, but of the Board of Ordnance. I t s would be unfair to impose a responsibility on the Com pany, by which they were to provide saltpetre at a low rate, if we interfered with their monopoly. On the clause respecting India-built shipping, Lord CASTLEREAGH intimated his intention to bring in a Bill on that subject, leaving the present system to continue for one year. The clause concerning the Whale Fishery was also deferred. I Alter some other clauses were disposed of, 1 1 Upon the clause being read which respected the propagation of Christianity in India, I Lord CASTLEREAGH expressed a strong wish that this clause might be allowed for the present to i pass without discussion. It was very imiantant to get through the Bill in the Committee as expedi tiously as could be done, and other stages would loccur for discussing (if any farther discussion was necessary) this point as well as others. Sir T. SUTTON disapproved of this clause. He thought the natives of India might say, if too open and avowed efforts were made to propagate Christi anity, 66 you have taken from us our territories, you have seized upon our revenues; and not content with taking our country from us, you wish to deprive us of our religion. But our religion you shall not take from us !" Might they not reasGn thus, if he were to judge from the feelings that generally operated ou the human mind ?—(llcar, hear.)—His dislike to the clause was, to its open avowal, to its unqualified terms. With the view of removing these objections, amongst other alterations he should propose, after having declared that it was expedient to send persons to India for eke above purposes (namely, to propagate Christianity), that those words be ;eft out, and that it be declared, it is therefore expedient to send per. tons to India 44 for lawful purposes," Lord CASTLEREAGH could not consent to give up the preaml K. ' He 'll4 endeavoured as much as possible to introduce the enactment in the manner the least likely to traduce discussion or irritation.— .1t must be recollected, however, that besides the feel ings of the natives of India, with respect to their reli gion, the House could not avoid paying some respect to the religious feelings of this country. 11 hen it was recollected, that near 900 petitions had been laid ou the table of the Ilouse upon this subjt cr, and that almost every body was agreed, that no hindrunia , should be given to persons submitting themselves to the propce controul from going to India for the pur pose of preaching the Christian religion, he thought that it was necessary that the preamble should stanti, in order to tranquillize the religious mind of this coin. , try, and let it be understood what it was intended to pccasion particularly advert to the conduct of the 11... 14 ,t of Controul, who had taken the East India C , lnpany up in great prosperity, and had brought to a state of embarrassment and poverty. !qr. RICKARD 6 also announced his intention of raking at large on the 3d reading. Mr. alderman Al KINS repealed his suzgestion _ _ . a. L7w j.— r* . 1