Star. — London, England, 1820-05-26 00:00:00

his present Majesty might have dispensed with as Regent, which, in his more exalted station, were abs solutely imperative. There were two or three ob vious ones; for instance, the establishments'of Wind sor Castle and Buckingham House must be sup ported by his Majesty._ Still, however, nothing more was asked than what had been granted in 1816 ; though the expenses had since then increased, the charges on the Nation were to remain the same. It had been observed, that the change in the prices of articles of consumption might allow a diminution of the former settlement; but he would put it to the justice and liberality of their Lordships, if they would look so narrowly at the arrangements neces sary for the maintenance of the Royal dignity, as to allow them to be regulated by the fluctuation in the prices of the common articles of life? but, in fact, there was no foundation for any such change on the ground of high or low prices, as it was well known that, at the time of the sitting of the Committee, in 1816, the prices were lower than at present, on ac count of the great fall in the value of agricultural produce. The Noble Lord said, that there had been former arrangements which had been really more li beral than the present.. It was right, whatever was granted, whether more or less than eight or nine hun dred thousand pounds, should be expended is his Majesty thought fit, subject to th e controul of-Par- Lament only in case of any great excess. The prin ciple to be acted on was that of Mr. Burke's Bill, in 178(2, and that of the Bill of 1816, by which a classi fication was established as to expenses, and a limita tion as to the mode, and thereby a check was placed on any tendency towards extravagance. The sums voted could not, according to the present plan, be ap plied to any abusive purpose, nor could the excesses of one department be shifted to another. The limita tion wit.:, that if the expenses of any one year ex ceeded the income by fifteeen thousand pounds, then was an obligation thereby created of laying the whole before the inspection of the Parliament. — Ile had promised not to trouble the House with the details of the subject; but there was one branch of it which he could not avoid remarking upon—be cause a motion relative to it had been made, and certain accounts connected with it laid upon the table. It was the third class to which he alluded, and which comprised the allowances to Ambassa dors, and the salaries and expenses of foreign depart ments. That motion was preliminary to another, which had kr its obkzt a new arrangement of the Civil List, by separating the King's Household from the Departments of State. He had strung objec tions to such a measure. Ile should be sorry that in the arrangements of the Civil List they should separate the King from the Civil Government. It was of the greatest consequence that his Majesty should be looked to as the source of all power in the State, as well as the fountain of mercy and ho nour—(Hear, heal).— It would be highly unbe coming if he were to be made a mere pensioner of Parliament. Our ancestors had acted wisely when they connected the Royal expenditures with those of the Civil Government. As to the allowances to Ambassadors to Foreign Courts, they were regu lated in a manner most advantageous to the public interest. Before 1816 they were indefinitely at the disposition of the Crowd ; but it was felt by the Committee then that a distinction ought to exist be tween regular salaries and. allowances and extra dis bursement.. The Committee therefore recommended that these extra disbursements should come under the specific notice of Parliament, by being specially voted as they arose. This was acted upon. It had been objected that these expenses ought to be re duced to .something like a certainty, and that esti mates ought to be laid before Parliament of the amount of the salaries; but surely the persons who received the appointments should not be expected to do more as to expense, than not to run in debt.— The allowances'in general were hardly sufficient to maintain them without the assistance of a private fortune. By the arrangement of 1816 the Public bad the full advantage of any saving arising out of the cir cumstances of the country ; it was not so on some for mer occasions. The saving in one class did not now go in aid of excess in another; but in the third class the saving went to the Consolidated Fund. This branch Parliament could move for an account of annually, to ascertain whether the expenses were greater than the exigencies of the Government. It was not ne cessary that estimates should be given in, but if any circumstances should occur like those which had h p iened a few ,ears ago, when we were shut out fwai the Centinenr, and of course had no Ambassa dors there, the country should have the advantage of the consequent reduction. By the present classi fication Parliament would be better enabled to in vestigate them if all the accounts were brought in as a single one. There was one more point he wished to say a few words upon. Ile meant the Droits of the Admiralty, and other casual revenues of the Crown. Those casual revenues, it was well known, in 1760, belonged to the Crown, and Parliament had made the settlement then with as perfect a know ledge of that fact as it had in 1816. There should be no obligation to bring these revenues before the House, is long as the King did not come to Parlia ment for the payment of his debts; in that case,, indeed, Parliament ought not to be excluded from all necessary inquiry. But the present Act went so far as to give a security which never existed before, that an annual account should be laid before Parlia.- , ment of the amount of the casual revenues, and the expenditure of those revenues. The Droits occurred chiefly in time of war, and their application de pended necessaiily upon circumstances. His Lord ship then re-stated, that the Bill asked for no addi tion to the means granted by that of iSi6, notwith standing the change in his Majesty's expenses, which had since taken place. By the present arrangements there would be a saving of about 140,0001. annually, in certain departments ; but, above all, a security was given, which did not exist by any Bills previous to that of 1 816— that if, in any one year, the expen diture of the Civil List exceeded the income by 15,0001. the whole account should be laid before Par liament. His Lordship then concluded, by moving the second reading of the Bill. Loci" KING said, that there was the same studied ambiguity and perplexity in the present Bill, as isormed the grand sou rce of objection to all former arrangements. He'did not approve of the present mode of classifichar cationed on , nor the Civil that thList e expenditure should be partly g, I the Cdtisolidateal Fund. He thought the arrange ment of 1816 *as not fotmded on an economical principle; as it had sanctioned three or four Privy Purses. ...He objected to any arrangement that war ranted Ole continuance of the Four-and-a-half per Cent. Dutiesand the Woks of the Admiralty ; and it was not inteaded to be economical. He said, that the radical' vice of the general Government of the Coun try was profusion and the want of an efficient check. He thought the old principle of the Civil List better than that of classification; for it made it the interest of the grown to be economical, as the excess of one department was to be made up only by saving in another. He contended that the sum demanded at present was far more than at former periods,amount ing altogether, when both the Civil List and Conso lidated Fund were taken into account, and the sum demanded for Ireland and Scotland, to 0,540,000. He concluded by observing, that he could approve of no measure that did not set out on a more econo mical and intelligible principle than that proposed. Lord DARNLEY wished that it should be ex plained, why, when £520,000 were asked, as sufficient for England, so large a sum as £207,000 should be required for Ireland ? He also observed, that al though the expenses of • the Lord Lieutenant of Ire land had been greater before the Union than at pre sent, yet since that time his salary had been raised from MOM to £30,000 per annum. Lord LIVERPOOL said, that the whole present expenses of the Civil Government of Ireland were the same as were found to exist at the demise of his late Majesty; and as a proof that the sum allotted for them was no more than sufficient, he could assure . their Lordships, that not a penny of it had ever been remitted from Ireland—(A laugh). As to the Irish Pension List, it was kept within due bounds, no grants being made upon it at any time to a greater amount than £l2OO per annum, which had been the rate _fixed by an Act in force formerly, until it amounted to £BO,OOO a year. He denied that the salary of the Lord Lieutenant was too great for his 'expenses, and appealed to the experience of those Noble Lords who had served that high office. The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered :o be committed to-morrow (this day).—Adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS. The SPEAKER having taken the Chair at half-past three o'clock, the I louse proceeded by Ballot to appoint a Committee for trying the merits of the Petition against the Return for Portsmouth. A short time after Mr. I.F.F. appeared at the Bar, and stated that the following blembers had been chosen to compose the Committee : Mr. R. Branshy Cooper, Nr. C. W. Taylor, Mr. Lucie, blr. W. Ashvrst, Sir Charles Cockerell, The lion. J. S. Cocks, Mr. Jnhn Mitchell, Lord Viscount Clive, , Mr. W. W ILLI AMS brought up the Report of the Com mittee to whom was referred the Petition. for leave to bring in a Bill to alter and amend the Acts relative to the Building of a Bridge over the Thames. The Bill for Incorporating a Gas Company in Dublin was read a first and second time. .The Dartmoor Rail Bill was read a second time. Mr. Strjeant ONSLO\V presented a Petition from the At toinies of Maidenhead, praying for some alteration in the laws respecting Conveyancers.—lt was ordered to'he on the table. Mr. •LITTLETON presented a similar Petition from the Attornies of Staffordshire.—Laid on the table. Mr. BLACK BURN E presented a Petition from certain Clothwoi-kers in Lancashire, praying to be relieved from the duties on Wool.—Laid on the table. -Sir G. CLERK presented a Petition from the Heritors of the county of Edinburgh, against any alteration of the Wool Duties.—Laid on the table. Mr. G. M. Grant, Mr. C. A. A'Court, _ Mr. F. Forrester, Mr. W. Drake, Mr. Nathaniel• Barker, Hon. W. V. Fitzgerald, Dr. I.ushiugton. DROGHEDA PETITION. Mr. P. MOORE presented a Petition from Mr. Edward Al derson, "the Agent to the Petitioners against the Return for Drogheda. The Petitioner stated, that a Petition had been presented to the Douse on the Bth instant, against the said Re turn, that it was hied for hearing on the 6th of June, that two sureties had entered into the usual recognizance., and that he had given the necessary notice of their names and stations in life, that on Saturday last he attended before the Examiners, when Mr. Howley, the Agent to Mr. Metcalf, delivered in Affidavits, impugning the competency of the sureties, that the Petitioner requested copies of these Affidavits, which were re fused, and he now prayed that copies of these Affidavits should be ordered to be given to him, and that he might be allowed time to answer them, which he could do in a satisfactory man ner, or that he might be allowed to substitt.:e two other sureties, who were in London, in order to save further time and expense. The Petition was brought up and read. The SPEAKER. desired the Serjeant to inquire if Mr. Al derson was in atteudance? Mr. Alderson appeared at the Bar, and verified the Petition. Mr. P. MOORE moved that the Petitioners do have time to this day fortnight to complete their recognizance& Sir J. S ['EWA RT was of opinion that this was a case which did not justify the introduction of a formal motion with respect to it. Neither of the individuals who had been proposed as se curities were fit to be received in that capacity. One of them was in the service of an eminent distiller ; and the other was a young man, without house or property. These facts were sworn to by many respectable persons; the Affidavits were on the table, and he could see no reason for re-examining those persons. Sir J. NEWPORT requested that the Petition should he again read, and his desire having been complied with, the Ham. Baronet said, he deemed the question one of great importance., Since the Parliament had been removed from Ireland, the power which was vested in the hands of the returning Officers was so large, that it ought to be watched with the utmost jea lousy, and where a question was to be tried as to the validity of their acts, every facility ought to be given. lie had a personal opportunity of knowing how difficult it was to go through all the' proceedings which a disputed Irish Return required, and he thought that as nothing could be more reasonable than the pro position that had been made by the Petitioner, he had a strong claim upon the justice of the House. Mr. C. W. WYNN objected to that prayer of the Petition which asked, that time should be given to change the sureties, because such a change would be inconsistent with the usages of the house. As to the prayer for copies of the Affidavits, he believed that the Petitioner had a right to read them, and to copy them if he pleased, for by the standing order, all such AM &Tits were placed in the hands of one of the Clerks of the House, for the benefit of all the parties concerned. Certainly an opportunity should be given to either party if he wished to con indict them. In the last Parliament, there was a precedent in the case of Haslemere, where an objection was made to the sureties, and further time was asked and given in order to sub stantiate them. But here the Petitioner prayed for leave to substitute other sureties, a prayer which could not be complied with, for they must abide by the original sureties. The SPEAKER said, that in that case further time was required in order to substantiate the sureties nominated; bat here objections were made to the persons who were offered as sureties. It should be recollected, that ht Irish Petitions the Petitioners have fourteen days longer allowed for entering.their recognizances than in England ; and further, that in the case now under consideration, the time would not be expired until the 6th of June, and that the Petitioners only asked for three days longer. But it would be desirable that the motion was in a more distinct manner before the House. The motion was to give until this day fortnight to complete the recognizances, al though the Petition prayed either for time to set up the present sureties, or to offer new ones is their place. The motion should have been separately, for one or for the other. Mr. PETER MOORE then shaped his motion to the follow ing effect .—" That the Petitioners do have to this day fortnight to complete the tecognisthee for the sureties alrady pApostd." —Agreed to. Mr. C. W. WYNNt said, that with respect to the affidavits, it was unnecessary to make any order, as the Petitioner had a right to see them. The SPEAKER observed, that if any impediment was thrown in the way, it was an impediment unwarranted and unwarrantable, and be would take care that it should not be repeated. ALDEOROUGH ELECTION PETITION. Mr. D. W. HARVEY presented a Petition froth William Bryant, Esq. as Agent for Charles Bryant, Esq. praying for time to provide another security in place of John Thomas Eglin, who declined to enter into the necessary recognizance,. The Honourable Gentleman moved that ten days be allowed for the purpose stated in the Petition, after the Agent had been called in to authenticate his Petition. Mr. A BERCROMBY objected to the present motion, as totally different from the last case which had been under their consideration. A Maumee, who spoke from under the gallery, said, if it would further the ends of justice in any degree, the House ought to extend the indulgence sought for. Mr. C. W. WYNN said, that a Petitioner was bound to know the willingness of his securities to comply with the neces sary conditions, otherwise much imposition upon the House might be the consequence. Another objection to the motion was, that securities might be tampered with to refuse compli ance in order to obtain further time. The SPEAKER said, that he thought this the proper time for mentioning that he had received a let:er, with affidavits, from Mr. W. Bryant, who requested that theY should be read when the subject came before that House. One was the affidavit of Henry Thomas, Esq. of King-street, Covent-garden, who stated that he had called on John Thomaa Eglin, and had been assured by him of his willingness to do all that was required of him as security, and to attend for that purpose on the 24th : that de ponent had mentioned the sum to him ; and that he believed John Thomas Eglin to be a good security. Ile mentioned this now to the House, to shew Alit the party was cognizant of the conditions required. Mr. WYNN said, that if the Petitioner had got a competent person, that was undoubtedly all he could do. Mr. D. W. HARVEY said, that Monday last was the first time the security had mentioned his intention of refusing the conditions. The affidavit of John Thomas Eglin was read: it stated, that he declined to enter into recognizance*, because he had entered into a bond not to become security in any suns above £5O; and that he had not been aware of the bond when he promised to become security here. Mr. Bovatse was again called in, and stated that he had not known of Mr. Eglin s intention to refuse, or of the bond which prevented him, till Monday last. The question, that the days additional be allowed, was then put and carried. Mr. C. CA LVERT presented another Petition from the same party, which bad been just put into his hands. Ile himself knew Nothing of it, but as it was couched in respettful terms, he offered it to the House. The Petition was then brought up and read. It prayed that the Petitioner might he examined at the bar of the House, touching a Petition which had been pre sented by a Mr. Win. Green, respecting the return for the Bo rough of Altlbormigh. and that he might be allowed to produce a copy of the return for that Borough.—The Petition was or dered to lie on the table. BOROUGH OF WA LLINGFORD. Mr. HART DAVIS presented a Petition, which he said he had just received, in passing into the House. The Petitioner, a Mr. Robert Winters, set forth that he was Agent for a Peti tioner against the return for the Borough of Wallingford; that he had, while engaged in making inquiries respecting the qualifi cations of one of the sitting Members, E. J. Roberts, Esq. let the time pass, at which he should have entered into recogni zances ; he prayed, therefore, that he might be allowed a little further time to enter into those recognizance', with which be was fully prepared. Mr. A BERCROMBY conceived that, admitting the whole the Petitioner stated to be correct, he had not offered any rea sonable ground for the indulgence be claimed. Lot d CASTLEREAGH said, much of the-public time was occupied in hearing petitions of this description. The Acts passed for regulating the time allowed for entering into recog nizances were useleu, if encroachments were to be made every moment by such petitions. His Lordship said, that this was not a ease which called for the interposition of the Houee.—The Petition wa4 withdrawn. AGRICULTURAL DISTRESSES. Mr..TOLIFFE presented a Petition from several Farmers in the neighbourhood of Petersfield, pray ing for some measure that might relieve them from the distresses under which they laboured, in conse quence of low prices. Lord CHARLES MANNERS presented a similar Petition from the County of Cambridge. Mr.'CURWEN also presented one from several Agriculturists in the Western part of the County of Cumberland. Lord NILTOIC said he held in his hand a Petition ' from another County, complaining of the Agricul tural distress under which the cultivators of land were suffering ; and he must say, that this and all the other Petitions of the same nature which had been laid on the table were well worthy the attention of the House, because it was the duty of the House to hear the complaints of all classes of subjects. It did not follow, however, that they were bound in the present instance to comply with the prayer of the Petitioners; at the same time, he must give it as his opinion, that any interference on the part of the House in what related to the prices of human food ought to be used with the greatest delicacy. The parties whose Petition he was then about to present stated, that they looked up to the House, in a confident ex pectation that something would be done for their re lief. He did not know what was the precise object which an Honourable Member (the Member for Sur rey) had in view by the Motion which he intended to make, and of which he had given notice on a former day, respecting the state of Agricultural distress: he did not know whether it was the intention of the Honourable Gentleman to propose measures which should cause an alteration in the price of Agricul tural produce, or whether he meant to move for an inquiry into the general distress of the country, in order to ascertain how far the burthens which pressed upon the People might contribute to weigh down the Agri cultural Interests. If his object went to affect the prices, such a step would be considered by the people at large as an attempt to enhance the price of food ; but it he meant to propose that a general inquiry should be entered into, for the purpose of ascertain ing the causes of those distresses which affected all classes of Manufacturers, as well as . the manufac turers of food, and, indeed, affected the whole com munity, a great deal of good might then be done, because the real grounds of public distress would be then clearly known. But if the inquiry intended to be proposed by the Honourable Gentleman was to be one of a limited nature, and if the Agricultural Petitioners wanted nothing more than to right them selves, at the expense of others, then he maintained that the inquiry would tend to do infinite mischief. He felt it his duty to make these observations on pre senting the present Petition; which his Lordship then brought up. It was a Petition from several Far mers in the West Riding of Yorkshire, praying that the House would take their distresses into their most serious consideration. Mr. H. SUMNER said could not withhold ex pressing his sentiments on the present occasion, after what had just fallen from the Noble Lord, and after being so were particularly t i c o t n l h e e d taitnterde to ellwe d t;) s lal h e. at He should say, they, that his object was t o be of a double views t i n nature; The first should be applicable to Agricultu rists exclusively, and the second should be more ge ral. By the Act passed in 1815, it was stated, that eighty shillings was the least price at which Foreign Corn was to be imported into the country; and by that means it was conceived that asufficient prow tionw has.foni the low prices. given t o the Fa i. rmers against object,ns r ttl di stiesses arising then, would be, to inquire whether a sufficient protection was by that enactment secured to the Farmers They now complained, that it did not afford them a sufficient remuneration; and that he considered a . w su o b t lec id t affected by those causes which affected the o t he r Ma; befi,ttotoincill4uireinclhotiii‘r7fdai'intre.AgltruinetUrixtst4s wjeerit nufacturers of the country ? With respe c t, however,: to the question, whether Agriculturists received a„ sufficient remuneration? he was sure it would tend greatly to tranquillize the public mind if a separate inquiry were gone into, for the purpose of ascertain ' ing, whether some distinct measures of relief might not be adopted ? Mr. CCRWEN was of opinion, that if the prices of Agricultural produce should.continue as they now were, there would be a deficient growth of Grain ;a the country, and, evenniafly, the people would have to pay dearer for all the necessaries of life than they would, if proper protection was given to Farmers; therefore, he conceived, that in that question the Agricultural and Manufactuting labourers were equally interested. An inquiry, therefore, ought to be instituted, with the view of doing something that should prevent us from being at the mercy of fa.. reigners for out food. Mr. COKE said, as he had a Petition to present similar 'to that before the House, he should take the opportunity of declaring his decided opinion that the distress of the Agriculturists arose from the sys tem which had been so lung pursued, and which ha:. brought such a burthen of taxation on the country. There was at present a great part of the county of Norfolk in the highest state of cultivation, which was only enabled to produce wheat by the assi-z -ance of artificial manure. Very little of the lard between his house and Lynn was formerly sown with wheat, but merely with rye or barley. Wheat was now grown there by means of the oil cake and arti ficial manures. The pressure of the present times threatened to put an end to this cultivation. Mr. RICARDO said, the Agriculturists had dis tinctly avowed their wish to have a monopoly of corn in the English market, for they now demanded some measure which should not fail to raise the price. The Agriculturist seemed to have an extraordinary notion of a countervailing duty ; they called for a duty which should amount to the difference of the cost at which foreigners and that at which we could grow corn. If such a principle were acted upon, all foreign commerce would be put an end to. If, for instance, corn could be grown at fifty shillings in Poland, and at eighty shillings here, they would demand a duty of thirty shillings, which would effectually exclude foreign corn, as our farmers would always have the advantage of not being charged with the expense of carriage on their com modity. The object of the Agriculturists could not be mistaken; it was most unreasonable for them to strive to raise the price of corn by legislative enact ments, for by thus raising also the price of all com modities, instead of alleviating, they would aggra vate beyond measure the distresses of the country — (Heat, hear). —He should, therefore, oppose any mea sure with such an object. Mr. BENETT (Member for Wiltshire) denied that it was the object of the Petitioners to prohibit the importation of foreign corn. They only wanted to be protected by means of certain duties laid upon the products of other countries, in order that cuki vation in this country might not cease. The object of the Petitioners was to keep corn at a steady and remunerating price, which was not the - case at pre sent; and if the prices continued so low as they now were, the farmers could not go on—the prices could not pay the .taxation. If protection was to be aban doned, the consequence would be, the abandonment of cultivation, and of the labourers; for if the corn was higher, the wages of labourers would be higher. All he wished for was, to see the Act of 1813 made efficient; and that the protection intended by that Act should be granted to the Agriculturists. At the same time he was ready to acknowledge that heavy was the great evil to be complained of; and until that was removed; he hoped some lesser remedy would be resorted to. He fully agreed with the Ho nourable Member at that side (Mr. Coke), that the great evil arose from the heavy preisure of enormous taxation. That should be remedied, as far as possi ble, as the first step ; and then he conceived that equal protection should be given to all classes, the Manufacturers and Agriculturists. Lord MILTON, on a question so important as the present, felt it necessary to look at the objects and views of the Petitioners. He had before stated, that he would not then declare whether he would or would not vate f for the appointment of a Committee. When that sulject came before the House, the man ner in which he should give his vote would depend upon the nature of the objects which the movers might have in view, upon the Members who were to constitute the Committee into which it was pro posed to enter, and also upon the subjects into which the Committee were to be empowered to inquire. The Petition was then laid upon the table, and ordered to be printed. Sir J. NEWPORT postponed his Motion relating to Courts of Justice in Ireand, to Thursday next. LINEN MANUFACTURE. Mr. S. WORTLEY presented a Petition from cci min Linen Manufacturers in the county of Forfar, praying that they might be put on the same footing, with regard to the bounties on exportation, as tile Linen Manufacturers of Ireland. Mr. ROBINSON said, the Manufacturers of Linen in Great Britain were entitled to the same protection as those in Ireland ; for if bbunties were given to those of Ireland, they should be given to all others. Sir R. FERGUSON observed, that if bounties were not given pursuant to the prayer of this Peti tion, three-fourths of the Manufacturers of Forfar must be dismissed. Mr. ItICARDO considered the practice of giving bounties on exportation as nothing less than bribing the consumers of our goods to take them off our 1 hag con icof b C tO t trai gre; 'tie befc S be 1 Midi aR Pil MI UM G the to by eh 1 4 1 ed he' sei qu It a . . 4,4. 1