Star. — London, England, 1813-02-27 00:00:00

'4Ra4MEATefI?I ; PAOCEEDINGS. HOUSE OF LORDS, FEBRUARY 2 • BANBURY rEERAOK. Their Lordships met in a Committee of Privileges on the Ban bury Peerage, when Lord ERSKINE addressed char Lordsh•ps at great length, in favour of the claimant, end concluded 'with moving, that the claim had been made good. After some observatiods from die EaH et Sucrose. Lord Eton sr, and Lard Et.teriamtou on, it was apeedrthat further proceedings should be postponed to .ten o'clock on Monday *'nn glit. Tbeir Lordships then &dimmed during pleasure.. At . idiom half past four o'clock, the House being formed, the tfiglish Infeltetit Debtors' Bill wa.. read a third time and passed. ' The 114arqui of LANSDOWNE &centre 1 a Petition from various perser:s confined 'or debt in Ireland, and impressed a wish, that whbn tht; subject should come under their Lordships cels..• sidetation, it would have the benefit of the learning and abilities: of the Noble Lord opposite (Itedestiale) Lord RES)ESDA LE observed, that the subject of the petition presented ty the Noble Marquis had previously engaged his at tenvoti ; indeed, be had several times had applications from Ire land. relative to it; but his advice to the applicants was, to con sult with the Irish Inks before any other step were taken There was much of local consideration belonging to the case of such persona, which ought well to be weighed. There were like wise many abuses to which those circumstances were liable, and which he illustrated by what had frequently taken place in the Isle of Man. The petition was ordered to lie on the Table. Lerd ERSKINE desired to be 'informed by his Noble and Learned Friend, whether In, the r ill which had just passed, there was any claim which,. tended to the relief of. confined Bankrupts ? Lord RFDESDALE replied, that there was a clause in his to that effect. • Lord STA Sir JOHN COTTEREL, add others, brought up front the Commons a number of private Bills, which were read the first lime. 'I he Coal lluty Drawback Bill went through a Committee, and was ordered to he reported on Monday. Mr. J thilion, front the London Dock Company, presented pa pers, which were ordered to lie on the Table. CATHOLICS. Lord ST. HELENS presented a Petition from the Gentlemen and Clergy of Stamford ; and the Bishop of CH ESTER from the parish of • Warley, in the counties of Lancashire and Chester, against the Ca'. tholic Lord CHARLEVILLE presented a Petition to the same effect from the county of Cavan. The Marquis of WELLESLEY presented a Pe tition from the town and neighbourhood of Chiches ter, expressing deep concern at what appeared to them a dangerous, usibecoming, and intolerant spirit, which had been excited throughout the country, with a view to interfere with and influence •the wisdom of Parlia ment, in the consideration of the great question there to be agitated, relative to the continuance or removal of the disabilities under which their brethren of the Catholic persuasion were labouring; and, with all hnniility,conjliring their Lordships to consult only and rely upon their own superior wisdom and knowledge in contemplating that important subject, and by no means to regard the violence or intemperance expres sed in a:any of the petitions presented to that Noble House. His Lordship, in behalf of the petitioners, observed, that it had been their original intention not to interfere or agitate at all the Catholic question, but to wait in confident and respectful patience until the wise and deliberate lecision of Parliament should call forth the cordial expression of their approbation. -But a spirit of a vth y different nature having ap peared and actuated another party, they found it ne . ry . to depart from their original and temperate zf~niUtion. That party, not contented with urging 'every argument thA they could find fit to promote their object, thought proper, while a petition was lying open for signatures, to send out an advertise= Ment, professing that they were possessed of an au • thentic document completely proving, and from the highest authority, ale fallacy of all the arguments set up by the Roman Catholics. 'rile document al luded to, that triumphant lost] ument against the Ca - tliolics, was no other than an extract from the third part of the Penal Laws, a notot ions, mischievous, and convicted forgery. But though the lozzei y was ma nifest, the injurious effect it had - prodered in various parts t f the counfry, particularly in Sussex and in the North, where it was industriously t6d, v. as serious and alarming. He should not take up mote of the time of their Lordsli:ps, but should move that the petition be read. The petition was accordingly read and laid on the Table.—Adjourned till Monday. HOUSE OF COMMONS. Soon after the Srais x r X took the Chair, a great pressure took place at the dims of the Strangers' Ga lery, by pe.sons endea vouring to force their way in, although at the time the Gal lery wit., fdled to an excess.; two or three persons were forcing their way into the sects vi et al.mir, and a great rehis.ance and noise ensued, upon which the Speaker directed the Set jeant at Aritis , inuredia•ely to take the fluters into custody. The tlcr tic further observed, that if the distutbatice continued, he I.nped some floimerable Member would assert the dizuity of the tbause by moving the Stavin% Order, that the Gallery should he cleared of strangers.—The disturbance Waned ately ceased. -Lord STANI LY presented a Petition Irons sandry persons in Lancashire, complaining of the use of improved Machinery in a particular branch of Manufacture. The SPEAKCIA said, the House hitherto had not been ac customed to receive pi Hions where the signatures happened to be on detached slips of paper, which %I as the ease, as lte per cadet d, of the petition now brought by the Noble Lottl. The pt tit sou was therefore refused. YE9liiltOKb ELECTIMC. Mr. BARHAM moved, that the Standing Reso lution of the House should be read, which ordered that ail the names of the objectionable voters on crin tested•electiotts should be delivered by the contending parties to each other, at silch a period as the House /night deem a reasonable intimation, previous to the balloting of a . Committee to take into consideration tl:e Contested Election Petitions. _ The Clerk accordingly read the Resolution. BARHANI then moved, that the Resolution might be carried into ffect with the sitting Member and the person petitioning ia Om contested election for .Pembroke. Sir JOHN OWEN (Member for Pembroke) said, that he had not received any' intimation of the 110tiCe. Of such a motion Laving been given tilt he took his seat to-day in the House. However he conceived that the motion had been made at an unseasonable period, for the Pembroke contested.election Commit tee would be balloted on Tuertlry next, and it was impossible to institute particular inquiries concerning the merits of voters, who resided at the distance of three hundred miles, within the compass of three days. lie . flierefore submitted to the House, that the mo tion be rejected, inasmuch as a reasonable allowance ;o prepare the list of impeached voters had given. iARHAM said, he had given the notice oP ion some time ago,' and the Hon. Baronet of time t; not been . 134 his 'moth Mr. r . proper t. .4epart trenrus...-- -ict of Parliament. . Mr. LMEHART and Mr. N. CALVERT said a few words concerning the propriety 'of lilting reasonable notice to produce such lists. - The SPEAKER. said, that he would endeavour to - give The House what information he had, on a subject so particular and important. In truth, a case etactly simihr in its nature had occurred, in which the House had taken upon themselves the privilege of judging whether convenient notice had been given to produce the lists, pursuant to the resolution of Parliament. After the general election of 1807, a motion WAS made, that orders should be given, that the sitting Member for Sussex and the petitioner should mutually . furnish each other with lists of the voters which they objected to. The motion was re jected, on the grounds that reasonable allowance of time had not been given, inasmuch as the motion was made on the 16th of the month, • and the Com mittee had been appointed for the 22d. Such, on a similar occasion, was the judgment of the House. Mr. WYNNE and Mr. BATHURST said a few words on the propYiety of abiding by the strict regula tions of the House. Lord CASTLEREAGH said, the complainant knowing the nature of the complaint which he pur posed to bring, had the advantage in the readiness of making out his list over the person to whom he was opposing himself; therefore, he conceived that reasonable time should be ziven to make out the lists of voters, especially those who lived so very remote as Pembr,-keshire. Three days notice was a period infinitely too short to proct.re the ned.'Lsai y infor mation, and the Motion was, therefore, improper. Sir J. NEWPORT contended, that particular forms and ceremonies ()Tight not to be permitted to impede the natural course of justice. Mr. LUSHINGTON spoke in opposition to the Motion. • Sir JOHN NEWPORT insisted that the Clerk should read the Act relating to Irish Contested Elections. • Lord KENSINGTON was ently proceed. ing to support the Motion ) when re was informed by the SPEAKEN ) that any discussion upon a subject which Gentlemen were to be appointed to examine, would only tend to prevent their going into its con sideration with minds wholly unbiassed. It would, therefore, he better to drop any farther discussion. Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and a division took place, in which, as we were informed, on being re-admitted to the Gallery, the Motion was' rejected. WEYMOUTH ELECTION. Mr. Alderman ATKINS brought up the Report of the Committee appointed to examine the contest. ed Election Petitions of Weymouth. The Committee having seated one of the Members, proceeded to a reconsideration of the evidence, and after having maturely weighed the whole, they adopted a resolu tion, praying, that the issuing of a new writ' ior the election of a Member might be stopped, ina.mucli as they conceived that the mode of election required Legislative interference. Pursuant to the desire of the Committee, he begged leave to move, that such parts of the evidence mentioned in the second resolu tion should be laid upon the Table of • the House and printed. Several Members having shewn a disposition to rise on the subject, Mr. PONSONBY proposed, that the discussion of a question so important should be postponed to Monday, for, doubtless, many persons of great in. formation, who were absent, would be desirous of being heard before any portion of the evidence should be printed. Mr. M. SUTTON said, it was but common fair; ness to the Committee to give them credit ;—that they moved only for such evidence as they conceived to be necessary for Parliament to be informed about. He saw no grounds for making any delay. Mr. Alderman ATKINS said, the description of votes which required Legislative interference, were those chiming privilege Prom the one thousand four hundred and ninetieth part of the sixty-eighth part of the fifth of a half-crown rent. Mr. W YNNE wasde,irous of delaying , the dis- Cusion, because some deliberation was required on a case to intricate. • Sir JOHN NEWPORT was desirous that the whole and complete evidence should be submitted to the House. Lord CASTLE,REAGH and Mr. ROSE con. tended, that much delay would be occasioned by laying the whole of the evidence on the Table of the House. --„-- Mr. 13. BATHURST said, that in a question where general corruption %Vas alledged, it would be necessai y to submit the whole evidence to the House ; but no corruption was stated as apparent in . the case, for the Committee. had seated one of the Members. After a short conversation between Mr. Broderick, Mr. Baring, Mr. Robinson, and Mr. Barham, the amendment of Mr. Ponsonby was negatived without a division, and the House resumed the discussion of the original question. Mr. BARING immediately rose and moved, that the whole of the evidence should be submitted to the House. Mr. MACDONALD and Mr. M. SUTTON made a few brief remarks on the subject. • Mr. PONSON BY urged the necessity of having the whole of the Minutei before the House, and con tended, that a partial production of them would be -a bar to future proceedings. Mr. H. SUMNER wished to propose another amendment, for the appointment of a Committee to inspect the Minutes of the Weymouth Committee, and to report .such parts as might appear to them to be necessary • but he afterwards withdrew it on the ',suggestion o f Speaker. Mr. Alderman ATKINS said, that the Minutes were not garbled ; that they consisted of a large list of names, and all that was necessary to be known. The discussion was protracted for some time fur. ther, and several arguments urged, on both sides, by Lord CASII.EASAGH I Mr. COCIIRANE JqIINSTONE, Mr. Mr. C. JOHNSTONE- said, that he rose for the purpose of puiting oft' the Motion, of which he had given notice for - M6nday next, until Thursday, as he understood that Ministers had an engagement for t : 4 ‘. • that day. '• • • • Lord CASTLEREAGH, in a very low tone, made some observations on the postponement not having arisen from any expressed wish on she part of his Majesty's Ministers, Who were not diiposed to suffer any engagement to interfere with t 4 perfor mance of their duty in that House. Mr. C. JOHNSTONE said, that for himself, he had no objection to bring foiviiird his Motion on the day originally fixed, but he conceived its postpone ment would be a matter of accommodation for both parties— (Hear, hear). The SOLICITOR-GENERAL made some ob servations on the readiness of his Majesty's Mini sters, to meet any question brought forward in that House. Mr. WHITBREAD objected to the gravity with which the Hon. and Learned Gentleman treated the subject.. It was well known that Ministers frequently had engagements which made it inconvenient for them to attend. There was no novelty in the cir cumstance. • The SOLICITOR-GENERAL was perfectly aware that there was nothing novel in the circutn stance, but his observation was founded on the cir cumstance of its having gone forth to the Public, that the Motion was filed for a particular day. He un derstood since, that Ministers had been invited to a turtle feast..- (A laugh). Mr. W H ITB READ observed, that the Hon. and Learned Gentleman had made a magnificent trifle of the business. Mr. BATHURST said, that as far as he was concerned, Ministers were not engaged on Monday. laugh).—He had thought it his duty to de cline an invitation from the Russia Company for that day. • The Motion was then postponed to Thursday next. by tile :o an assertion made it had been stated, tha t ignatures to it had wit' their Apost lit Vicar :opy of a memorandum, Iment in question havit 0 by the espostk,oe Vicars, had been e in the British Museum, Dec. 50, 1791, by Mt Secretary of the Committee, as a monumem tical integrity. The protestations had been sively circulated among the clergy, and indeed the c.401,4i.: laity,. and not ni're than six persons had refused to sign it. None of di signed it withdrew their signatures from dte of but very few, and those not through reluctance to subscribe to the protestation,- but because the oath which was coupled with it, and . whicii hied not heai. drawn up by Cathelics, \vas not worded in a sati:f.ie. tory manner. :n us Meth the Vicars had recom mended to th 6 Catholics not to take, though it had among its strppottets soiree the greatest lurr'rtariii of the Church. - Here he qnoted several eminent men in proof of what he had advanced. He inveighed against the part-which the public press had taken in - MIS controversy ; and asseited, - that si was the Strong bias of some of the newspapers, t!iat they would not even admit advertisements agaii.st the side they espoused. He then gave some account of two Letters addlessild to a Noble Earl, which he had published . on the Catholic question.—He had viewed this as a great question of civil policy, and, considering the value and sets ces of tile Catholics, deemed dent worthy of admission to a participation in the privi leges bestowed by 'the British Constitution, with pro per provisions and securities, whhla might be devised by the Legislature, and would be accepted by the Catholics. On the subject of the Veto he contended, that the Catholics ought to yid:. that noint They could not spew him a state in EllrOpt! in %Okla the Sovereign had not a full and pertect nomination ; and here, where only a negatiae was cl.anted, he could see no good mason for its being refused. Un less this WAS done, there was great cause to fear dart-. ger to our establishmems from foreign influence. Without the right to inspect bulls, briefs, and re sctipts, he . could not consent to give the ettltGlics political power that might b. injurious to the state, He did not mean that such documents shoshf he vim to the Secretary of State's Oilier, but tome of their own'ecclt.::.tstic.s, in 'whomth;:y and ere Government had coafidence, miglit . he 'apPpiate.tl to per:orm this ditty. Even our Cafite;lic ancestOrs were in the con stilt' practice of peoritltag - rrif4s and securities agaiest the encteashnicnts of the Pope. ,Magna Cho ta, the Statute of Pritiouire, and • wen! other enactments, he instaneedat. proof of this fact. But all these things a Committee could alone digest and arrange. N't a Committee of the whole House, but a Select Committee, which was best adapted to carry the matter to a right conclusion—to discuss the ex tent of the privileges that might be ranted to the Catholics, and the nature of the securittes and guards against the influence, he would sly the growing in- • fluence, of the Pope. In the, reason he save the ;no- Lion his cordial support. Mr. YORK E., in esphanation, stated, that he had been misrepresented, of misunderstood, by the Hon. Baronet. He had said only, that in con,equence of the protestation, a difference took place between the • Vicars Apostolic and the Committee, and that the latter were obliged to submit. He had said also, that three of the Vicars Apostolic had withdrawn , their names from the protestation in consequence of • the oath, the form of which had been introduced • . into it. General MATHEW observed, that it appeared to him, after the able, eloquent, argumentative, and enlightened speech of the Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Plunkett) below him, last night, that little re mained for him, or for any other person, to say upon the subject under the consideration of the House.— That speech, in his opinion, surpassed any thing th.‘tt. he had heard or read ; and presented to the House a chain of undeniable facts, such as had never before been known in this country. He did not believe that any speech had ever been delivered in that House which went so' satisfactorily to establish the clear, unequivocal, and undoubted tight of the Catholics to the grant of their claims. The sentiments express ed by his Right Hon. Fr•end on that occasion, and on every other occasion that li^ had had the honour of hearing him, w re such 'as reflected credit on his understanding and his heart. He was sorry, how ever, that. as to one or ter, points stated in that ad mirable speech, he was obliged to differ from his Right Hon. friend. The opinion of his Right Hon. Friend was, that Catholic emancipation was only to be granted upon the condition of full and ample se curities for the Church of England !rein, at Cue same time provided. That was the view of his Right Hon. Friend, and may, perhaps, be the opinion of other Members of that House. But he would ask any Gentleman who entertained this opinion, whether he understood what was meant by these securities? He should like to knnw in %that set pi.rese or form of words this bond el security vies to be I. , rmed ; as also, if the obligation were not to be fulfilled, upon whom the penalty of failure or v:olat'on was to fall? What party is it that could say in such a CAW W no th.ff, 66 you have signed the bond, but tailed to per form its tonditions, and there fare must submit to all the consequences of your breach of engagement ?•' For his own part, he was persuaded that n i such se curities as were required wee nezessary. No honest man could in his conscience ask if r any other sec tif ity than the Oath of Allegiance. He sh..uld not ti l er.• trespass upon the time of the Rinse by re ideng th.t oath, which, however, he. should contend, alfraideefit security enough. If the Catholics could /eerie, that: oath, they would break all the securities whi,;ll the House could possibly enact. Another vita upon . which he differed from his Right Hon. Friend was that which regarded a provision for the Catholic • Clergy. His Right Hon. Friend had contended, that if the claims of the Catholics were to be granted, a provision should -also be made for the Catholic Clergy. He was sorry .his Right Hon. Friend had brought forward that topic ; because he was persua ded, from the long residence of his Right Hower,- able Friend its the Irish capital, he must know that the Catholic Clergy would never consent to any such meastire k and that the Catholic Prelates in Sprod or Senate had positively determined that the Catholic . Clergy should under no circumstances receive a sin- • gle shilling from the Public. This was the feeling r 'msg. ve in . ,:, , ii i t te , . it , ,y . ..,. t : ~. .., . °r. '' itirtiritisi: 11471Astvlori lin a r t' — WeiTrew liis teen ikiMed bi Notice and Order - Book. I% eon c e i . . r 4 - 4, ' s • - • • ..re • Mr. Ross, Mr. Passivis; • afe Totili.NE*. Chronicle, in answer to an assertion i , m7 41 ,0 1 e allotrauce 4F time - had been gi /4 , 7 , 1 e, ), ~ , • . the Soctc4itni.Pspe.4l,l - the Gallertwai Harting Pea, in which it had been st.it ProatictiOn of the lists *(7flcrpeaclted voters. ' ~... , J , and the Hosiettlivh4d I 'When, we under. who had given their signatures to it h thai subiect he would bike the sense of the 4=ion - . :Amp,. t the propositiOti for producing the whole of. them at. tLe instance of their Apost 111 `• Mr. W. WYNNE dslared that it would be ' "Nbsi evidence was lost,' E lie nunibers beiug,6l to 1.12. refute this, he read a copy of a memor 4 i . improper to depait fr.4l:lie.resolution of, an exp • MOTION RELATIVE TO THE \ PRINCESS'OF WALE'S. set Ithill, that tilt' document in questio _•2l,_A_ - a c•• • . . Mornin g ! by este :hat those ithdrdovn WS. T 9 which viog derwitcd r 1 Butler, It of puli- rtt or seven those who I . le papez, GREAT calmmtv ELECTIOx. Mr. WYNNE brought up the Report of the Com mittee appointed to inquire into the subject of the Petition of certain personc, who had be:n summoned to attend as witnesses on the Committee fair trying the merits of the Petition c mplaining of an undue election for the Botough of Great Grimsby. The Report set firth, that the Petitioners had been sent for by General Loft, to attend the Committee ; that they had accordingly come to town, bait had not been called on as witnesses ; and that, having been un successful in their application to General Loft for money, they were utterly unable to defray the ex- penses of their journey home. The R , port wither stated, that the Committee had been unable to dis cover the residence of General Loft ; and that it ap peared to them, that there was no other mode of re lieving the Petitioners but by sending them on to their parishes by order or the Magistrates. The Report being laid on the Table, Mr. WYNNE commented on the extreme hardship of the present case, as they had attended in coyse quence of the Speaker's warrant, which was peremp tory, and commanded them to attend at their peril. After some observations on a case of a similar nature, which had occurred in 1776, in the election for Shaftesbury, in which, the House directed that rea sonable compensation should be made to the Peti tioners, he concluded by moving--- , 6 That an humble Address be presented to his Royal Highness the Prince Regent, praying that he would be graciously pleased to direct that reasonable compensation should be made to certain persons (their names were here re cited) who had been summoned to attend that House by virtue of the Speaker's warrant, and that the House would make good the same." The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said a few words in support of the motion, after which it was carried-in the affirmative, and the Ad dress ordered to be presented by such Members of the House as are of - the Privy Council. EAST INDIA COMPANY. Mr. ROBERT THORNTON presented the Pe tition of the United Company of Merchants, trading to the East Indies, praying for a renewal of their ex clusive privileges. Mr. R. THORNTON then presented another Pe tition, praying for a repayment of the debt due to the Company. Lord CASTLEREAGH said, that as the Peti tions from the East ladia Company were now before the House, he wished to apprize them, that it was his intention to bring forward, for their consideration, the question relative to the renewal of the Cr•arter, as early as possible. It was his purpose, therefore,' about this day fortnight, to move, that the Petition should be referred to a Committee of the m hole House, not with a view to to its immediate discussion in the Committee, but for the purposant submitting a series of Resolutions for their consideration, detailing the views of his Majesty's Ministers upon the subject. Mr. PONSONBY expressed a wish that the Noble Lord would fix an earlier day, as it would •be ex tremely desirable that the House should be put in possession of the Resolutions upon this important sub- I ject as soon as possible. Lord CASTEREAGH said a few words, in reply. Mr. WHITSHED KEENE made some observa tions on the great magnitude and importance of the question ; after which the several Petitions were or dered to be laid on the Table. Lord PALMERSTON postponed his notice on I the Army Estimates to Friday next. ADJOURNED DEBATE ON THE CATHOLIC QUESTION. The Order of the Day was then read for resuming the Adjourned Debate on the Catholic Claims. Sir J. C. HIPPESLEY did not, at that late hour, intend trespassing long on the time of the House, but he felt, on this occasion, his duty required of him that he should not give a silent vote. - - He then calved the attention of the House to a protostation made by the Catholics in the year 1789, abjuring certain tenets which had been imputed to them. That they had withdrawn their names from this protestation, had