Star. — London, England, 1830-05-05 00:00:00

r. a 11 .1: case.} btCaUiL hot wish to detain their lordships; cul i.tct was notorious to :my one who had at all turned his at. eentia.: to ihe subject. The noble lord here quoted from Bishop Barnet. in order to show the bad effects of such a system, and the ne. et.gs.tr of introducing some radical change which should induce every to re.:itie in his parish. The present system was in direct contrail:- ton to a I.tw paned in the reign of Henry VIII. The sub. jet:- of pluralities. howtver, was one of great importance, and, be 'me lie came to that, ho wished to call their lordships' attention to fp:oder •ithjeer, :Aso of great importance;—he meant the church f•roterry. %lid here lie would stare that he had no intention or s ro join will those who would pull the church to pieces. The -ct was, th ir the state of the church with regard to property was much like that of the present mode of farming—the great pro. ? ~.o:s hod u•mrpcd the whole. Without the smallest intention of inuring church property, he would say that parliament . t a tight to inquire into all property of this kind; and tie 14:ien an individual case in which Government had already nit; sped ; he meant the parish of Marylebone, which bad been divided ilto four divisions. With regard to the reports which had berm returned to Parliament, he must say that they were defective in the cgtreme, and particularly so with regard to Ireland. In one p (ri.!: the amount of income was said to be £4O, while the fact was that it was five or six times the amount. He found also that the return of :he Church lands was equally incorrect, and that the re turn made in 1820 made out the amount of land belonging to the Church to be 13,000 acres less than the true accounts. lie men. toned this merely for the purpose of obtaining something like ac curacy in returns, and not with any intention of injuring Church properly. In one diocese alone he found that nine parishes had been entirely left out 0` the return. He wished also to say a few words on the subject of tithes, lie highly approved of the COl - Act, and should be glad to see the same law extended to En ;land, because he was so convinced of the bad effects which Rowed from the disputes in England between the clergy and people on the subject of tithes. This circumstance alone tended to alienate the people from the clergy, and also to give the clergy a character which they ought not to have attributed to diem. He could not illustrate this better than by alluding to a story which he had heard from a naval officer, who had pass.ll with the rector or vicar through some part of the parish. After a short ride, they conic to a small common, and on seeing a flock of geese, the cler gyman began to count the geese; and on seeing a herd of ipigs, he made a dead stop fur the same purpose. This, he was happy to say, was not general ; but there were individuals who conclude& themselves in this manner, and he should be glad to see the abuse put an end to. In confirmation of his statement relative to the bad effects of tithes, he would only refer to a conspiracy of an atrocious description, which had come before the Assize Court during the last circuit, and which had been excited entirely by the grievances which this system entailed upon the community. The mode in which the Clergy was educated was also most defective. He :bought their attention was more turned to classical educa tion than was necessary, and should be glad to see it mitre directed to religious studies. But of all points, that of selling liv ings was the most objectionable. Advertisements to this effect were seen every day in the papers describing the amount of the income, the beauty of the country, the age of the incumbent, &c. This he regarded as most unseemly. But this was not all ; the system opened the door of the church to every one the most unfit ; and the man who had the most money was sure to get the living. If such a practice were followed by a Bishop, it would be called simony, and he would be made answerable for the consequences. (Hear, hear.) —lle put this merely as one of the abuses of the present sys tem of church government and he was sorry to say that it was not confined to one country, but prevailed in both England and Ire land. He did not say that all Clergymen were inducted in this way ; GOD forbid he should say so. Ile knew there were many ;Amid and honest men in the church : but, at the same time, he was called upon to say that there were others who neglected their duty, and thereby brought disgrace on the church. His only object in mentioning this was to point out what was wrong, and what was injurious to the church. He would not allude to the curates in the Irish church, because a commission had been appointed to inquire into the state of that church ; but he could not pass over the subject without saying a few words on the condition of curates in England. According to returns made in 1810, there were 3,694 curates. Of these there were 455 who had incomes above 501. a-year ; and 3,239 curates who had not salaries to that amount. Since that period there had been an improvement, but that was not sufficient, as the minimum was fixed at 761. a year, or about 4s. 1(1. a day. It ought to be recollected, at the same time, that most of the livings in which these curates officiated were sinecures, and that these curates were men of college education. lie, therefore, thought that it would be advantageous to alter this system, and give the principal part of the income to those who per formed the duty. The noble lord here referred to an advertisement which had appeared in the Kentish Garotte, stating that, a clergy man of the established church, of 50 years' standing, had by bad health, and other calamities, been redueedto the greatest distress, and appealed to the public for relief. This, however, was not a solitary case, and he could cite many others of a similar nature, which could not have occurred,had there been an equal division of church property. Theconduct of many of the resident clergy also deserved censure.— Many of the residents did no duty, and others worse than no duty. Many of them he found devoting themselves to secular employments, such as farming, though It was forbidden by the 57th Geo. 111. for any clergyman to farm more than 80 acres of land, unless his in. come was in proportion to it. The consequence of this was that cler gymen became bankrupts, and thereby brought disgrace on the pro (ration to which they belonged. The noble lord here cited a case of this kind which had occurred in February last, and quoted the Ga st& in which the name of the bankrupt Clergyman was given, and the 'day fixed on which be was to surrender. He himself knew an Aranleacon, but whom he should not name, that kept fox-bounds and twenty hunters, and hunted regularly with them. He knew another whose means did not enable hint to keep up so large a sporting establishment, but who had his hounds and horses too. What was worse, upon the Sundays the sporting parson and his sporting friends assembled round the communion-table in the church, and there made their sporting arrangements. This was a state of things, ha need not say, which ought to be checked. The only effectual way of checking it was by an appeal to the House. It was with the view of inducing their lordships to look at the sub ject in the same way that he now brought forward this motion ; and he had hopes that, if he did not succeed in snaking out such a case as would require their lordships to interfere, he hoped, at least, to be able to shame the parties into better conduct. He hoped, however, that it would be inquired into, and put an end to. lie assured their lordships he had no motive in coming forward but the good of the church. If they knew of the cases which had come to his knowledge in the last six months, they would join with him in wishing. for the good of the church, that the evils which beset it were put an end to. He should not, however, unnecessarily dis tress them by details, for the subject was one of an unpleasant and painful nature to him. Now be might be told that'll was unnecessary to bring this matter to this house, as there were other and more immediate tribunals to which appeals might be made. This he denied :}if there were competent tribunals they had at least proved themselves very insufficient to their purpose, for the evils went on increasing, and while this was the case he must bring it here. Things were never stationary ; if they were not getting better they were sure to be getting worse. Looking at tentively, then, at the subject, he had no hesitation in saying that he thought it safer to make some attempt at amendment than to let things remain as they were. He was ready himself to take all the consequences of the experiment, and Noble Lords might rest assured that the danger was not so great as they imagined. It was said to be more dangerous to tamper with the interests of the church now than at any other time. He hoped that GOD ALMIGHTY would spare him yet to see these abuses reformed. Their Lewd. ships would be encouraged to the work by the sanction of their own consciences, and if the work was well done they would have the Hots Snit? with them, and Goa ALMIGHTY'S word. He deprecated altogether the plea of procrastination; .it was au insolvent debtor putting off his creditor to a distant day : but when would that day come ? It might be said, "Oh I another dine ; r ' his answer was " Another time may be worse than the present, abuses will continue to cesep in like thieves in the night." Did they wait fora time when the enemy of the church was more weak, they must wait a long time, foe the enemies of the church were becoming more powerful every day. If the inquiry was deferred, therefore, it would come on at a worse time. He could have wished that this subject had been brought under the consideration of the house years ago, but it was not his fault that it had not ; one great reason with him for bringing this forward was, that it had been said by the right honourable Secretary for the Home Department in another place, that the church must stand upon its own purity, and the same had been repeated by a noble duke in this house. But, if it was to stand upon its own purity, care ought to be taken to preserve It in gilts vi. goer. lie hoped t en, that their lordships. would not be led astray by an ignis fawns, or *lnk that the church was reposing la security, Increasing her strength. The contrary was the feet. The. church had by no moms increased in the Was peeper. this as the dissenters. By a return which he held is his hied, k would appear that since lad to 1829, there had been an increase of agdlsacatiag chapels in Bealand and Widar, of so many additional compeketiem This showed an increase of five new co *my year. He saw lately tome btmrs from Leicester, with* salmi that since the puling inhabit there had been 100 passes am wood ham the Chin* Air Ihrgland tr that Rome. The moms of this tliketim emu the National MAR* was that the people weal beetructed 'and • the faith of Pro testant, be it ronssidould, .deposilod upon Ids inatructiom If there was any doubt upon tile owed at Lade amongst the people, they Would only have -so look at conduct. The atoms of amindtmonts and convictions wodd be a good guide upon them occadons. In 1118, the nontber d passes nom. ratted for. Anima was 11,163 ; but, in 110, it bad increased to KM. lb* dowictlomp m 1883, wore hilbt ; whereas In they increased to 111,261 ; so that the number of convictions in 1829 were greater than the commitments in 1823. The fact was that the people were becoming more and more depraved every day. Now he I knew but of two ways of checking crime; one was to instruct the people in the fear of God, the other to restrain it by human laws.— The effect of human law they all knew was to restrain crime; and the alterations in those laws had been admitted to be improvements; so that crime ought to be upoo the decrease. and •et it was a fact, that it was encreasing. The state of morals in London and South wark was truly distressing. Did the people go to church on bon days ? Were not the shops, on the contrary, open ; the butchers' stalls and the public houses, in fact ? It was a day of dissipa tion to the working classes, and the tradespeople could not get their journeymen to work upon the Monday morning. If it were true, then divine law ought to co-operate, in preserving the morals of the people, with human law, this motion surely could not be of indif ference to their lordships. He knew that there were many worthy Bishops upon the bench, who would give him their assistance upon this occavion, and ho hoped that they would not disappoint him.— The noble lord concluded by moving "that an humble address be presented to his Majesty, praying that he would be graciously pleased to appoint Commissioners to inquire and state if any, and what, abuses existed in the United Church of England and Ireland, and if any, to report such remedies as would he mom. expedient un. der existing circumstances." The motion was not seconded. The LORD CHANCELLOR then put the question upun the motion. A short pause ensued, and his lordship declared it negatived. The Earl of MOUNTCASHEL complained of ['Ong tak-n by surprise. He meant to divide the house, and would do so now if it was not too late. The noble earl's proposTon war, however ' met by loud cries of " Order, order, the qoesion has been alr mdydisposed of," and here the matter ended. Some bills were then pushed through a stage, and the house ad. journed at half.past eight o'Cloek. HOUSE OF COMMONS-TUESDAY. Numerous petitions were presented against the Beer Bill in the course of the evening ; others complaining of digress ; and n few on the monopoly of the East India Company. ANGLO-INDIANS. Mr. W. IVYNN presented a petition from Indo.Britains, per sons born in India of British and native parents, praying to be ad. mined to all the privileges of British born subjects in India. Whatever might be the result of the inquiry now going on, this country must admit the petitioners and the natives generally to office. AIL J. S. WORTLEY thought the question involved in the prayer of the petition wits of such impurtance that it must of neces sity be taken into consideration by the committee on the East India Company's charter. The class to which the petitioners belonged were about two thousand in number and one thousand of them were In the employment of government in India, notwithstanding their disqualification. Sir J. MACKINTOSH could conscientiously declare his opin ion that there was no class of his Alajesty's subjects—not in actual slavery—who were made the victims of so much needless hardships as the class to which the petitioners belonged. (Hear, hear.) He spoke his sir.cere opinion when he said that there was a greater ge neroeity--a higher point of honour, amongst the British commu nity of India, than was ortlinatily to be found in the same class in this country. He read that morning of a report of a public meet ing at Calcutta last December. at which two li indoos delivered speeches in the English language, which would have done honour to any member of any assembly in this country. (Hear.) Mr. C. FERGUSON said it would be the best policy of this country, to draw more largely than it had yet done, on the talents and acquirements of the natives of India. Many of the Indo-Bri. tons were in office at Calcutta, and proved that they possessed full as much ability as Europeans. Mr. W. WHITAIORE supported the prayer of the petition. Sir CHARLES FORBES said, after twenty.two years' residence in India, the more he saw of his own country, the better he liked the natives of India.—(A laugh.) FOICit AIN Mr. F. BUXTON presented petitions from certain bankers, mer chants, and others in Kirby Lonsdale, and in Darlington, and from Knightsbridge, praying for the abolition of the punishment of death for torgery.--Ordered to be printed. Mr. F. BUXTON moved fora return of the number of persons executed for forgery during each of the last ten years. STAMP DUTIES. Mr. O'CONNELL presented a petition from certain persons, reporters to the newspapers in Dublin, against the proposed alteration of the stamp duties on Irish newspapers. The honourable and learned gentleman stated that many of the pe titioners were known to blm, and that he had the honour of inclu ding them amongst his most intimate friends. Ordered to be printed. Also for an account of the number of persons put to death in Ire. land by the armed police appointed by the 2d and 3d Geo. IV. In England resistance to the police was a misdemeanour, but under this act, if the people resisted the constabulary force they were put to death. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER objected to such a motion without nodce. Mr. DOHERTY rose, not only to object to the motion, but to protest against the comments by which it had been accompanied. The hon. and learned member had asserted that in Ireland whenever the people chewed resistance to the police they were put to death. This he denied ; but if it were true, it was on that account the more the duty of the hon. and learned member to bring forward those charges, in which he (Mr. Doherty) was involved, rather than con. tenting himself with placing his petitions in the hands of his noble friend. It was true that in the case to which those petitions referred lives had been lost in the conflict between the peasantry and the polies. But if the case were investigated, he knew it would be found that the conduct of the police was free from blame. There had undoubtedly been much bitter feeling between the peasantry and police ; and no man in the creation knew better than the hon. and Warned gentleman what and who it was had caused that bit. terness of feeling to exist. The hon. and learned gentleman had sent forth all sorts of misrepresentations of his conduct in Ireland. Would to GOD he would stand up in the face of the house and of the coun. try, and give him an opportunity of showing, as be could show by statement, and by proof if necessary, that chase misrepresentations weretutterly false. If lives had been lost in these unhappy conflicts, on the Lads of those be their blood who had instigated the peasantry to fruitless resistance. Mr. O'CONNELL did not know to what statements of his the hon. and learned gent. alluded. He had not btought forward the pc. tition because he found that the only error committed by the hon. and learned gent. wee favourable to the prisoner. Another reason was that a book had recently been published, giving a different account of the transactions. Mr. 0. CAVE pre nodoe that on this day week he should move a declaratory Resolution, that all children born of Negro parent s in the British possessions, after the lst of Jan. 1831. shall be free. POOR LAWS. Mr. S %DLER presented a petition from Tullamore, praying for a vision of poor laws in Ireland. As the subject would soon be brought forward, he should not now enter into It. The honourable member gave notice, that on Monday, the lit of June, he should move for leave to bring in a bill for bettering the condition of the working classes of the British empire. His attention had never been withdrawn from the subject since last &trim The honoura ble member was proceeding, when he was called to order by the Brsazza. The Petition vu ordered to lie on the table, and the notice Axed for the lit of June. komur cimigoLic _CMARITIIII. mt. o'coNN111;46TW.;;;;&i;;;;;;Ining in a bill to place the charitable bequests and &mations of Roman Catholics in Ormt Bdudn on the IMMO footing as those of Protestant Dissenters. The necessity of sash aNR stonek his as being obvious. In Ire. land the 'churches of Resnais Caddies were as secure as those of Protestants, and as well by the law. It was quite dif. fermi here. Relief was outmoded to Catholics by repealing oaths. The AMON spinet soporddess uses were, however, in force still in Engird. Tbe mumgosome was, that though all te Charities were under the peetesties of the Court of Oanowy, those of Roman Catholics were not. He did not want to alter, in their favour, any law of mortmain, but merely to place them nods: the protection of a Court of Equity. Sir C. WETHERELL said he did not rise to oppose the bring ing in of the bill. There might be certain objects of charitable do nation of which be would approve, and others in the establishment of which he could not concur. For Instance, if the measure went to sanction the introduction, or the making provision for monastic in. stitutions in England, he should oppose it. Of this be would be better able to form a judgment when the bill was before the house. The SOLICITOR-GENRRAL said he understood that by the Relief Bill the Catholic religion wu to remain as it stood when that measure passed. If the object of this Bin was in any way to' extend the establishment of it, the subject would then became one of very great importance. Though Roman Catholics were dismays, they were not considered by the Relief Bill as Protestant Dle. seaters. Until the measure was brought in, he could not be able to form a judgment as to its minutiae temleney. The A TT perstitions OßNE Y - OZNIC ypIIed SAL said he did not think the BM. tate of Su was i to °Adam eadneively. It might apply to donations ham as well es others. %tr. O'CONNELL said the iniesdneelea embank institution was eratively int:vented by the provision of the idiot bilL If the ipturisions of the bill were found objectionable, be:shield set press h this session. Leave was givat to being la the bill. MARRIAGE/ Ilf IRELAND. • Mr. O'CONNELL rose to move for leave to bring in a bill to render valid, in certain cases, the marriages of Roman Catholics in England by a Catholic Clergyman, and to abolbth in Ireland certain penalties imposed on Catholic priest for celebrating marriages be tween Catholics and Protestants. The honourable member, after stating shortly the state of the law in Ireland, as affecting the marriages of Roman Catholics with Protestants, and also of Dissenters, said that by the law as it now stood, a Roman Catholic priest, by celebrating marriage between a Protestant and a Catholic, was guilty of a capital felony, and incurred the penalty of death. There was another statute which, for the same offence, subj-eted hint to a penalty of 5001. It was supposed by some that the effect of one of these statutes was to do away with the other, but the contrary had been decided by Lord Kilwarden and the Court of King's Bench in Ireland. So that by the law as it now stood, a Roman Catholic Priest might be first hanged, and call. ed upon after to pay a fine of 5001. He proposed in this bill to do away with the penalty of death, to reduce the fine, to prevent the infliction of it except in cases where the Roman Catholic Clergyman knew that either of the parties was a Protestant, and to do away with the pe nalty altogether when both parties, at the time of marriage, declared themselves to be Catholics. Catholic clergymen were often betrayed into a marriage by the parties stating themselves to be Catholics— He knew one case in which a clergyman was so betrayed, and was, in consequence, obliged to fly the country for three years. Their object was to prosecute him ; they were bribed to do so, and they maintained themselves fir three years upon the success of their scheme. Their misconduct having been made manifest, the priest was permitted to return to his parish. There was another provision which lie wished to introduce into the bill. His poor countrymen who came over to England, from early habit preferred being mar ried by a Catholic priest. Now, such a marriage here, even between two Catholics, was invalid. Taft consequence weft that the husband might desert his wife when he pleased, that his children were bas tards, and might be thus thrown upon the parish. He proposed to introduce a clause to reader valid such a marriage, but if lie fout•.d that it was objected to in connection with the other parts of the Bill, he would not press it at present, but reserve it for future consideration. SOLICITOR-GENERAL said if he understood the hen. and learned gentleman, It was not his intention to alter the Relief Bill, to which he was desirous to give its full effect, and to extend the application of it as far as it could be extended consistently with the principle. He must, however, object to the last provision sug gestcd by him relative to the marriage of Rowan Catholics in Eng. l..nd. It might lead to very important consequences. So far as the measure related to Ireland he could not at present see any objection to it. ltappeared to him that the act of 1793 had the effect of doing away with the capital felony. Lord F. L. GOWER said he did not intend to oppose the mea. sure, or throw any impediment in the way of it, particularly as he did not understand that it was proposed to render valid the marriage of a catholic and protestant by a roman catholic priest. Sir JOHN BRIDGES said he feared that when these obsolete laws were done away with, the next step would be to introduce laws totally different. Mr. NORTH said the hon. member had no occasion for any such apprehension. By the law as it stood in Ireland, the marriage of a Protestant and Catholic was ipso facto null, and for celebrating such a marriage the penalty was death. No person would say that such a penalty was not much too heavy. It was his opinion that this law was 111 fact repealed by the Act of 1793. As the law stood, the presumption was that the Catholic priest knew what the religion of the parties was It was certainly right that the onus of proof should be thrown on the prosecution. He differed however with the lion. member in one point. The mere declaration of the parties at the time of marriage that they were Protestants ought not to be deemed sufficient. Mr. CROKEK expressed his approbation generally of the measure. The law of marriage ought not to be left in its present anomalous state. He trusted some person of competent know. ledge would being the whole subject under the consideration of the House. After a few words from Mr. TRANT, who expressed his approbation generally of the measure, leave was given to bring in the BilL EMIGRATION. On the motion of Mr. W. lloarow, leave was given to bring in a bill to enable parishes to mortgage their rates for a limited period for the purpose of permanently providing for their unemployed poor at home or abroad, and to regulate the mode of keeping parish ac counts, so far as regards the sums collected under the poor rate. CHANCERY. Sir C. WET HERELL postponed to this day week his motion relative to an additional Judge in the Court of Chancery. CANADA 81r G. MURRAY obtained leave to bring in a bill to amend the Slat of his late Majesty, and to make more effectual provision for the Government of Canada. BUM DILL. Mr. CALCRAFT moved the second reading of the beer bill.— (Hear.) Until very lately he expected the second reading would have passed without opposition. Few, he believed, were opposed to the principle, but the member for Dorset (Mr. Portman) was opposed to parts of it. The object of the bill was to make the trade in beer completely free on the taking out of a license..— Whether any qualification should be required he would not now stop to discuss; that would be better considered in the committee. The publicans objected to the bill as likely to be injurious to their interests. Nothing could be more natural or fair than this. When, however, vested interests were spoken of in such a case, as was done lon that night by an hon. alderman, the publicans, by such objec deas, only injured their own claims. There was nothing of a vested right here, for even the publicans themselves complained that their licenses were at the mercy of the magistrates. There was, no doubt, a large capital embarked in the trade, and not less than 60,000 employed in it; but the interests of the public were not to be neglected. The only object of the Government was to open that sort of competition which was likely to introduce a better article. He did not mean to reflect on the great brewers. There would be no cause of complaint if the publicans furnished the arti. cle they got from the brewers. The regular practice of publicans was to reduce it 25 or 30 per cent. It was also well known that brewers took advantage of houses which were their own to send an article which they could not dispose of if the houses were not their . The objection to this bill was, that it would have the ef. Fi r m: P o rt f l establishiag a great number of tippling houses. The house should recollect, that the power of controul over these houses would be very strong. The requiring of some qualification would in a great measure prevent any inconvenience. The publicans would still remain as they were, and they could not be injured if they took care to sell a good article. It was In a great measure by the eon- duct of the publicans of the metropol s this measure was rendered necessary, and also by the country brewers. If they were to attend to applications for indemnification in cases of this kind they could never legislate. He recollected when he was member for Rochester he was applied to to oppose the use of steam-vessels, as likely to in. jure the interests of innkeepers, but he assured them it would be petfectly useless, and they did not Ind their trade eventually injured. Mr. PORTMAN opposed the bill. The effect of it would not be to make the trade In beer completely free. The magistrates should be invested with sufficient powers to control Wander. The bill appeared to him wholly objectionable. What security had the public by this bill spinet the use of deleterious drugs ? Com. petition was the only principle relied upon. It was essential that magistrates should have control over beer houses. for the purposes of the police of the country. If the bill was an experimental one,, they might retrace their steps, but that could not be done when once the trade was epees& It would not have the effect of increasing the supply. In fact, no additional supply was called for. He felt arrebeed that it would neither reduce the plies se beer, nor be of any um to ihe fames by raisin: et" pries Though be did set he& spew palm= as ha ving a semi still where so large a was enierked, it net le be hampered with, unless sew advamege was math* to odes hem it. He hand the mweseell:mweeinemes wield attend the meson as were hum se have tabs plow he the elder counties. Oa these pounds Masai we as so emmisset that the Bill be seed a emend time that day six moths. Mr. DI SON ceded the amendment. Be did not trade in Msk it weld& mho on, Imsedt en the public to open the Mr. BENNET supported the bill. The takind o o n. if 3,500,0001. of taxes on beer most greatly Increase the column If the public 'brewer would befbre compete with the private ' wer who paid no duty, his power of competition must thus be greatly Increased, and be would gain In this way what be might lose by a reduction in the value of public houses. To talk of vested rights in the case of publican was quite abeurd.Now with respect to the public—lt would be a gnat benefit to the labouring classes that they could go to a beer house and take their needs in place of visiting the kitchen of a public house, than which nothing could be more injurious to morale. The bill would, In hie tides, be productive of the best consequence both as es Ingethement in the quality of the article and in the habits of the pis" by leading them to the more ge. nerd see of a wholesome hewn. In plate of gin. He should pre. far, however, the seinsties of the welt duty to that on beer. They meet reduce the taus en priestly' industry, and he trusted this the Mgt undo &gnat dad more would be done by ministers. Mr. lIIATIIOO, said he preferred a reduction of the tax on base to that es emit. The beer tax amounted to a penny a pet, and the ask ten so seeneddeg sheet a farthing. The poor would not brew sift ft the is IS nth were 'spaded. Am erg ether chum. stenos whith "MY wpm than was the and es. ran 1 101 . ft O& The Pliwelpel reuse why he ap. ren d of the gen gasohol it would de awes with the pre. sent thenspely. It was ridknlens se lath of in to morals.— How mild it Injure ma i mere to get beer at houses in a viler than at one ; but these eal, bow wee it more injurious to morals to drink a good than a bad beverage ?—(Hear.) To t morals in such a case was nonsense. There wa s . too great an iLd.. nation manifested on many occasions to interfere with the enjoy meets and the amusements of the lower classes. lie thought would be an improvement if some qualification were required for obtaining a license. Mr. SADLER raid he objected to the measure in toto fisenetbing more effectual should be done towards relieve the general distress which now existed. Ihe honoutabic get.: tieman eulogised the conduct of the magistracy in the MOAN,. ment and superintendence of public houses. By the p r ,.. sent system, order and regularity was maintained, and every individual permitted to open a public house found peotection in his trade. The relief to the country by the proposed mea sure would be no relief at all. The repeal of the malt duty alone would have been beneficial to the poorer classes. Th.: repeal of the beer duty would do no good. He could not sec how the order and decency of society could be kept up by the in. tended alteration. lie considered the operation of the bill nothing more nor less than a bonus to tipplers. When the sale of beer de. pended upon the Excise it became a mere fiscal concern. There was no security against the nuisances this new trade would produce in almost every street. He knew that thousands and tens of thousands would be victims to this measure. Numbers would be ruined by this enactment, and their families exposed to want. The hon. mem. ber supported the amendment. Mr. F. BUXTON had always considered the honourable mom. ber for Newark an advocate for the interests of the poor. How that honourable member could advocate the repeal of the malt tax rather than the beer tax, be really could not understand. By the repeal of the malt tax, the rich would be relieved to die amount of silty-five per cent. and the poor not at all. The lace, by the repeal of the malt duty, woula fall heavily indeed upon the poor, and lightly on the rich. He admitted that the monopoly et: the brewers would go when the bill passed, but their skill and capital would enable them to maintain an advantage in compe. tition. The publican's Interest was not a vested interest, but his peculiar condition ought to be favourably considered. His hope was that the house when they came into committee would not lose sight of what was due to the publican._ He thought that the public interest did not r eq uire beer be consumed on the premises of the seller. They had pro. wised to break the fall of the publican, and treat him le. dead'', consequently they ought to protect, as far as th e y could, the interest of that body. He had no doubt there would be sonic indulgence extended to them. 'I he Government had certainly told the publicans, on a former occasion, that the law would not be altered. The Honourable Member for the Uni versity of Oxford was two years modifying his plan, and was not that a proof that Government did not mean to open the trade ? He was not desirous of preserving the monopoly of the brewers. Let it go with the licensing 9 stem, but if the brewers supplied the pub. lie with the best and the cheapest beverage, they would sustain no injury by opening the trade. Sir C. BURRELL opposed the bill. He could not allow thee the poor man would b. served by the repeal of the beer tax. The brewers would derive the advantage. The repeal of the malt duty would have been a bmefit to the people. Mr. 111ABERLY admitted that the publicans had no vested in. tercet in the trade, but this was a question of property. and they ought to inquire whether the publicans had been induced to embark their capital by the proceedings of that house. It had been de. cided in a Committee of that House, that the beer trade was to remain restricted. Publicans had no claim, and the question was. could they do anything fur them ? He thought they could. Why could they not give a bounty to the publicans ? Why not give them the exclusive right, for a limited time, of selling beer on 11... premises ? The hon. member threw out that hint, in the hope that the Chancellor of the Exchequer would take it into his consideration. Mr. CALVERT said it was not his intention to detain the house but a few moments. He concurred in all that had fallen Iron. the hon. member for Weymouth. He should support the mea sure of the right bon. gentleman, but his hope was that he should see the publicans treated with indulgence, and that they would find themselves in a better condition when the bill came out of the committee than they expected. A great deal bad been said about vested interests, but he denied that the publicans in their peti. Lions bad ever said they had a vested Interest. The hon. membet sat down, reserving his right to make the bill what it ought to be in the committee. Mr. C. BARCLAY said he was a little jealous of the opposition given to the bill by gentlemen who had expressed their desire to have the malt duty repealed. The malt tax was about a half. penny in every quart of beer; the beer tax was one penny in the quart. In the last year, of 29,000,000 quarters of malt consumed, the private brewers consumed only 4,000,000, a proof that private brewing was not to be relied on in point of consumption. He gave the measure his decided support. The opinions he expressed were not new. If hon. members referred to the Beer Committee o: 1817, they would find he reprobated the system of licensing. He predicted that the evil would fall on the brewers and victuallers,and the result had verified his prediction. Lord MILTON considered the question with reference to the peat system of finance. He should oppose the second reading art the bill. His hon. friend, the member for Weymouth, had let them into the secret. The hon. member had said the brewer's monopoly would be done away, but the skill and capital of the brewers would always secure their interest. That was the real secret of the bill. Mr. HOLDSWORTH pointed out disorder which had occurred in Devonshire in the cider houses, and described those houses to have produced great trouble to the magistracy. With regard to the principle at the end of the bill, which mixed up the jurisdiction of county magistrates with the jurisdiction of borough and district ma. gistrates, he gave it his decided opposition. Lord G. SOMERSET considered the objection made by the last hon. speaker a strong support to the bill. The hon. gentleman had said that all the disorder in the cider shops of Devon had arisen from want of police regulation ; now that regulation was to be found in the bill Wore the house. The speech of the noble lord, the member for Yorkshire, was opposed to the conduct of ministers, in not taking of the malt tax rather than opening the beer trade.— The noble lord had not applied himself to the question, whet!!tr freedom in the beer trade was not beneficial to the country. He supported tile bill from a knowledge of the situation in which •he country stood. Mr. BROUGHAM said that some six or seven years ago he had lotroduced a bill somewhat similar to the present. The only difference was, that he wished to restrict the consumption of beer upon the premises. His own opinion was then clear and distinct upon the subject, and if he had yielded, it was only in deference of the prevailing opinion of the house. He now con sidered that the present bill would be of great advantage to the agriculturist, that competition would be intledaced, that a b and better beverage than at present existed would be pro cured, that the public would be bettered by the proposed plan. H: did not find fault with the brewer, but this measure would keep the publican in check, and there again do good. The e. moral police" o: the country, to borrow the phrase of the boo. member for Newark, and good beer woulticontend with bad gin. He might be considered as a visionary upon this subject ; but when he stated the fact within his knowled , he felt fully inclined to support the Bill now under consid er ation. The tendency of the people of this awn try was to prefer beer to gin. He would give his hearty sup. port to the present bUL It would tend to destroy the present licensing spam, and, even so far, would confer a great be. nefit on the people. The repeal of the malt tax would do good to the tick ; but the repeal of the beer tax would confer a blessing on the poor. It did great honour to the brewers that they now so handsomely come forward, and after he bad diluted them, they held together with the publican, and threw on: his bill. Ile congratulat his majesty:a ministers, that under hap pier auspices they had,better suereoaod and that brewers,like °elms. were in a happier state of legislation and impovement. Serenity' were were then ordered to withdraw, when a divisien took place i For the Second Reading 248 Fee the Amendment Majority .. 217 The other Orders of tbe Day were that disposed of, and the hot.: adjourned at a Quarter to Two o'Clock. M4JORITY AND MINORITY On Mr. Henne's modon--" Thu have be given to bring is a all to revive, emend, and render perpetual, the set 67 Geo. 111. c 45, to continue every person in °See at the demise of the So vereign, until removed or discharge! d therefrom by the succee.i. ing King or Queen of this Realm.' MAJORITY. Altiserp, Lord Inglis, Sir R. H. Wood. J. Brougham. H. Moberly, J. TILLIULS. Dawson, A. O'Connell, D. Mame, J. Graben, Sir J. Tbeensen, P. Warburton, H. Hobbes's,. J. C. Trani. W. H. MINORITY. Harries. Rt. Hoe. C. =Liam Croker. J. W. Maroon. G. R. Helms, W. Lewis, F. Gilbert. A Murray. Sir G. &saint, air J. Goulbws, Itt.Hoo.H.Ptaota, J. MINORITY ON THE BEER BILL Bell, M. Hosthesto, IL R. Trite. C. K. Burrell. Mr C. M. Hesthroto. Sir W. Vyvyso, &r R. R. panda, Hodgson, IL A. West FR. Marquis logi* Mr R. H. Weils. J. Drake. t T. Tuck, L. Williams, 0. Drako ir W. T. limatebben, Sr B. Wiliam, T. P. Masa i Lord Willoughby, H Foley, I.Rifirked, W. susixas.. Preeemale. Sr T. M. Whir, 11. T. Dieldeme, W. Genlee, 1L libtlterpo, CeL Portman, R. B. • M. .~~ .. . .