Star. — London, England, 1830-06-05 00:00:00

NZ , .iIBER OF STE.4 I I-VESSELS IN FRANCE, AMERICA, 4e. Tit , . first steam-vessel known In France was in 18111, when an old Leith steam-boat, named the Rob Roy, was purchased by the Ferret' Government to run as a mail-packet between Calais and Dover r it was afterwards thoroughly repaired by Monsieur de Rheum. ;out named the Henri Quatre ; since which fourothers have been built by the same engineer, the machinery being previously obtained from England. The Rob Roy is still running between Doter and Calais as a mail-packet. At Havre and Rouen there are clx ; at Bordeaux two ; one at Lyons, and one at lllarseilles, which runs between that port, Leghorn, and Genoa. Besides these there are 12 Government steam-vessels, and five nearly ready to be Lunched at Toulon ; the greater part of them arc now armed, and form a division of the expedition against Algiers ; they are to run as mail-packets between that city and the port of Toulon, as soon as the army has landed. In 1820 a cast-iron steam-boat went from London up the Seine to Paris. as a company was then about to be formed to keep up a regular communication by water between the two capitals ; but, in consequence of the tide in the river Seine only running two mile, above Rouen, and the shallowness of water, that under. taking was found to be impracticable, and It was consequently abandoned. There are, however, two small steam-boats that ply between Paris, Rouen, and Havre, during the summer reason, twice a week, and one between Paris, St. Cloud, and St. Germain, on Sundays and fele days ; they are obliged to have their paddles astern, instead of the larboard and starboard, as in the regular steam-vessels, in consequence of the want of a sufficient draught of water, and the rapidity of the current, which also prevents there being any pleasure-boats on that river near the capital. The canal de l'Ourcq, a short dirtance outside the Barriere St. Martin, is the only place where the Parisians can enjoy an aquatic excursion. in Russia there arc two steam-boats; on the Rhine six; and one in Holland. In Spain there is one, formerly the Royal George, which belonged to Sir John Doyle, and left, London in 1823, being the first that ever appeared in that country ; it now plies be tween Seville, Cadiz, Gibraltar, Malaga, and Carthagena ; two in Italy ; four in Greece ; and two belonging to the Pacha of Egypt. At Calcutta there are two—the Enterprise, which left London three years ago, being the first attempt that was ever made by steam, and which she performed in less than three months, and the Irra waddy, built at Calcutta of teakwood. In the United States of America, in 1812, there were 170 steam-vessels, generally of very small dimensions; since which period, according to the last returns made to Congress, up to 1829, they have increased to 320, employing upwards of 2,000 men. By this means a continual intercourse is kept up between Philadelphia, New York, Boston, Washington, &c. at extremely moderate ch.,rges. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS-FRIDAY. Several petitions were presented against the punishment of death for forgery. Mr. White presented at the bar a copy of the evidence respecting the Admiralty Court of Ireland. The Duke of RICHMOND presented a petition from the chemists and Druggists of Norfolk, against stamps on medicines. Lord CALTHORPE presented a petition from Birmingham, against the Birmingham Free Grammar School Bill. NZ JONAH HAZIHNOTON. The Earl of WESTMORELAND presented a petition from Sir Jonah Barrington, praying to be allowed to be heard by counsel and witnesses in justification of his conduct. The noble earl bore testi. mony to the honour and honesty of the petitioner. The Duke of WELLINGTON, in rising to bring forward a mo. tion respecting the Message of the House of Commons, relating to Sir Jonah Barrington, went through the circumstances of the case, observing, that on w hatever foundation the decision of the House of Commons was founded, it was fit that their Lordships should have a solemn inquiry of their own. He submitted that their lordships should comply with the prayer of the petition, by examining wit nesses at the bar. He therefore moved that the further considera tion of the subject be postponed to Monday se'nnight, and that the Attorney-General be directed to attend at the bar on that day, which was agreed to. The Marquis of LANSDOWN presented a petition from a per son named Catden, stating that he had for several years attended to the mode of burial in different parts of Europe, and that he pro posed to erect a cemetery for the dead, as the best mode of burial, and praying for permission to carry his object into effect. The noble marquis presented three petitions fro.o Ireland against an in crease of duty on spirits ; two from the county of Meath, against the vestry bill ; another from the same place, praying for an altera tion in the tithe system ; from Kerry and Dublin, against the pro. posed increase of duties on newspapers. The Marquis of AYLESBURY presented a petition from Marl borough, in favour of the Watch and Lighting Bill. DRAINAGE OF BOGS-IRELAND. The Marquis of DOWNSHIRE having moved that the second reading of the Drainage Bogs (Ireland) Bill should be postponed to Tuesday next, The Earl of WICKLOW proposed, that it be deferred until the next session, as it contained clauses highly objectionable. The Marquis of DOWNSH IRE observed that, as the noble earl had no objection to the principle of the bill, he would allow it to be read a second time on Tuesday, and be committed. After going through the committee, he would have no objection to let it stand over to the next session. The Earl of DARNLEY pressed the second reading of the bill ; ' if there were any deficiences in it, they might be remedied in the committee. The Duke of RICHMOND hoped that the noble marquis (Downshire) would withdraw the bill for the present, for it certainly contained clauses highly objectionable. The Marquis of LANSDOWN supported the second reading, though he agreed with the noble duke that it contained obnoxious clauses ; still as the object of it was to give employment to the poor, is d_served the consideration of the house. Lord IrHARNCLIFFE took that opportunity of stating that the Howe of Commons went too far relating to money bills • they carried to such an extent, as not to allow this house to int roduce a penal ',Luse in any bill. He had no hesitation in saying that they tarried it on to an inconvenient extent ; it increased their own business, and it was in a great measure the cause of having so many bills sent up to their lordships' house so late in the session, that they could not be considered by their lordships. He begged to say, that he had it in contemplation to bring forward a motion upon the subject. The order fur the second reading of the bill was then dis charged. Earl GREY presented petitions from Cashel and Clonmcl, against the proposed increase of duty on stamps is Ireland. A message from the Commons brought up the Abolition of Fees Bill, and several private Bills. The order of the day for the examination of witnesses on the East Retford Bill was then read, and Counsel proceeded to examine wit iiesaes.—The House then adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS-FRIDAY. 111r.W. DUNDAS presented a 'petition from certain writers of Edinburgh, against the Scotch Judicature Bill. ENGLISH OPERA-HOUSE. • Mr. A. ELLIS presented a petition from Mr. Arnold, complain. ins of the uncertainty which prevailed respecting the opening of a street front Waterloo-bridge towards Holborn. The petitioner com plained that he was at a leas what to do with certain property which he possessed in the vicinity of the Strand, where the Etiglish Opera House stood, in consequence of reports which reached him, and for which there was some ground, that government had some intention of opening a road over the ground in question. The hon. member wished to ascertain from the noble lord at the head of the office of Woods and Forests, what were the intentions of government on this subject. Lord LOWTHER said that government were not prepared to make any advances for this purpose. The improvements which bad been undertaken by the Office of Woods and Forests were upon grounds belonging to the Crown, and bethought if the road in ques tion were considered necessary, it was the business of private indi viduals to undertake It. Mr. HOBHOUSE, Mr. J. WOOD, and Mr. WARBURTON, spoke in favour of the new street, which they considered absolutely neeesaary for the convenience of a rest portion of the metropolis. Dlr. A. ELLIS presented a pet ti ion from Mr. Haydon, the his torical painter, praying encouragement foe the fins arts Mr. WYNN reported from the committee on the Clyde Naviga tion Appeal, that one of the members (Mr. O'Connell) bad not this morning attended, as ordered by the house, as a member of that committee. Air. O'CONNELL said, be bad been up to so late an hour, that he was not able to get up in time; but he regretted that the com. mittee had suffered any inconvenience in consequence of bis absence . On the motion of Mr. WYNN, it was moved that Mr. O'Connell be excused. On the motion of Mr. Baowittow, returns were ordered of the quantity of linen yarn manufactured in Ireland sines 1823. Mr. C. CALVERT presented a petition from St. Olave's, South. wark, against the bill for removing poor Irish Sir R. WILSON supported the petition. re lici rb;erved that if the hon. member for Limerick were to have his attention drawn to this petition, he would find in it another proof that something must be done for the Irish poor. Mr. 11. GRATTAN said that this bill was Intolerable. If this bill were to be persisted in, to smd back the poor of Ireland, then lie should feel it his duty to Wag in a bill to send back the rich. all Mr. DOHERTY compl a ined Mat reports had been circulated in I tels.;d to the effect, that by this bill Irish vagrants ware enabled to be whipped, merely because they were Irishmen. He believed there was no such provision in the bill, and he wished the impression removed. Lord STANLEY said there was no foundation for the report. Mr. O'CONNELL said the legal effect of this bill would be, however unintentionally, to revive the practice of whipping vagrants. Mr. LITTI.ETON thought the bill to which the petition refer red could not be passed with convenience this session. Mr. J. GRATTAN would oppose the bill in every stage, unless it contained a provision for the support of the Irish poor. Mr. G. DAWSON wished to have a provision in the bill giving a discretionary power to parochial authorities to relieve Irish paupers. After some observations from Sir G. Philipps Mr. Estcourt, and Mr. R. Palmer, the petition w as l a id on t h e table. MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS. The usual messengers from the Lords brought up some bills, which were laid on the table. Mr. J. WOOD presented a petition from the Co-operative So ciety of Liverpool, complaining of monopolies, particularly that in the East India trade ; and a petition was presented fir Mr. Wood from a parish in Chester, against the bill for altering the jurisdic tion of that county ; one from Bolton, in favour of the Jews; and one from the cotton spinners in Preston, praying ti.st the rates of wages should be left free. Lord BELGRAVE presented a petition from the bankers and merchants of Chester, against the East India monopoly. Lord KILLEEN presented a petition from Kilkenny. against the increased duty on Irish newspapers. Col. WILSON gave notice that on Monday, or the next vacant day, he should move a resolution to clear up the doubts which ex isted as to the right of Jews to hold landed property. SUTTEES. On the motion of Mr. S. NVoart.Ex, copies were ordered of cer tain communications issued by the authorities in India, respecting the burning of Indian widows. 111 r. F. BUXTON was glad this abominable practice was now likely to be put an end to altogether, and in a great degree this was owing to the energy of the present Oovernor General. Sir 31. W. ItIDLEY and Mr. TRANT spoke to a like effect, which ended the conversation on this matter. Lord S I'ANLEY presented s petition from a society in Lan cashire, complaining of the increasing practice of dram-drinking, and praying that no additional facilities should be given to this per nicious practice. Mr. BRIGHT wished to know if it was the intention of the Chimerllor of the Exchequer to proceed to-night with the Beer Bill? The Right hon. gentleman said his present intention was to pro ceed with the supply, and, unless it was too late, afterwards to take up the beer bill. In answer to a question from Mr. J. Wool), the Chancellor of the Exchequer said he should put off the building of churches bill to Monday. Mr. O'CONNELL presented a petition from Dublin against abuses of charities; from Carljw, against the corporation of that borough, and of malversation of the funds of the corporation. Lord TULLAMORE at some length defended the corporation, and denied the misapplication of their funds. Laid on the table. On the motion of Mr. O'CONNELL, returns were ordered of the quantity of Spirits imported from Guernsey and Jersey since 1826. On the question of Mr. HUME, returns were ordered of the se veral sums paid by government to the Canada Company. SUPPLY.—FOUR ♦ND ♦ HALF Pea CENT. DUTIES. On the motion of going into a Committee of Supply, Sir J. GRAHAM said, that previously to going into *discussion of his proposition respecting the Royal prerogative of importing all articles free of duty, he was willing to make a proposal to his Ma jetty's ministers, namely, that if they pledged themselves to bring in a bill to limit the Royal prerogative, particularly with regard to the four and a half per unt. duties, and if he received an affirmative answer, he should leave the matter in the hands of Government, with the understanding that this measure, if they were to have one, was to be introduced in time to pass this session. Sir R. PEEL said it was the intention of his right hon. friend in the course of the debate to state the intention of government, which was to place the royal prerogative with regard to those duties under the control of parliament. Ile wished, however, to remind the house that these duties were never applied to the private pur. poses of the Crown, but had always been expended on public ob. jects, and were different In their nature from all others, as they were payable in kind and not in money. Sir J. GRAHAM said he should riot under those circumstances press his motion, and bore testimony to the conduct of ministers in meeting the wishes of the country so voluntarily. Mr. ROBERTSON wished to have a provision in the measure, to prevent colonial governments from trading on their own account. Mr. HUSKISSON said that persons might purchase the four and a half per cent. sugars at what was termed the long price ; that is, paying the dudes upon them. Now those persons might go the next day to the Customs and demand a drawback, the Customs not hav ing, at the same time, obtained any advantage from the importation of these sugars. This was an inconvenience. It would therefore be wise and proper to preserve the privileges of the crown, but at the same time to limit the importation of articles tb those used by the sovereign. Sir C. WETHERF:LL was opposed to any interference with the privileges of the crown with respect to the importation of articles free of expense. The crown had as much right to import those su. gars under the four and a half per cent. duties, as the carriage of the sovereign was, by right, free of toll upon his own roads. Mr. BRIGHT said he should look with jealousy upon any bill introduced upon this subject, as he feared it might revive things that were in existence, but were allowed through courtesy. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that the proposed bill would by no means encroach upon the prougative of the Crown. Mr. BARING observed that the object of the bill was to prevent the prerogative of the Crown from being increased, at the expense of the general Interest of the public. Sir R. PEEL said that the true friends of the prerogative of the Crown were those who were not anxious to push that prerogative too far. He thought be was maintaining the true interests of the Crown by checking its abuses. Mr. BROUGHAM also thought that the best way to preserve the true privilege of the Crown, was by cramping its power to abuse its rights. Mr. 111:316 said that abuses had taken place arising out of those privileges, and he thought that the Chancellor of the Exchequer ought to pay back the money paid in c onseq uence of those abuses._ He was certainly favourable to the proposed bill. WATS ♦ND WEANS. Upon the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHE QUER, the house resolved itself into a committee of Ways and Means, when it was resolved that four millions be granted to his Majesty out of the Consolidated Fund, towards meeting the supply for the year 1830. The house then resumed. $U PPLY. On the motion of Mi. R.liiwsorr , the House resolved itself into a Committee of Supply. Upon the motion that 19,00 W. be granted to his Majesty, to meet the extraordinary expecses of the Mint, relative to gold and silver coin, Dlr. HERRIES, in reply to the hon. member for Aberdeen, said that the profits that had arisen upon the silver coinage had gone to meet the expenses attendant upon the gold coinage. He added that the Government thought it advisable to open the Mint as much as possible to individual i:nporters of bullion, and by doing so they took the monopoly in the purchase of bullion trom the Bank of England. Under the present Act, the individual merchant gained an advantage of one-half per cent. for gold and silver Imported by him, more than he did formerly. Mr. BARING did not think that there was much in what the right hon. gentleman had stated to the house. Still the public paid this increased per tentage. He denied that the Bank had any mo nopoly in the purchase of bullion. The relative value of the silver coinage had been changed. and a greater number of coins formed out of a given quantity of silver. He did not see the policy of this proceeding. Mr. HERRIES begged to observe, he had reason to believe that a rumour which had gone abroad relative to the fabrication of a spurious species of silver coin in another country, and imported into this, was incorrect ; foe all the coins brought to the Mint to be tried were found to have been coined there. Mr. HUSHISSON thought that greater encouragement should be given to the South American trade in bullion. Sir 0. COCKBURN said that the question of freight upon vessels trading with South America was under consideration. Mr. Alderman THOMPSON said that he was glad to hear that the question of freight was under the consideration of government. Mr. MABERLY thought that if a merchant wished to employ a ship of war to convey his bullion front South America, he bad a right to pay a proper freightage, and that freightage ought to go into the public purse.—(Hear.) Mr. HUME also thought that a reasonable freigh age ought to be charged on bullion coming from South America. He also thought that the trade ought to be extended, and not confined to some few favoured individuals.—The motion was agreed to. £l,OOO were voted for expences caused by prosecutions relative to the coinage of this country. Upon the motion that 15,0001. be granted to his Majesty to de. fray the expenses of the charges relative to the prosecutions con. sequent upon the coinage of the country, Mr. R. GORDON complained of the great increase in the law expenses relative to this subject. He condemned the number of barristers that were employed in coin prosecutions. He also thought that prosecutions in which the Attorney. General had been engaged In, might be termed persecutions. Mr. DAWSON maid that the law expenses in this case were ex. penses incurred at the instance of the secretary of state for the home department.lt wu due to the law officers:of the crown to say that, the rum paid to them by the solicitor to the treasury, were much smaller than those paid by priva.e individuals. The ATTORNEr-GLNER AL sail that it cost public bodies much mere for prosecutions than it did the government. It wad supposed, that the emoluments of the Attorney and t3olkitor.Ge. neral would be very great upon the demise of the Crown. He had taken the amble to inquire into the subject, and he bad ascertained that the extent of the number of patents that would fall into disuse by the demise of the Crown would be 200. Now the fees derivable upon each of these to the Attorney and Solichor.Generals would be but about five guineas. He thought it was unfair in the hon. gent. to attack him in the way he did, by calling the prosecutions in which be had been engaged persecutions. Mr. GORDON said that be should ever consider these prosecu. dons persecutions. His (Mr. Gordon's) constituents and the coun try cui,Nidcred them in the same light. Mr. I). W. HARVEY said that, if tho emoluments of the At torney-General were rot ns runt as tiny were represented, then were the public very mute ti.cel%ed upon the subject. There were many cases in which the Attorney-1 ener..l did nothing, and yet he got his fees, such was the case in tiling bills in Chancery with respect to charitable institutions ; for talthough the Attorney-General's name was used, be never appeared in that Court. The ATTORNLY-GENERAL said he did nothing more in 1 this instance than was done by his predecessor, and he continued to preserve his privileges in his own hands. Now he had seen a cir- 1 cube letter, addressed to the trustees of certain charitable institu. tions, relative to the funds of the charity, and inviting them to in. quire and account for those funds; or if not, a bill would be filed in Chancery against them. Now this was stated to be done by the authority of the Attorney General. Now he denied that h e gave any authority for any such letter. Mr. D. HARVEY said that all who were in the habit of hearing I the learned gent. would suppose that he still felt himself in a Court of Law, and not in the House of Commons. He avowed himself the author of the letter in question, and if the hon. and learned gent. would act with the character of a man, lie must admit the propriety of it. The letter was calculated to do a general good, but he denied that he ever put to the amount of Os. hid. in his pocket by it. The Ironmongers' Company had 100,0001. for the redcmp. don of slaves on the coast of Barbary, but, happily ter the cause of freedom, there were no slaves on that coast. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL observed th.tt the Ironmongers' Company bad acted very properly throughout; they allowed that money to accumulate, because they knew not to what object they should apply it. The hon. and learned member advctted to some observations which fell from the member for Colchester tespecting the profits of the °Meteor Attorney and Solicitor-General, observing that he should derive twice as much advantage by private business as he had derived from Crown business for the time he was occupied with It. 1 1 Alderman THOMPSON defended the Ironmongers' Company from the Imputations east on them by the member tor Colchester. That company observed the strictest economy in the management of the funds in question. Mr.HUME observed that it was a matter of reproach to this coun. try that the officers of the crown never looked after these charities. The country was much indebted to the hon. member for Colchester for what he had done in that respect. He (Mr. H.) did not care whe. ther the object of his hon. friend was to bring grist to his own mill, as insinuated by the Solicitor-General. The hon. member then observed that the prosecution of the press was a persecution, and he was happy to perceive that no member in that house had applauded such persecution. He was sorry to see the Attorney-General, who heretofore had supported liberal opinions, become a persecutor when he went to the other side of the house. it must be a consolation to him to see the object of his persecution reduced to ruin. He begged to know if the expenses of persecuting for the libels on the Lord Chancellor were included in the item before the house. The ATT( 'RKEY-GRNERAL replied, that the expenses for these prosecutions were included in the item before the house. fir. 1). W. HARVEY observed, that the amount of public cha rity misapplied throughout the country was not less than two mil lions, and whoever inquired tato them and caused them to he pro. perly applied,did an act of benevolence for shich the country should be grateful. Sir E. KNATCHBULL should oppose the vote, if the charges for the prosecution on account of Lord Lyndhutst was included. Sir C. WETHERELL would move that the vote should be :e -duced by so much as that prosecution cost, sine: the Attorney-Ge. neral thought proper to file an ex-officio information after Lord Lyndhurst had declined to prosecute. He (Sir Charles) had a bill ready to bring forward respecting ex-officio informations, and should bring it forward on a future occason. (Loud cheers.) The ATTORNEY-GENERAL complained of being tailed a n in committee without previous notice, to explain his conduct.t— -(No, no !) He submitted that • question of that kind was raised. —(No, no !) The learned gentleman then proceeded to say, that the grounds of opposing these expenses were, that the prosecution was unconstitutional, and he submitted that a committee was not the proper place to discuss such a question. The principle and merits of these prosecutions had been discussed on a former occasion in the house ; with respect to the prosecution in question, he (Sir James) met no person In or out of the house who denied that the libel on the Lord Chancellor should be prosecuted ; but there were some gentlemen who thought that there should be no prosecu tions for libels; other gentlemen were of opi n i on t h at there s ho u ld no ex-officio prosecutions; that might be right ; but as long as they were allowed by the constitution, he did not see why in this in. they were objectionable. Mr. BARING rose to order. The Attorney-General was not called on to defend these prosecutions. The question was should these expenses be allowed ? Mr. BROUGHAM concurred with the hon. member who spoke last. The Attorney-General was not called on to enter into his defence. The only question which he was required to explain was, why he took up the prosecution for th e lib e l on t h e L or d Chan cellor after that noble personage had himself declined to prosecute. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL then observed that he thought it a libel of such a gross nature as ought to be publicly prosecuted. When high officers were accused of corruption, it was a fit occasion for prosecution. Sir E. KNATCHBULL did not see how the Attorney- General could complain of having been taken by surprise by so humble an individual as himself, All he bad asked was, if the public should pay for all thoee prosecutions. It was a question of great importance to the house to know whether the individuals 11- belled or the public should pay for them; for if the latter should pay, it might be an inducement to Attornies General to prosecute. lie (Sir Edward) wished to know if any other charges for ex-officlos were included in those estimates. The ATTORNEY-GENBRAL observed that the expenses for all the ex-olficio Informations were included. Mr. O'CONNELL hoped that Sir C7fietherell would persevere in his motion, not because the ex-otficio was too harsh, but because the prosecution was put in a proper train by the Lord Chancellor, and there was no instance on record of an ex-officio having been filed after such a proceeding; it was a double prosecution. He (Mr. O'Connell) cared not whether the opinions of Mr. Alexander were liberal or not ; it was the principle he objected to. Sir R. PEEL observed that, if the house thought with the hon. member for Clare, that the prosecutions were vindictive, the house should show their sense of it by refusing the expense. Would the house by this indirect means fix a censure on the Lord Chancellor and the Attorney General, by refusing an item of 1001? The At. toiney.General had been very unfairly dealt with this night; he was called on without previous notice to defend his conduct with respect to these prosecutions. He (Sir B.) never recollected any gentleman being placed in such a situation as the Attorney-General bad been this night. What he (bir R.) should propose was, that before the report was !nought up, the facts of the case should be laid before them, and also a statement to show whether it was customary for the public to pay for public prosecutions. Mr. SADLER maintained that the most important constitutional questions ought to be discussed on incidental questions. Sir C. WETHERELL raid he was glad that this whole qua don was likely soon to be publicly discussed ; but he had received no satisfactory answer to his question, namely, the ground upon which the Attorney-General took up a prosecution, which had been abandoned by the Lord Chancellor. Sir B. PEEL never meant to say that constitutional questions should not be discussed in Committees, or on incidental grounds. Mr. BRIGHT condemned the conduct of the Attorney. General, which be thought unconstitutional and oppressive. The vote were then agreed to, as were the following :-- £107,000 for supporting convicts at home and at Bermuda. n 6,000 for the support of captured negroes. 118,700 for paying the expenses of commissioners for suppressing slavery. 128.000 for defraying the expenses of missions to the New States of South America. .C 16,000 for defraying the expenses of the Law Commissioners. At the request of Mr. HUME, this last vote was withdrawn. The house resumed, and the report was ordered to be brought up on Monday. Sit E. PEEL said he should bring forward the forgery bill on Monday. /Milt BILL. On the question of going into a committee on the beer bill, iIr.BRIOHT mid the house was not yet in possession of the views of government withnprd to those melee arrangements which af fected beer and malt; unless the house were determined to act in they shield pass this bill with ou t further information. tr:r an aed e, to knew distinctly what were the extent oldie reductions in the excise duties on malt. _ The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the excise regulations formed part of a bill sot them before the house, and he thought it better to reserve the dismission until that bill were before the house. In answer to a question from Sir M. W. RIDLEY, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, what he intended was, to have beer licenses obtained from the excise ; but when a house was to sell spirits as well as beet, then a magistrates license, as at present, would be requisite. The house then resolved into committee on the bill, with an un• demanding that the clauses were to be agreed to pro forwa, and the discussion and division to take place upon btinging up the report. Sir T. FRREMANTIJE moved that a clause be inserted in thv bill, obliging persons in the country, anxious to obtain a license to sell beer, to fix his name and address upon the churelt•doots for three Sundays. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he e, , ild agree with the proposition. The House divided, when the numbers were_ For the clause Against it— 72 Majority against the clause....---. —3O The r:p6rt was ord. n d to be received on Thursday. —The otter orders of the day were then disposed of, and the House adjoutnt,l a Quat.er.past Three &Clock this morning. THE CURRENCY QUESTION. TO EDWARD D. DAVENPORT, ESQ. FLORENCE, May 17, 1830. St rt,—Having seen in the English newsp aper , that you have given notice in the House of C ommons of a motion to renew or " restore silver as the st an d ard ein rency," I beg leave to communicate to yo u my L uau ledge on the subject, derived, not only from my argils'!' tance with the state of the currency in continental man tries, but also from the experience of a near connection who, upwards of sixty years ago, was himself person:ilk engaged in great transactions in Holland relating to coinage of gold. You are aware, I presume, that silver is the standard currency—that is, the legal tender of money, in evert Christian country in Europe, except in Great Britain that in all those countries it is lawful to take a premium for gold coin, or sell it at a discount ; and that an nee.. for or against gold, is as common as is a rise or fall nt any mercantile goods. Consequently, Great Britain is the only country %%here gold coin can be obtained without any premium whatevei In plain terms, the Bank of England is the only silo' in Europe where gold coin must be given at prime cost, a, long as a Bank note can be presented to it. As long a> the issues of the Bank paper were confined, (as before the late French war), and as long as there were no enorntou. capitals in the hands of Exchange dealers, (mercantil, people, who deal in coin, and in the arbitration of Ex change by bills of exchange of all trading nations), they, was not any great danger of the Bank of England being intluenct d in its issues of paper by a demand for gold coin. Now, however, the case is reversed; and I have no hesitation in saying, that much of the distress in Great Britain arises from our having gold as the standard currency. It is Sir, within your walls, a common expression et several most intelligent men, and, among others, I sink out Mr. HUSK MON, "let us have no tampering vi the currency." I grant to Mr. HUSK ISSON great knee ledge of mercantile affairs ; many just notions on political economy ; but a very great want of information on the history of the coinage of England and foreign countries, appears to me to be most evident in him, and in the famed Report of the Committee on the Bullion Question Of that report I shall give you an instance. The evidence of a mercantile gentleman of London Mated that there was little difference in the expence of exporting gold or silver ; and this was taken up as a fact established by Mr. Ricardo, his follower, Mr . WCulloch, the author, and several supporters of a gold stands d. Now, Sir, there is not an Exchange broke: in any foreign country who will not instantly declare that the expense of the transport of gold and silver coin is in the compounded ratio of the bulk and weight—gold is to silver English coin, in weight, as the ratio of 1 to I-11 nearly ; in bulk, as 1 to 22, perhaps. That is, to ex- Fort 2,000/. sterling of silver, would require 22 cases, while in gold it would require only one case ; and the weight of these 22 cases would be 1 . 3} times heavier than the case of gold. I presume I need not say, that nu carrier, by land or water, would diminish the carriage on account of the article within, and he must be paid by bulk and weight ; excepting, however, his Majesty's ships of war, that bring home bullion or coin from South America by per centage. But to meet Mr. Huskisson, and others who support gold standard on their own grounds, I deny we ever hat, been able to maintain a gold standard previous to the year 1797, when the Bank of England stopped payment in gold. Had those gentlemen looked into the records of the Mint, they would have seen, that from the year 1760 t•t 1797, it was a constant struggle between the Mint aml the exporters of gold. During those 37 years we coined about 60 millions sterling, includinga small re-coinage o: worn coin of George H. Now I ask if such an enormous annual addition to the currency of one and a half million could have been necessary, if there had not been a con stant flow out of the kingdom of gold coin, either melted or in its original state ? This singular fact struck me many years ago, and I applied to the experience and knowledge acquired by the gentleman (to whom I have already alluded) in Holland for a solution. From him I learned the following history of gold coinage in Europe : Almost every great nation has attempted to make gold coin the currency of the country, as a mode of fiwilitating money transactions before paper money was invented ; yet none ventured, except Great Britain, to declare it the standard. Venice, at a very early periuu in the history of modern commerce, coined sequins to a great extent, to forward her commerce in the Eastern parts of the Mediterranean ; but such was the constant flow of her coinage to those countries with out return, that this Republic afterwards coined largely as a state profit, but never fixed gold as the standard.— France, under Louis XIV. made a similar attempt by large coinage of Louis d'Ors, but her extravagant court. and most expensive wars, forced out the gold coinage ; and this export had such influence in other countries, that Louis d'Ors are in many parts of Italy, at this day, a standard of many money transactions. Portugal coined an enormous quantity of moidores the early part of the eighteenth century, and such was the influx of them in the Western counties, that their circulation was twice put down by royal proclamation. Holland, (I mean the old Seven Provinces,) then the greatest commercial nation in Europe, coined ducats largely ; and in the war of the rebellion of 1745, we obtained permission to coin gold at the Dutch mint, for the payment of troops and auxiliaries, to the extent of twenty millions, in the coin ei• Dutch ducats. My rela tion was assisting in this money transaction at Rotter dam. In 1766 he returned to Holland for a short time, and to his surprise found that all this immense coinage had totally disappeared. About the year 1775, the Dutch Government issued a new gold coinage of cyders and half-ryders of fourteen and seven guilder pieces, nod not so fine in the gold as the old Dutch ducat, which W3ll famed for being flexible, and therefore in so great de mand in Eastern countries, as to bear a premium always. In 1786, when, in early youth, I was in Holland in a mercantile house, the greater part of this new coinage had disappeared. The Germanic States have never attempted any gold coinage to any extent. Notwithstanding the great extent of Buonaparte a • coinages, and subsequently of that of Louis XVIII • they are at a premium in every town on the Continent ; and,