Star. — London, England, 1830-03-12 00:00:00

. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF I,OIIDS.TUURSDAY. Lord KING presented a petition from the corporate tr►des of Scotland, against the East India monopoly, in favour of the reduction of taxes, and against the corn !ars. The Earl of DERBY presented three petitions for throwing the trade to India and China open : from the mayor and corporation of Liverpool ; the merchants, manufacturers, and others of that town ; and from the trustees of the Dock Company. Referred to the select committee. Lord WHARNCLIFFE presented a similar petition from Halifax. The Duke of WELLINGTON presented a petition from the inhabitants of Sr. Pancras against the Vestry Act. STAMPS OM HANK NOTES. The Duke of WELLINGTON—My Lords, I wish to take this opportunity of giving an answer to a question put to me the other day by my noble Friend (Viscount Goderich) with respect to a re turn presented to the house relative to the number of stamps issued for bank notes within a given period. I find that I was right in what I then said, that I believed the stamps for the Scotch notes were included. I have now to inform my noble friend that it is impossible to ascertain the number of stamps issued for Scotch notes, except those for one pound, the account being blended. The return, I may add, includes the notes of the chartered banks. DISTRESS. Earl liEAUCHAMP presented a petition from a parish in Warwickshire, complaining of distress, and praying relief. STAMP DUTY ON LIFEHOLD PROPERTY.—INSURANCE. The Earl of MALMESBUItY—My lords. lam desirous of ob- 1 tainieg a return relating to a subject to which 1 beg to call your lordships' attention a few moments, with respect to two different ' descriptions of stamp-duty ; one of which is of considerable import. ance to a class of subjects with which lam connected—l mean agri culturists. As the day is now approaching in which his majesty's government are about to state what are the reductions which they intend to propose, I think this a fair opportunity of calling their attention to the subject of stamp.duty on conveyances of lifehold property. In that part of the kingdom where I reside, in many parts of Donetshire, Wiltshire, and the West of England, it is very usual for cottagers to hold their cottages for life. This, I think, is as ex cellent custom, and one beneficial to that class of persons. It fre quently happens, when they have children, and a life drops off, that they are anxious of putting in their children's. The amount of fine is bl. This is the sum generally paid in adding one life to two others. The hardship, however is, that the stamp on the convey. ance is 11. 15s. and the stamp on the counterpart 11. 10s.—for they require, and are right in having that security. So that in a tran saction in which a cottager pays 51. no less a sum than 31. ss. is re quired by government in stamp duty. This, my lords, frequently the acts as a bar to such transactions. If they are content to y a fine of 5/. for that advantage, they are unwilling—and inca pab le, OOD knows, in the present depressed state of things—to pay enormous stamp duty on that transaction. Besides, a landlord may be inclined to take the fine by instalments, but the stamp duty must be paid on the nail—no instalment can be taken for it. (Hear.) lam de. sirous of obtaining the amount of duty received by government on such transactions as these, and if it do not form a large sum, which I apprehend it does not, I hope that the duty will be abolished, as I am persuaded it would have a very beneficial result in those coun. ties where such a custom as that to which I have alluded prevails. The conveyance of an estate in fee, if it be sold for less than 150/. only requires a stamp of 11. 10s. Ido hope that the attention of his majesty's ministers may be directed to this point, and that they will remove this onerous, this unjust tax. Now lamon my legs I will refer to the other point, where there is a duty imposed, which affects not only the agriculturists, but all classes—l mean the policy on whit is called the common insurance from fire. I find, from the calculations made by those who are willing to insure property from tire, that in the year 1815, a policy was only 21. (on the 1001. in. oared), whilst the duty was 2s. 6d.--not less than 125 percent. on the policy. The duty, in 1826, was raised to 3s.—thus making 150 per cent. on the policy. From more accurate calculations, ii s as now discovered that Is. 6d. was considered sufficient remunera tion for the risk of losses by fire, and the duty was still 3s.—being 200 per cent. or twice as much as the insurance-office required. I am perfectly satisfied, my lords, that if the tax were reduced an ircrease of revenue would follow ; for many persons would insure who do not now insure their property. These are points, I think, well worth the attention of his majesty's ministers. I beg to move for " a return of the amount of stamp duty paid on convey ances of all life-hold property under the value of Si." Also " foe a return of the amount of stamp.duty paid on all conveyances of property in fee, under the value of 1501." Agreed to. DIST RESS,- , TAZAT lON. The Duke of IllOWTiFilpresen tni;Peiition, agreed to at a county meeting held at Dumbarton, complaining of distress, and re. commending a rigid economy in the expenditure of government, and praying a reduction of taxation. _ BURNING WIDOWS. Lord BEXLEY presented a petition, from a congregation] of Protestant Dissenters, against burning idows In India, as was un. derstood • but the place from whence the petition came was not heard be low the bar. INTERNAL STATE OF THE COUNTRY. Lord HOLLAND—I received a note, my lords, from my Dolga relative (the Duke of Richmond), on my way to the house, request. ing me to give notice that he intends bringing forward the motion on Thursday next, which he was prevented, by indisposition, from submitting to the house this evening. I now move that the house be summoned for that day.—Agreed to. PORTUGAL. Lord HOLLAND—I now riee, --- tny lords, for the purpose of putting some questions to the noble Secretary for Foreign Affairs with respect to our relations with Portugal. There appears to me to be but scanty information on the subject. In requesting the Infor. :nation of the noble earl, it will be necessary to refer to the corn. munications from the throne which we have had from time to time, connected with the affairs of " that country. On the 29th of July, 1828, in the speech from the throne, his Majesty says, " he relies upon the wisdom of the august house of Braganca to take the course which shall be best calculated to maintain the interests and honour of that illustrious family, and to se. cure the peace and happiness of the dominions over which it reigns." At the opening of the session of 1829, we are told that " his Majesty has entered into n ations with the head of the house of Bragwiza, in the hope of terminating a state of affairs;" and at the close of the session this paragraph is in the speech—" It is with increased regret that his Majesty again adverts to the condi tion of the Portuguese monarchy; but his Majesty commands us to repeat his determination to use every effort to reconcile conflict ing interests, and to remove the burdens which press so heavily upon a country, the prosperity of which must ever be an object of his Majesty's solicitude." At the commencement of the present session, the speech states that " his Majesty laments that he is un able to announce to you the prospect of a reconciliation between the princes of the house of Dragons." Reim these communications, I suppose that a negociation was established with our allies, with a view of reconciling the differences which exist between the branches of the house of Bragariza, for we aro led to believe that such a nego elation was established ; and from the speech last quoted, we learn that his Majesty's hopes have been disappointed i the natural in. ference is, that the negociation failed. But, since this, other cir cumstances have occurred, and we are told in a document to which I know it is not quite regular to allude—nevertheless, the document is made known le all Europe.—l mean, my lords, the communica tion of the King of France, at the opening of the Chambers on the Id of this month. In that communication, I find that the French King informs his Chambers that " at the present moment he is, in concert with his allies, carrying on negociations , the object of which is to effect between the princes of the house of Braga= a recon ciliation, necessary to the tranquillity of the Peninsula." Now, my lords, the questions which I wish to put to the noble earl are these—First, whether the negociations which were originally esta blished in 1829, and alluded to in the speech at the opening of the present parliament, arc terminated or not ? Secondly, whether, in the negociations entered into by his Majesty with her allies. France entered into negotiations for a similar purpose, or whether France has some ulterior purpose ? also, whether we are principal parties to the second negociation, or have a secondary part in the negocia. WM, in which, as principals, we failed? The third question re- slates to another branch of the subject, lolly irregular to allude to, tr to which, nevenheleas, I feel it ,t to call the attention of the My lords your lordships w ell know that his Majesty's mi. *ten have invariably given as a reason for not producing papers to tin g negotiations when pending, that it would be improper so Now, I wish to know, if the negociations are actually pmeillig, whether they are carried on in concert with our allies, and erbethar the Kings of France and Spain are parties ? These, my lade, are the questions 1 wish to put to the noble earl. There is, I may add, my lords, some discrepancy between the Speech of the King of France and that delivered by the lords commissioners at the opening of the present parliankent to this house, in one particu lar. In the Speech of the Kitts of France it is stated that " the war in the East is at an end ; the meieration of the conqueror, and the friendly intervention efike pottai, by,preserving the Ottoman em vire froeh the dhiastetiVhialtna it, having maintained the balance of Europe, sad stellgthesed the ancient relations of the different States.' New, in eke speech of the commissioners a ea twactiop i s ei ppierelaaposiso of the war between those two powers ; bit I 'dit not Sat it was brought about on the ' part of his majoity , there ts any omission in the cons. soissioners' in shat suet I am not able to say. 411111DEEN.....1n answer to the questions which the wi re* sofas Ilaasard, I , beg to observe, that the negotiations to ISM he hoe ' with the Emperor Don Pedro, is the summer of ISM were sat brought to that favourably close that was desirable —they bad not been attended with so satisfactory a result as could have been wished. Properly speaking, no negotiations had been carried on, ferred to inasmuch as our plenipotentiary went to the Brazils, but was Landon,re it being conaidered by the Emperor inconvenient to carry on negotiations on both sides the Atlantic at the same moment. With respect to the negotiations in which we entered with the King of France, that is a different uansaction. We certainly act in concert with , the French government, but by no means in a secondary manner. Quite the reverse. A communica tion has been made in concert with the French government, in re ference to the reconciliation of the Princes of the house of Bragimsa As to the ulterior purposes of that government I know nothing, if any such exist, but Ido not think there are. (The noble earl here Paused.) Load HOLLAND suggested an answer respecting pending nego tiations. The Earl of ABERDEEN—Pending negotiations 1 I beg to say, my lords, that they could scarcely be called negotiations. A com munication has been made, in concert with the Kkg of France and with our allies to the court of Brasil. . , Lord HOLLAND—The court of Brasil P The Earl of ABERDEEN signified assent. With respect to what the noble lord has said, that papers are refused when negotia. dons are pending, it must be obvious to your lordships that such • course is the proper one. When the time comes for the production of the papers alluded to, the noble lord will see a very good reason for not producing them at the present moment. I am not aware whether such a declaration was made * • but this I feel assured of, that if the papers were produced whilst negotiations are pending, it might prove injurious to the parties for whom the noble lord is in. tested. With respect to the passage in the speech of the King of France quoted by the noble lord, I do not think ft bears the con struction which the noble lord has given it. Our endeavours to bring about a peace between the two powers alluded to have been unceasing, and I think it will be found that we have been instru mental in causing peace. We have strongly urged the necessity of peace to both parties, and what effect our repeated remonstrances have had will be ultimately seen. I will, however, say that neither party neglected attending to them, but undoubtedly the Turkish go. remittent appeared a length of time insensible of the situation in which they were placed. Lord HOLLAND—I am not certainly 'prepared, my Lords, with any motion on this subject, but I must be permitted to make one or two observations in consequence of what the noble earl has said. In the spe e ch from the throne, at the opening of the sessions of 1829, it is said that his majesty has entered into negotiations with the head of the house of Braganca. Now, my lords, I wish to know whether that negotiation is concluded. I think from what the noble earl has said that the negotiation is concluded, and the one in conjunction with the king of France is a separate and new. one. The Earl of ABERDEEN—The noble lord is not quite correct in describing this as an entirely new negotiation, inasmuch as the same object is in view in both. The negotiation entered into im mediately with the Emperor Don Pedro had arrived at that state that there was very little prospect of a favourable issue. With respect to the second negotiation with the court of France and our other allies, I can only say that it is entered into with perfect concord.be. tween the two countries. _ Lord HOLLAND—Then the court of France was not a party to that negotiation mentioned in the king of England's speech, but it is to the negotiation now existing. Ido not wish to ask any im proper questions, but 1 should like to know whether the court of Spain is a party ? The Earl of ABERDEEN—In answer to the noble lord, I beg to say that the court of Spain is no party to the negotiation. The court of Austria has been a party from the first of the trans. action. I may add, my lords, that through the whole of these ne gotiations the court of France has had cognizance of what we have done from the first. _ _ The conversation here dropped. The Marquis of BUTE presented a petition (in the absence of a noble friend) from Renfrew, complaining of distress, and suggesting the abolition of taxes which press on the working claws. Lord Ellenborough's Divorce Bill was reported with one amendment. On the motion of the Earl of ROSSLYX, the bill was ordered to be en gre lie lt arriage Validating Bill passed through a committee. In the committee, Lord Ilom.xxn eulogised the right reverend prelate (the Bishop of London) for bringing in the bill. A clause was inserted at the suggestion of the Bishop of Bath and Wells; and an amendment to one of the clauses by the Bishop of London. Adjourned at a Quarter past Six. HOUSE OF COMMONS, THURSDAY. Mr. NIELD, the Member for Oatton, took the oaths and his seat. Mr. W. PEEL pres ented the 22d report on public charities, and also some papers re latin g to vaccine institutions. Mr. BOBHOUSE gave notice that he would on Thursday next move for certain returns from the Bank of England, in continuance of former returns. Be thought fit to give notice because he under. stood the Bank had refused to comply with the request. The honourable Mamma also presented a petition from Walter Freeman, a clerk in the Navy-office, relative to the currency.—Laid on the table. . _ Mr. NORTH presented a petition from the tanners of the city of Kilkenny, against the leather tax. Lord .7. STUART presented a petition from the inhabitants of Cardiff interested in the coal trade, against the regulations respecting coals carried coast ways. Sir C. COLE supported the petition, which was laid on the table and ordered to be printed. Sir THOMAS FREEMANTLE moved for a return of the amount of moneys paid out of the Exchequer to High Sheriffs of counties on account of extraordinary charges, distingvishhig each county, &c.—Ordered. PEER LICENSING SYSTEM. Mr. Alderman THOMPSON said he rose for the pur pos e of presenting a petition from a very numerous and respectable body of persons—the licensed victuallers of the city of London and ha airy ; the petition was signed by 11,000 persons interested in the sale of beer:by retail. He considered it unnecessary to state to the house the large property embarked by these individuals in their business ;it must be known to every member present. He would only state the fact that, in the city of London and its vicinity, there were about 4,300 licensed victuallers, and the capital embarked by them could not be estimated at less than one million sterling.— He would wish to impress this fact on the memory of honourable members, who would shortly have to decide upon the important question whether the beer trade was to be thrown open or not. If the alterations should take place he felt convinced that one-half of this industrious and respectable clam of persons must be rulned,and t i lkttorty of the other reduced 50 per cent. in value, whilst the likely to arise to the public in general was vary uncertain.— consumption of beer had fallen off considerably, he would allow, but he didnot attribute this to any fault of the publicans; it bad been produced, in some degree, by the reduction of the duties on wine, spirits, and coffee. But above all, he considered as the principal cause of this diminished consumption the very heavy duty upon malt. He considered that the publicans could not be blamed on account of the monopoly in the sale of beer; it was a monopoly which had existed for centuries, and been the cause of creating a fictitious property in licensed houses. The publicans had em , barked large sums under the existing state of the laws, and it was now sought, by a change in those laws, to deprive them of the greater portion of their property. The petitioners prayed that they might be heard by Council, and allowed to call evidence ingainet throwing open the trade. Mr. Aid. WOOD supported the petition. He stated that such was the decline in the sale of beer, that one half of the publicans had not trade sufficient to live upon at present. He did not consider that by throwing open the trade any benefit would arise to the pub lic. The price could not be reduced so long as the heavy malt tax was continued—a duty which pressed with such disproportion upon the working classes, compared with the rich ; for whilst the gen tleman paid only a duty of 26 per cent. on his claret, the industrious working man had to pay 150 per cent. upon his humble beverage. Sir JOHN NEWPORT was in favour of the trade being thrown open to fair competition, by which the country must be bensiltted. —He considered that this was an instance in which it was attempted to set up vented interests as a bar to the execution of a measure likely to be productive of public good. He felt confident the opening of the trade would be of great service,not only in this country, but also is Ireland. Mr. G. R. DAWSON considered that the petitioners were a body el persons deserving the greatest consideration. They petitioned for leave to plead their own cause upon a subject on which a committee was then sitting; be therefore thought it would be much better if sissy laid their representation before that committee, where they Weald meet with every attention, and every inquiry would be made, lather than gentlemen should come forward, and make exaggerated statements to the house, arising from the conflicting interests in voked in the question, which he considered to be one of very great =apace. He ho ped hon. members would not be led away by I:r e presentations. He should reserve his arguments for a proper occasion, and feel satisfied, without protracting the debate, by moving that the petition be referred to the committee now sitting on Beer Licenses. Alr. F. BUXTON considered that the observations whleb.liad fallen from the honourable baronet were uncalled for and harsh. If the monopoly in the sale of beer had been an evil, neither the brewers nor the publicans were the cause of it. The evil originated in the excessive taxation of this particular article—one which fell so hea vily, and out of all proportion, on those the least able to bear it. ,He would not go so fr. some dmres ibotwth the tsza#ou wy- ;Cid:lshow beverage of amounted to 27 per cent. that on claret to 28 per cent. on Port wine to 26 per cent. whilst the working man and industrious artisea on beer 165 per cent. (Hear, hear !) This was one portion of the' effect produced by this unequal imposition. In another shape it still op reared the poorer class, whilst it left nearly untouched the rich. If a gentleman consumed in his family a quarter of malt, it cost hint 20s. whilst to the artisan it would amount to 55s (Hear, hear, hear.) It was to these causes of unequal taxation that he attributed the evil, and not from any im agi nary advan tages arising to the publican. With respect to the diminished consumption of beer, he considered that It bad been principally I produced by the reduction of the duty on spirits. (Hear.) The contemplated change he, as one of the porter brewers, was ready to admit, would be attended with a heavy loss in their trade—but not one but what they could withstand ; and, if the trade was to be thrown open, the brewers did not fear a fair competition. But to the publican, who had embarked his capital in the purchase of the privilege of carrying on his trade, it must be attended with the most ruinous consequences. If this interference could be at all justified on public grounds, he hoped to see the spirit of free trade carried to the fullest extent, and not for the country gentleman to continue his advantage over the poor man. If fine trade is to be the order of the day, he hoped it would be permitted to purchase corn and hops in foreign countries, where they could be purchased much cheaper; and, with respect to hops, of a finer description than in this coun try. (Hear.) In conclusion, he could not but repeat, that he con. Wend the publicans' case as one of great hardship. As for the brewers, they could live under the present circumstances, and he did not fear an open trade, so that it was not a partial one; but he trusted that it would be founded on principles of the utmost freedom. Mr. C. BARCLAY gave his Majesty's government credit for the motives which had induced them to bring forward this mea sure. He, however, considered that the utmost attention ought to be paid to the representations of those who had embarked their pro. perty under the existing laws, and that no change ought to take place without the moat mature deliberation. He thought that the petitioners should state their grievances before the committee sp. pointed on the question. The petition was then brought up and read. It prayed that the house would not sanction the trade being thrown opsa. and also that they might be heard by counsel against the bilL—Tho petition was referred to the committee sitting on beer licenses. DISTRESS or TEL COUNTRY. Sir FRANCIfiI3I.II6SETT I presented a petition from numerous inhabitants of the city of Coventry, complaining of the distress pre vailing amongst numerous classes In that city, which they ascribed in some degree to the contracted state of the currency, and praying a reform in parliament. Mr. FYLER said, although the petition had not been en trusted to him, he did not take offence at It. He agreed with the petitioners in some points, whilst he differed from them in others—such, for example, as annual parliaments and election by ballot. The petition was then read, and ordered to be printed. Mr. DENISON presented petitions from the farmers of various places in Surrey complaining of distress, and praying the repeal of the malt an d duties. Mr. EYLER presented a petition from 2,400 Abend weavers of a parish in Coventry, complaining of their very distressed state. Ordered to be printed. Mr. WODEHOUSE moved for r return of the average price of corn for the last ten years, previously to 1825.-... Ordered. EAST INDIA COMPANY'S CHARTER. Mr. C. P. THOBISON presented kpetition from numerous mer chants of the city of London interested in the East India trade, against the renewal of the East India Company's Charter. The petition prayed for freedom of commercial intercourse with India, and for unrestrained liberty to reside in that country. By unre strained liberty, they meant nothing which would lead to a breach of the law, or any act by which the safety of those extensive and valuable dominions might be endangered. They also prayed that the company might be restricted from issuing stamp-duties, and also that these should take place a perfect separation between the commercial government and the sovereign government exercised by the company at present in India, and that the company might be restrained from interfering is commercial pursuits. Also, that the remittances home should be made in bills. With respect to the tea monopoly, the petitioners refrained from alluding to the subject, as they were divided in opinion on that point. He would, however, express his own opinion, which was in accordance with those of persons most acquainted with the subject, and which was, that it would be attended with advantage if the monopoly were partly done away with. The petition was then read, and ordered to be printed. Mr. JEPHSON profaned a petition for the abolition of slavery. Mr. O'CONNELL said a few words in support of the petition, which was laid on the table. _ Mr. HUSKISSON presented a petition from a most numerou. and respectable body of persons. The honourable gentleman stated that this petition contained the signatures of every tanker, every merchant, every ship-owner, and every respectable tradessoket the town of LiverpooL It contained 7;000 signatures. As a summit tee was then sitting on the subject to which the petition retool, he did not think its fit time to go into a discussion, but wouldmmsly state that it prayed that the East India Company's monopoly might not be renewed. General GASCOYNE would also refrain from discussion, and would merely observe that, no doubt, something like the pretest they had heard that evening from the publicans would be set up in opposition to the adoption of a free trade, vit. vested interests were at stake (bear.) The debt, too, would be started as an obstacle, and they would probably ask, as they did on the last renewal of the charter, " If you take away our charter, how are we to pay off the debt ?" On that occasion it was seven millions : what would they say to it now that it was so much more ? The petitioners asked but to participate in the trade to which they, as subjects of the same realm, were justly entitled, and not to interfere in the least degree in the political government of the country. He (General Gascoyne) was at a loss to know what arguments could be adduced for the con tinuance of the exclusive trade to China. The interests of the whole country were opposed to those of a few ; it wasin comparison as millions to 2 or 3,000 individuals. Mr. ASTELL would raise his voice against all exa gger ated statements. He trusted this subject and all Its relative bearings would be amply considered in the committee then sitting. The petition was read, and ordered to be printed ; it purported to be the petition of certain inhabitants of Liverpool, entreating the house to abolish the monopoly of the East India Company in the trade to India. Mr. HUSKISSON presented a petition from the Jews of Liver. praying to be relieved from their present civil disabilities.-- The petition was read and laid on the table. Mr. O'CONNELL presented two petitions in favour of Radical Reform in the Commons House of Parliament—the first from Tullagh, in the county of Clare ; the second from 10 persons sign ing on behalf, as he stated, of 30,000 inhabitants of London, con vened at a public meeting at the Eagle Tavern, City-road, en Tuesday last. The petitioners, he stated, in both cases, at tributed the present universal distress to the want of a thorough and radical reform in that house, which he described a: an instalment of the oligarchy of the country, instead of a repre sentation of the commonalty.—The petitions being read, were or dered to be printed. General GASCOYNE presented the petition of the mayor, burgesses, and council of Liverpool, praying the abolition et the Salt India Company's monopo of the trade to India—The Men wee was ordered to be referre d to the committee sitting on that LEVESON GOWER brought up, pursuant to the order of the house, the Charitable Societies of Ireland Estimates.—Laid an the table. Mr. SLANEY presented a petition from the own of Oldham, in the county of Salop, against the truck system. IRISH room,. Mr. SPRING RICE prefaced his promised motion on this sub ject by expressing, in extremely complimentary language, his r~ret that It was not confided to the hands of its able and eloquent advocate, Mr. Villiers Stuart, no longer a member of that house.— in the propriety of some of the remedies pro on Mom oscadons, by that gentleman, he could not say he yet Iss perfiNdy agreed with him in the statement he bad mak that a sat COW WM IllaSollt ter the interference of the legls. lature, in assougdog to poodistwrrdie Irish poor. There was some. thing favour able Is the yosseat nonent for bringing forward this motion, alter so ossa anesdation hr the public mind as to the expediency of the iksks et the eatholics into a full-participation of the benefits of the sensdtatien. The religious prejudices which had hitherto maimed this question had fortunately subsided by the happy terrines da of that long-agitated question. no dam& there could be akdasibt in any man's mind, who read the two re ports of the Lads aid Commons' committees on the subject of the Irish poor, that shwa was a ease made out for the house to interfere, and institute apeaid inquiry into this very important su • Hell, it welsai4 wen payed with good intentions; and so It Ibe said their* id that bowie was paved with reports au wise, sound, sad asedist changes in different brancheit of our and religious isUilllsliniente. (Hear). But they too often lay till they w e ar hoessien. One thing he would pledge himself to, that, If the home agreed to the Committee, he would not suffer its Report to remain a dead letter on their table. (Hear.) All the additional evidence, besides the two Reports alluded to, he should move for, would only refer to that information which was requisite to fill up the details of information relative to the state of the Irish poor since those Reports bad been drawn up, so as to bring it up to the present rime. His objects were practical, end he should, therefore, avoid all anxiety to give any statement which might at all of ezaggention • to the sego or Annals . et the sae " Ireland. Commerce, which was one of the reasons of this singular circum stance in the relative conditions of the two countries, had gone on of late years increasing with a rapidity unparalleled in the his tory of any other country at this day; and the result already was, that the exports of Ireland, amounting in 1728 to no more than 287,0001. now have so far increased, that the exports of a second-rate city of Ireland, Waterford alone, amounted last year to above 2,163,000L—(hear.) There was a growing capital in the matey ; the banking interest flourished ; fevers had become less frequent in so extraordinary a degree that there were only at present one instance to four of former periods. The criminal can. mitments and the condemnations were decreased astonishingly. Executions had rapidly decreased, being in preceding years on an average of 61, whilst, in 1821, they were 37, and, in 1827, not more than 21. Those persons charged with seditious offences in the year 1623 were 14 in number ; in 1825, 9 ; in 1828, nut one. And here he must, in proceeding to the second head of his remedy for the imperfections of the provision for the poor, say a word in de fence of the landowners and better order of persons in Ireland, who had, on some occasions, with great injustice and levity, been ac. cased of neglecting the poor, and feeling little for their situation. National reflections were rarely ever just, and this assertion shared the fate of most of he fellows. It was altogether false, and end. nently unjust to the Irish character, which had displayed itself in the erection of charitable foundations, and buildings for the relief of all classes of sufferers, whether through poverty, sickness, or In sanity, far beyond any other country he was acquainted with, taking Into consideration, hr the comparison, the capital and wealth of Ireland and other countries. In every county in Ireland, Water ford excepted, which was provided in another way, there were excel. lent county hospitals. The next establishments to which he should allude were the fever hospitals. These were established all over the iMmtry ; and there were no charitable institutions where cases ef fever were more carefully or Judiciously treated than at those M which be referred. There were also establishments for the relief of the sick poor. There were nearly 400 of these dis tributed throughout the country, without one farthing of expense from the public (Hear, hear.) He was happy to inform the house that relief had been afforded from those places to upwards of half a million of persons. (Hear, ham) He stated those circum. stances, to show the house how cautious they should be of adopting opinions at random, or supposing that the poor were neglected merely because they might have heard so. He hoped, therefore, that gen demen, before they took up such an opinion, woul d care to furnish themselves with the necessary know ledge. But it was asked what was to be done for the Irish poor. In approaching ;this subject, he would observe, in the first place, that the introduction of Poor Laws into Ireland had been twice considered—once incl. dentally, and once directly—since the Union between the two coun tries. In 1804 it was Introduced by his right honourable ft lend (Sir John Newport), whose name was mixed up with every measure for the improvement or the relief of Ireland. A committee was cop. pointed upon that occasion, who reported It as their opinion that the adoption of any, gene ral compulsory system of relief...not founded upon the encouragement of industry—was calculated to in jure, not to sate, the lowest classes of the people, for whose benefit it was intended. Again in 1822, when a committee was appointed on the subject of providing employment for the poor the question of Poor Laws was incidentally introduced, and it would operate as a recommendation of the report of that committee with many persons to know that it was drawn up under the eye, and with the assist. twee of, Mr. Ricardo. The report stated that any system of relief, independent of their own industry, would interfere with the industry of the poor, and tend rather to increase than diminish the evil ever - tually. He did not mean to say to the House of Conunons " Let us adopt these opinions; let us act upon this authority" All he meant to say was, that it would be unwise to leave those authorities alto. gather out of sight ; and that, if they did resolve to depart front these opinions, they should not do so without inquiry, and without making out a case which could satisfy their own minds that they were right in the departure. He had stated before that they had houses :of in dustry in Ireland, and as it was the intention of the honourable member for Wicklow to introduce a proposition for establishing such houses by a compulsory rate, it was necessary that he (Mr. S. Rice) should notice the probable effects of such a measure. In fact. such a proposition involved the whole question of the poor laws.— (Bear, hear.) It might be a small beginning, but it was a begin. fling ; and, as the smallest possible crystal might be taken to repre. sent the largest possible one, so this slight application of the system might be considered as representing the whole system of the poor laws, and argued upon principle accordingly. In prosecuting this inquiry, it was not enough to show hint that 100 or 200 persons were well fed under the operation of houses of industry—that was not enough. They should show him that the sum of misery had been reduced in the district; for, if it should turn out that they were only taking the money out of the pockets of one class of people, and putting it into the pockets of another, without pro. dusting any diminution of misery, it was evident that they were doing very little good, if not a great deal of evil. The experiment of adopting houses of industry had been tried upon the largest possible scale in the city of Dublin; and what was the result, after all ?—That the paupers of Dublin had been fed out of the pockets of the English people. Since the Union there had been no less a sum than 803,0001. laid out in this experiment.-- During the administration of the bon. member for Inverness in Ire land, a committee had been appointed to investigate the subject. and they reported the total failure of the houses of industry. The ripen proceeded to observe that it was not elms but those institu tions might have aggravated the evil, by attracting beggars from all the other parts of Ireland, and thus filling up whatever vacuum might be created in Dublin by continual supplies from the country. Would it, then, be a benefit to the people of Ireland to entail upon them, as a t law, an institution of the nature just de. scribed ? e would recommend to his hon. friend to visit the asylums in the country, as he had done, before he came to the de. termination that they were likely to be attended with advan. tage. (Hear, hear.) Having himself had an opportunity of e init. ing one of these establishments in particular, he found there a pompous list of Directors, medical attendants, and other officers, but he found that the greatest neglect pervaded every depart. ment—he found that, during the ravages of a fever, the medical man had never attended, but was prescribing for his patients, at the distance of some miles. His hon. friend could scarcely think but that establishments of that nature, half hospital, half gaol, must be liable to the same abuses, and certain it was that the poor themselves would feel very little gratitude for such relief. He was aware that there were many visionary theories upon subjects of this nature. Doctor Davenant and Sir James Child expected the greatest benefit from them. On the other hand, there were great practiCal authorities opposed to such systems, and to the general principle of the poor laws. Doctor Franklin bad stated it as the result of his experience, that the more the law pro. vided for the poor, the less did the poor provide for them. selves ; and the less the law provided, the less did the poor provide. The proposition which he now was about to meet was the application of the English poor laws to Ire land. If they looked into the history of the English poor laws, they would find that from the passing of the 43el of Elisabeth, up to the present moment, there existed a wish in this country either to depart from or to amend the principle upon which these laws were founded. But it was sometimes said, in treply to this, that Ireland should have the benefit of the experience Q England--that she should have the English poor laws without their faults. By what chemical process this was to be effected be did not see ; but he would say let England, which is more a country olreti l losophers, first reform their own laws, and then give them to din their amended state. This would be the natural say to give that country the benefit of English ep.... . It was some what discouraging, however, to reflect that Mr. Pitt, Mr. S. Bourne. Mr. Nolan, BIT. Slaney, and others, had applied themselves in vain to the improvement of the English poor laws. He regretted that the hon. member for Newark, to whose work lie should refer, was not now. in his place. 1 hough he (31r. S. Rice) disputed many of the prin ciples and doubted many of the facts contained in the honourable gentleman's work, he felt obliged to him, as an Irishman, for the attention he bad bestowed on the subject, and the benevolence which every where characterised his opinions and views. (Hear, hear.) The hon. gentleman of who.n he spoke was an advocate for the ap plication of poor laws to Ireland. Ile had described the poor laws as a remedy for the existing evils. No one could deny that the oils wete great, foe he would beg leave, in the first instance, to separate himself from the doctrine of those economists who held that absenteeism was not an evil. (Hear, hear.) But when he was sold by the honourable member for Newark that poor laws would net only be a cure for absenteeism, and a check to those clearance. if the population from estates to which he was a professed entryy he might be referred for his answer to the political economists them selves. Happily for those who disapproved of the introduction of poor laws, they had two classes of opponents to deal with, who an ew,* each other. One said the introduction of poor laws will meant the dispossession of the tenants by their landlords. The ran said, it will compel the landlords to dispossess them.—(llesr, he*IMO But he would say, that if the economists were correct eissmalstn it would be a reams with him for DOI agreeing to illnisfillifin. He did not wish to give the landlads any additional bilmunamt foe driving off their tenantry. Another great grievance lis lidied Iris the want of employment; and the member for New adellaintained flat poor laws, would be a remedy for that also. It Amiable to know in what way. How could the existence of 5 :14, laws increase the demand for labour ? The demand de. upon circumstances wholly independent of such considers. dais It appeared to him more likely that they would diminish, Increase hutch demand. If they took money from those who otherwise have, laid it out in the improvement of laud, the must be 40 that extent to deprive them of the means of sir bytemployment, The fellUlajMl4/011 for labour was said, &admit,' 11401 h W big huoittluMe in Ireland. But why was it i na dequate ? --Am the, - ' labour ' required. I N .1 / 1 MO ii any omisiloh in the cool wily, and out ofall proportion, on =as me mast able to mar U. cuomuse syuzu au aasanaw. se . aam Ir . • . .. r . ~, .„..., _ _ Ea ..... Lz „.....x.... , ..... [am not able to say. He would not pso far as to my that the p u bli c did not sti ff er .i n all smog; of exaggeration as tolls* ' evils Or dlitiliMEl Ile MITNIe Waqq• .. 41 , . 41 5 / o eigagte in siewmpou mut why was it matiequaurr." a n s wer to the questions which the some dmree (rook= monopoly, but he would merely state trhat feting system to Ireland . He would, thorax*, is the list la- roe *On was a groom of labour than was taloired .. ; observe, that the negotiations to the taxation was, to s how how that monopoly. was caused . He stance, avow to the house, that, anxious as he was toe the suer tot 4. 4101 5-wsis, tbati country might hays twil"T"' gime Dos lsesth • beim summer would show that thins Was nothing taxed milted, as this cheap of his motion, the condition of the poor of Ireland was much Pa'. ilia Wallah Mal r the amdition of th e labours bourable does that was desirable beverage of the poor. The tax on the rich man's champagne' better than be believed that of the poor here. (bear, keas.)— Ciao" roes hot taring. Was it meant to make a provision fir - - I! 4 , 1 ...:.:,,