Star. — London, England, 1822-06-26 00:00:00

A employer stood in need of. Suppose that the Gagle man who employed the farmer to buy for him should have another agent in the market selling corn for. him, on account of his having more of that commo dity than he wanted. What would people say when they found the'sime matt emPloying two agents, one to buy and the other to sell Whim in the same mar ket? and would this produce no effect on the prices? It certainly would ; and seep a case was-exactly similar to the proceeding.now proposed nate adopted. He was confident that the keeping up a Sinking Fund, while such an operation as the one intended by this Bill was going forward, would be attended with con siderable loss to the Public: and he wished to knoW why the Sinking Fund, which was at the disposal of Government, should not be made available to the in tended object ? He defied the Noble Earl to do any thing that could more affect the Sinking Fund than this. If the Commissioners of the Sinking Fund, however, were enabled to buy the very stock that was to be created' dry this 13 . 111, that would be the most woeful mode in which the thing could be effected.— The Noble Marquis next alluded to the negotiation entered into some weeks ago, between the Govern mint and the Bank of England, relative to the re• newal of the Charter, on condition that certain privi leges were to be granted to Banking Companies; and, as he had not lately heard anything on the sub ject, he took it for granted that the project was laid aside altogether. The Earl of LAUDERDALE said, the distress of the country was owing to there being no mai ket for' our commodities, and this arose from excessive taxa tion, which he wished to see reduced by every pos sible means ; and as the measure then before the had such reduction for its object, he should not oppose it. The operation of this plan would be to take C9.,800,000 out of the hands of some rich citizens, and he was sure that that money circulating through the country would create a market. But the keeping up a Sinking Fund of five millions would considerably counteract this operation ; for the taking five millions from the pockets of the People would have a fatal effect on the markets of the country.— The great evil the People laboured under was the want of a market ; and the great object of Govern ment should be, to take care that there should be a demand for everything that was to be consumed. On this principle he could not approve of raising a capi tal by a Sinking Fund. ,If that fund were allowed to, remain in the pockets of the People, there would then' be a demand tor articles of consumption ; and what reason could there be for not giving up that fund? • To relieve the People from it would enable them to bear their burdens much better than they could now bear them. If the relief were extended (or six or seven years, there would-be a relief at the end of that time of one hundred millions. The present Bill pro vided that the Commissioners should make quarterly payments, and should only receive half-yearly pay- Merits from the Treasury. Now he had made a cal culation that this would be ultimately a loss to . the Com missi oners,in the difference between thecompound interest on what they received, and what they paid. The Earl- of LIVERPOOL explained. He said, his calculations wsre different from those of the Noble Earl ; but if there was an error, it might be rectified. He differed from the Noble Earl in what he said about capitalists, and could see no difference between that which remained in the pockets of the people, and that which, after being taken from them, went back to their pockets again. It would only be a diversion of the wealth of the country from one channel to ano ther; and by keeping up the credit of the country, Would be more serviceable to the landed interest, and thus the money would go more effectually into the pockets of the people- than by any other way.. He knew of no way by which an increase of debt incase of war could take place, except by buying off as much debt as possible in time of peace; and, there fore, he could not conceive why a Sinking Fund, which tended to effect that purpose, could be ob jected to. As to what had been observed by the Noble Marquis, relative to certain arrangements lately entered into by the Government with the Bank of England, he thought it necessary to state, that it was not intended to take any step during the present Session relative to the renewal of the Bank Charter. Lord LAUDERDALE said, he used the word ca pital in the same sense as every writer on political economy of this and every other country. Lord KING wished to know if there was anything at this time like a Sinking Fund? He (Lord King) Maintained that there could be no such thing as a Sinking Fund, until the debt due by the Government to the Bank was paid. As to the present Bill, its principle was a reduction of taxation, and as such it certainly covered a multitude of absurdities. The Ministers had never begun to reduce taxation until they were compelled to it ; and he hoped that, before next Session of Parliament, the Noble Earl would see the absolute necessity of reducing taxation four times lower than was done in this Session. They were long since obliged to give up the Income Tax; but although the people were insulted by being charged *ah " in ignorant impatience of taxation," yet Ministers were now forced to reduce a part of the same. Ile maintained that taxation was the chief cause Of the distresses of the people; because, by ex cessive takes, hitteased numbers of idlers were living at the eipesite Of the industrious. As to the Bill nOw habit the House, be could not see on what grOtihd it bad been introduced. The Bill also ap peared Vritboht a preamble; and it was his intention, to anothet 'sue., to introduce a clause which should remedy that defect. Lord LAN SDOWN explained. He was favourable to a tifinking Fund in time or war, but not of peace._ The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered to be tottunitted bn Tuesday next. The other Orders of the Darbeing disposed of, the at tight o'Clock, adjourned. HOUSE 'OF COMMONS. ?Jr. Ricnaans,Otti the &Won* House, Clerkenwell, pro tented a Return of the Monies paid within the last year for the Expense of Witnesses on Public Prosecutions.—Ordered to lie un the table. 1 2;1r. WaorrnsLET brought ih a Bill to prevent Washings or other Substances produced from the Mantiftet are of Gas from being conveyed tote any River or Book. A blanpaa asked yebcm these substances were to be taken to wnorrgsLEY said anywhere, so that the Public V it--XA laugh). from Mr. 0:- Gringo, INr. J. P. Gamer, BiU was read a first time, and ordered to .ne on Monday next. 'LEY presented a Petition front the Master, and Assistants of the Con paSz of Cutlers not his intention , plaL. thaw they were under the law as know stood, and-they+ should be therefore exempted from the Stamp .dudes.—The Report was ordered to be brought . up this day se'nnight. Mr. W. small called the attention of the Right lion. Se cretary to the many violations of the lase-which were taking place in the Manufacturing Districts, with respect to the time for the work of children in Cotton Manufactories. lk hoped the Right Hon. Secretary would direct his attention to the subject. Mr. Secretary PEEL said it was his intention next Session to propose the appointment of a Committee to hear evideace on the subject alluded to by the Hon. Gentleman. Mr. W. SPri nu moved that there be laid before the House a cepy of a Rale made on Saturday last, by the Court of Ex chequer, 'respecting the issue of Extents in Aid —Ordered. Mr. lIOLIHOUSE presented a Petition from cartain In habitants of Camberwell, being Protestant Dissenters, pray ing for an alteration in the Marriage Servics.--Ordersd to lie OD the table.- Mr. WODF.HOUSE said, by the provisions of an Act re cently passed for increasing the Duties on. Excise Licenses, maltsters were subjected to very considerable hardships. By the former Act a maltster took out a license, for which he paid 4!. 2s. 6d. which covered him from any ether charges. By the new Act the duty was increased to upwards of 5/. and he was obliged to take out a license for each distinct building. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, that he was not aware of any such regulation in the Act alluded to by the Hon. Gentleman, but he would make inquiries. A. Message from the Lords here announced their Lordships Assent to some Bills. CASE OF SIDNEY IIOBIIOUSE rose to present a Petition from three per sons of the name of Smith, brothers of a convict at Botany Bay, who had been found guilty of robbing a Mr. Middleton of his watch and pocket-book, on the 15th of August, 1820, and who, for that offence, was sentenced to transportation for life. The Hon. Member stated, that there were now abut dance of proofs to chew that this Smith was not the person who rubbed Mr. Middleton. The evidence on the trial at the Old Bailey was en tirely circumstantial, for the prosecutor disclaimed all knowledge of the prisoner's identity, and the verdict of the Jury was founded entirely upon the testimony of Colton and T a ylor, the two Bow street officers who arrested him. It was not, however, till the November follosiing the trial, that any light was throw* upon the affair, and for the exposition which then took place, the pri soner and the Public were wholly indebted to the active huma nity of Mr. Sheriff Parkins. Mr. Parkins happened to see in the Papers that a person was cast for death, for having robbed Mr. Middleton on the day in question. The robbery occurred in the Strand, very near Mr. Parkins's carriage, and, as he had wit nessed the transaction, he was curious to know if he could iden tify the robber again. He repaired to Newgate, but the mo ment he saw Smith in the Press-yard, he was convinced that he was not the guilty person ; for Mr. Parkins had a• distinct recol lection of the person who did in fact commit the robbery, Some Inquiry was then set. on foot, and Taylor and Colton being ap plied to, they stated their concurrence in Mr. Parkins's opinion, and one of them went so far as to say he knew the person who was the robber, from the deseription which Mr. Parkins gave of him. Ife (Mr. Hobhouse) had the letters of these men on the subject to Mr. Parkins. The name of the person whom the constable suspected was Hedrop, who was left at large until Fe. bruary, in the year after, when, being taken up,. he was tried, and found guilty. No mitigation, however, of the sentence was yet extended to Smith. The Hon. Member said, he was sure' it was a oversight on the part of the Horne Department, else Smith's sentence would have been before remitted. There were the testimonies of many respectable shopkeepers of Middlesex to Smith's general good character. Ile wished to call the attention of the Right Hon. the Secretary of State to the subject. He read a letter from a peripn of the name of Looce, stating that Colton had appeared as a witness seventeen times, and that he and others were observed frequently quarrelling about the division of in formation-money. Mr. Secretary PEEL objected to the establishment of a pre cedent for inquiring in that House into the evidence adduced in cases connected with the crimininal administration of justice. He should not enter info the details . of the case. Every inquiry had been made into it. The Judge and Jury were satisfied ; his (Mr. Peel's) predecessor and himself were perfectly satisfied of the justice of the conviction, and that the law ought to take its course. Mt. CREF.V/tY thought it was fully proved that the indivi dual was net at ail concerned in the robbery. Mr. BENNET said he believed there was a conassrein/ spe culation among the Runners of Police Officers to swear away men 'S lives. It had been proved at one of the Mica, that they would swear, and did swear for each other. -He trusted the Right Hon. Secretary would review his determination. Nr. W. SMITH was not insensible to the danger of the prekedent alluded to by the Right Hon. /Secretary; but he trusted the Right Hon. Gentleman would again direct his attn.. don to the case. _ Mr. Secretary PEEL explained. It was the eonstant prac tice of the Government to receive evidence of new facts in fa vour of persons convicted. The Petition was then read, and, after a few words from Mr. Hoanoess, was ordered to lie on the table. SCOTTISH PRESS. Mr. ABEItCROMBY, on rising to bring forward his promised Motion respecting the conduct of the Lord Advocate with respect to the Scottish Press,• observed, that he felt it necessary to request the in dulgent attention of the House, although the sub ject of his motion was of a local nature, as it was connected entirely with Scottish affairs. If, how ever, he should be able to shew that the Learned Lord opposite, and his colleagues, had sullied the dignity of their offices, not only by connecting them selves with the Press, but, through that connexion, by a systematic attempt to calumniate 'individuals, and to affix stains upon their character to which no man of honour could patiently submit; and if he could shew that this practice had been sanctioned and countenanced by the Learned Lord, and that by his instrumentality the forms of law had been perverted for bad motives, he had a sight to expect that the House would not remain altogether passive on the subject, even though it referred entirely to the affairs of Scotland--(Hear, hem).--He stood before the House in the character of a public ac• cuser ; and if he could assume such a character to gratify party feelings, there was no term of repro bation sufficiently strong which could be applied to his conduct ; but as he conceived that it was in his power to shew that a gross attack had been made upon the liberty of the subject, and that the law had been perverted for oppressive purposes, he thought he should abandon his duty by shrinking to bring the subject under the consideration of the House.— He should state nothing to the House without due consideration ; but as it was necessary for him to' comment on the different facts, as he proceeded, he trusted that any expression he might utter not alto gether warranted by the facts thetwelves, would not be attributed , to any improper feeling. He would himself be the first to retract such an expression.— His motion was in some measure connected with the , late trial of Mr. James Stuart, but he should rely as little as possible on the proceedings respecting that trial, though he thought there had been in the course of them much harsh and unnecessary delay. After ' explaining the delay which had taken place in his own motion, and which he stated to have been occa sioned by the proceedings against Borthwick at Edinburgh; the 'Honourable and Liarntiri Member! proceeded to state, that Ife should first bring : under the notica/Of the House the powers which were by law entrusted to the Lord Advocate of Scotland, in virtue of his office. He should then state the facts with which the Learned Lord and his colleagues «•ere connected, and•the transactions in which they had been engaged with regard to the Press of Scot• land ; particularly noticing the oppression, which he contended had been exercised in the case of B.rth wick. Upon these he should not ask the House to come to any definitive opinion at present. He thought he should make out a case which would ir resistibly call for a Committee of Inquiry, and not dad the House should be in possession of the Re port of that Committee, would he ask them to come to any ultimate decision whatever. First, then, ad dressing himself to the powers entrusted to the Lord Advocate—in his person were container the powers of the ancient Privy Council of Scotland ; powers which, hefore the Union, were exercised by the Lord Justice General, the Lord Chief Justice Clerk, and other high Officers. These powers were claimed for the'office of Lord Advocate in the year 1804, by a Learned Lord who then held the office, but who was now the Lord President. These were extensive,, not to say dangerous powers, and he did not mean to say that the Lent ned Lord would ever attempt to diercise them—(llear,hear).—One of them included the power of superseding the criminal jurisdiction of the country, and bringing the accused to trial before the Council as a special Court. There was scarcely any great act of outrage or injustice noticed in the history of Scotland which was not referable to the exercise of those powers. However, die Learned Lord was, in practice, the public prosecutor. He could bring a man to trial without the previous *sanction of a Grand JUry ; and though his power was par tially restrained by an Act of Parliament of the year 1701, ordaining that he should bring the accused to trial within 60 days, he had the power of postpone.. meat, by various delays, to the extent of 110 days, the whole of which time he could retain a man in custody without bringing him to trial, although that man might afterwards prove to be innocent of the offence charged against him. It was true that a private individual might commence public prosecu dons ; but this right was shackled by so many re straints, that it was seldom or ever put in force.— The private prosecutor was liable to pay all expenses if he failed, and for them he could be compelled to give security. He could be compelled to swear that he believed in the truth of the accusation ; and, above all, he could not prosecute at all, unless he could shew that he had sustained a personal injury from the offence. This was an outline of the powers placed in the hands of the Lord Advocate. The Lord Advocate and Solicitor General were of course appointed by the Crown ; and the former had the privilege of appointing Advocates Depute to repre sent him on the several Circuits, and to exercise many of his powers ; and he might here inform the House that his motion related to the conduCt of the Lord Advocate, the Solicitor General, and two of the Advocates Depute--( Near, hear).--The House, and all thinking men, would agree with him in saying, that in proportion to the magni tude of these should be the vigilance of the House and the Public in noticing their exercise.— It shoald be observed too, that in some instances the office of Lord Advocate was a judicial office; so thikt if there ever was a case in which great temper, great forbearance, and judicial dignity of conduct ought to be united in the same person—it was in him. who filled the office of Lord Advocate. Above all, they had a right to expect that he would never interfere in any matter which he might reasonably think would come before him in his judicial capacity. If, for in stance, he observed the dissemination of libels, sedi tious or blasphemou-, or tending to any breach of the peace, and especially to that which might end in murder, it became his duty to interfere to punish the offender, or to prevent the mischief. Unfortunately, however, his (Mr. Abercromby's) charge against the Learned Lord, was a crime of commission, and not of omission. He charged the Learned Lord with having used his patronage, his money, and the sanc tion of his high office, to the encouragement and I maintenance of a regular system of calumny, in the shape of libels on individuals; a crime rendered the more grave and serious %%hen it was remembered that the Learned Lord was also a co-existing Secre tary of State for the Home Department, inasmuch as he was the regular official communicant with the Home Secretary upon all matters respecting the in ternal government of Scotland. He should here in form the House. that, since the Union, Scotland having lost its Parliament, the principal attraction io its capital was the Bar, which could boast of having among its Members men of first-rate talent and edu cation, and of the highest possible character, and those, of course, possessed considerable influence in the country. The number was from 150 to 200 ; and it was to be observed that the Lord Advocate had the patronage of 80 places to be distributed among members of the Bar. The House, therefore, were able to judge of the good or the ill which might be worked accordingly as this patronage was well or ill directed. He should proceed to inform the House that, in the year 1820, there was a Paper in existence called The Clydesdale Journal; this was a Provincial Paper, and was soon after re moved to Glasgow, and took the additional tide of the Glasgow Sentinel, and on this occasion the Learned Lord and other individuals signed a circu lar, strongly recommending to public patronage the Clydesdale Journal, as deserving of public support. This paper was signed the 20th of November, 1820. —Now how had this Journal been previously con ducted ? Had it been carried on so as to deserve that recommendation ? He had seen large extracts from the Clydesdale Journal previous to that date, containing libels must gross, base, and wicked, on private individuals. He would not ask the House to take thii on his assertion; but he would state cases which would fully establish his assertion. Ile had the case from a Gentleman of much respectability, and who had received a favour from Government. The words were, " the Clydesdale Journal had been much injured by the personalities it contained which could do it no credit.' These were the words of a strenuous supporter of the Paper before it received the support of the Learned Lord. Copies of the re commendation of the. Learned Lord were sent round to all the friends of Government. More than 200 had been circulated of these recommeetiatioes, t e o lLzi t t rul b 7act th noi e donf exc e ption abused du ir anler o dta f .hse t a w mnip o r , re.im.n h i.ci a :va d otran b sln ee; ritit : i g tee: sin:3,l ;l Journal, and and all attached to them. Mr. E aton knew that the Learned Lord had signed the ream ' . siustdotion of that Paper. Mr. Eaton. was, from his conduct, unworthy ofu judicial siteation, and yet be • was in his office at the present hour. le„januar• y, 1821, a Resolution was taken at Edinburgh to estx. blish the Beacon Newspaper, and no les.- than 803. names had been subscribed. 'Meow veep was t o open an account at'. the traskinouso of Sir • W,. Forbes. A. security was deman ded, and some of th e . names to the bond were the Lord Advocat e , t h e Solicitor-General, two. Advocate Deputes, and si r Walter:Scott. If the account of the Berman balance* itself, then no demand was to be made on the scribers; if not, a rate was to be fixed for defrayi ng: the expenses. Soon after the pu tlication one of the subscribers objected to the mode of conducting the Neer, and that being .unattended to, he withdrew. . ltis name, and never after allowed the Paper to enter. his door—( Hear, hear).—lf this individual should: be asked why he had not withdrawn his name fi oire the bond, he believed he would answer that he durst not withdraw his name from a bond to which the Learned Loaf was a patty—(Hear).—From the moment it became known who were the real authors of the Paper, they were so beset with applications from the parties whom they had maligned, that the Paper was immediately given up--(Hear, hear). The Learned Gentleman then alluded to the correse pondence of the Learned Lord with Mr. Stuart, in which he had stated that it was political, and not Ist vate character that was the object of attack ; and that he was no party to what had been said against Mr. Stuart. But that Paper depended . Wholly on the patronage of the Learned Lord; and his conduct was to be judged of, not from his professions after he.had been detected, but from what had. taken place during the continuance of 'the Paper—(Hear, hear). He could prove that all the nurebers of the Beacon had been regularly sent to the Learned Lord. In reading a number of the Beacon, be found a speech of the Learned Lord on. the Scotch Jury Bill, topic for topic, argument for argument, and illustration tem. illustration. That was certainly a singular coin cidence. The Learned Lord had assigned, as a rea son for not withdrawing his name, that he did not wish to shield himself from any pecuniary considera tions; and yet, in the course of-ten days, when no tice had been given him that an action for damagrs had been brought against him, he withdrew his name. The Learned Lord, as a proprietor of the Paper, was liable for all that it contained ; and in any case where he was she public prosecutor, he must have held the same language to the Jury. In 1793, Captain Johnstone, the Proprietor of an Edinburgh Paper, was brought to the Ber for a libel on one of the Judges; and though he proved that he was them ill in bed, and that the inset tion of the article was against his instructions, yet he aas punished for the libel. Did the Learned Lord reflect, that it was the sarcasms in the Beacon and the Sentinel that laid Mr. Stuart under the moral necessity that led to the late fatal result? The contents of these Papers had a di rect tendency to produce a breach of the peace, as one of them contained a paragraph, in which it was stated, that the authors were always ready to give their names, and that that circumstance marked it a gentlemanly Paper---(Elear).—An action had been brought by Mr. Stuart against the Proprietors of the Sentitiel, and two of the Advocate Deputes stated it as their opinion, that the articles coniplained of were perfectly justifiable, though the attack upon Mr. Stuart had been in the greatest degree per sonal; and had led to a fatal result. Ile had to state a case of grots oppression, that would supersede Al comment. The case was that of W. Mat ray Barth wick. He (Borthwick) had some connection e ith a man of the name of Alexander, and in 1821, they carried on the Sentinel in conjunction. In November, 1821, they agreed to dissolve partnership, and Alex ander was to pay £2O in money, and 1:90 in bills.— The bill for I:90 was not good, and on the 18th of December, 1821, Borthwick proceeded to sue for the money, or for a reinstatement in the property of the Paper. The Magistrates of Glasgow, on the 14th of February, found Alexander bound to fulfil the agree ment, and if not done within six days, then Borth wick was to be reinstated in his former rights.— On the Ist of March, by a warrant from the Ma gistrates, Borthwick took possession of the premises, carried off the key of the safe, and such of the papers as he tho Ugh expedient, and announced his intention of returning next morning. No opposition was then made by Alexander ; but on the 2d of March Borth wick was arrested, end.on the 10th of March he was liberated, and then Alexander offered terms. Borth wiek stated what had taken place to the Magistrates of Glasgow, and Alexander then preferred a charge of theft against Bolthwiek; and the Procurator-Fis cal, to avert all responsibility from himself, pot at the bottom of the paper, " Concurred only." Borth• wick was immediately discharged by the Magistrates of Glasgow, and going to Edit:burgh, lived without concealment. An attempt was then made to Cantle possession of Dot thwick's papers before the Sheriff of Edinburgh, and ueon that occasion one ef the Learned Lord's Deputes acted as Counsel for Alexander.— On the 4th of April Bortinvick was arrested at Dun dee, and was put in irons. He was brought to Edin burgh, guarded by two men armed with pistols; bal was refused, and he was indicted on the 6th of April, and the trial fixed for the 24th. The utmost anxiety was expressed by Borthwick for the trial, when Hope, the Advocate-Depute, deserted the diet, fro loco et tempore, at the same time offering to liberate him on bail. By the advice of iris Counsel that offer was refused, as otherwise he could not have the bene fit of the Act of 1701. Furry days elapsed, and WI order was made by the Lords of justiciary lot his release; when Alexander, with the concourse (coa currence) of the Lord Advocate, preferred the saute charge as that which had fOrMerly been pronounced .by the Magistrates of Glasgow wholly unfounded. — The Learned Lord might say that he could not lee fuse his concurrence; belt that opinion was disputed by some of the ablest writers on the law of Scotlead. —The Learned Lard most have known that no real charge could lie against the man. If the Learned Lord thought horthwick guilty, why did he Allow Alexander to interpose? Within forty-eight hours after the trial of Mr. Stuart, Borthwick - was di - charged, after seventy days confinement. In 7: 1 - ‘ 3 1 :e rlu n erd ot r.a rch s on : e a d tr.ds b: ief i i s t pama, OcrmwMOr m latimaift Midi* the. . ea s t tk . able. The &mai' Bill sed a and patavd. Mt. CU RWE!•l4noved for a Copy of ityrileeefrluttication which bad taken place between the Racist WM AileTreasuty, I resp.stise the proposed duty of Ss a kinked en Ssit:—Ordered. The Stamp Duties Bill was, upon the motion of Mr. Lusu- wenn, recommitted. In tle Couto:btu *e /loft Gentleman Istated, in answer to a question from Mr. liitshitouse, thaoit was not his intention to place Benefit Societies la a worse condition