Star. — London, England, 1822-05-07 00:00:00

'V' T j ll . t ' 'l' t' . Nr i r*, 4 l . . ' O • . , petition was was ptopseed to be established, in the same manner as was done in Scotland, and the gooi effects of which were always fe l t in that countr y ; for at the time when the country banks of England were suf feting the greatest crush, the Scotch banks rode through the storm, and no such thing as a bankruptcy' or failure was known to have taken place in any of them. The plan of extending the banking system all over the country, could not now be adopted without the consent of the Bank of England : they had a veto upon it, and,he would ask whether a relaxation of their monopoly was not an advantage for which they' ,ought to receive a further c ontinuance of their Char ter for tea years? Ile should be ready to discuss this subject fully when the proper occasion arrived for so:doing. The Marquis of LANSDOWN said he should make a few remarks previous to a motion with which he meant to conclude. The question between the Government and the Bank depended on the equiva— lent that was to be given. In Ireland he conceived it absolutely necessary to open banking concerns in order to give them greater security, by admitting an unlimited number of partners ; but it did not follow that such a thing should be done in England, where capital abounded so much, and he did not look to the same advantages from the plan here as in Scot land. He trusted the Bank of England would not issue one note less in consequence of this extension of banking concerns throughout the country : but it would be a question of some importance whether it would be wise to continue its monopoly to the Bank of England,for ten years longer—a thing which had never been done before without a large pecuniary sacrifice cn the partof that body. It appeared, how ever, that a large sacrifice was to be made on the part of the Public to the Bank, merely for the pur chase of a present relief, which was not likely to be attended with any great effect. The Noble Marquis then moved that there be laid before the House co pies of all the correspondence between the Govern ment and the Batik of England on the subject of the extension of the Bank Charter. Earl GREY, in reply, said he considered the plan of enlarging Country Banks as altogether nugatory, unless it was intended as the beginning of an evasion of the provisions of the Act passed in 1819, for the Renewal of Cash Payments. The Earl of LIVERPOOL said, the chief object was to put Country Banks on the best possible system. Lord ICING strongly condemned the measure for selling the Annuities payable to Officers and Pen sioners, while a Sinking Fund was kept up, that would counteract all the good effects likely to result from such an operation. After a few words from Lord SVFFIELIN Lord LANSDOWN'S motion was agreed to, and the House adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS. Sir R. SIIAW presented a Petition from a body of Christian people, styling ihemselves Separatists, complaining of the h ard ships to which they were exposed , in consequence of their h ard ships refusing to take an oath.—Laid on the table. The Importation of Goods Repeal Bill was read the second time and ordered to be committed tO.IIIOCrOW. Lord EBRINGTON presented a Petition from the Owners and Occupiers of Laud in Boleworthy, Devooshire, complaining of distress, and attributing it to the unexampled pressure of mation.—Laid on the table. Mr. W. GORDON laid on the table a Petition from the Ship.owners of Aberdeen against the Navigation BilL Captain WEM ISS presented a Petition from the Farmers of the County of Fife, praying that the Scotch Distillers might be put on the same footing as those of Ireland. If Scotland was allowed to export her spirits, the consequence would be an in creased consumption of barley by 500,0b0 quarters annually- Sir R. FERGUSSON supported the prayer of the Petition. Lord A. HAMILTON considered it a great hardship to the Scotch Distillers, that not only were they prevented from ex porting their spirits, whilst England and Ireland could export theirs, but even the spirits imported from England or Ireland were not allowed to be re-exported from that country. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, that the Bon. Gentleman who presented the Petition had overstated the cue. This was a question of much importance, and he wished the House to suspend their opi nions until the ommissioners of Inquiry, before whom the whole matter was laid, should make their Report. In the present distress, be bad no objection to give every facility for the consumption of barley ; but he had no hesitation in saying that be would prefer seeing the increased consumption take place rather in beer than spirits, which were so hurtful to the morals of the People. Sir RONALD FERGUSSON said, that the Scotch Distil lers, who brewed for the English and tome market, were placed under certain disadvantages. They were obliged to have two llcenses, and the works for each were to be distant two miles , from each other. Also, if after having tried the English market, they found their account in ivturning to the home consumption, they were Pot allowed to have a license in the English concern until a year had elapsed after it ceased to be worked for the Eng lish market. T res e HUNTER BL AI It moved for a copy of the Report addressed by the Lords of the Treasury to the Chairman oft he Board of Excise for Scotland, relative to illicit distillation in that country-- Sir EDWARD KNATCHBULL presented a Petition from the Owners and Occupiers of Land in Kent, complaining of Agricultural Distress. The Hon. Member prestnted two laini simi lar Petitions from the same county.—Laid en the table. Mr. DUGD ALE presented two Petitions from the Owners and Occupiers of Land in the county of Warwick, complaining of Agricultural Distress, and objecting to that part of the plan which referred to the grinding of corn in warehouses.—lteferred to the Agricultural Committee. Mr. PARES presented a Petition from certain Unitarians, against the Marriage Act.—Laid on the table. Mr. MAULE presented a Petition from the growers of Belo. ley or Rincardine, praying the exportation of Scotch Whiskey. Mr. S. WORTLEY presented a similar Petition from the growers of Barley of Forfar.—Both referred to the Agricultural Committee. Six THOMAS LETHBRIDGE presented a Petition front the Owners and Occupiers of Land in the counties of Somerset and Gloucester against certain parts of the plans in progress for relieving Agriculture. The petitioners stated that these were not time . plans from which they could expect substantial relief. Th e y thought that still less was to be expected from the plans presented by the Honourable Member for Portarlington ( Mr. Illeardo)—(A laugh). In all these particulars, he (Sir Thomas) agreed entirely with the petitioners. Respecting the plans of the Honourable Aleniber for Portarlington they were so vi sionary that he knew not how t o a rgu e against them; and yet that Honourable Member had charged him(Sir Thomas), and ot h e r Gentlemen in that House, with giving opinions without at the same time giving any reasons for them. This referred more pa rticularly to the mode in which he (Sir Thomas) had advocated a system of higher protecting duties. Now the fact °Pinion without grounding it upon w as, he had never sta t ed an such substantial reasons as were at least =miming and satisfac tory to those who were of the same spike with himself. The H onou raldie Member had talked of eir a practical question IL . by the test o f ro s a im iut he (fir iilM) Will sure that his ( Mr. Ricardo's) r lag add lead wa esi y error and delusion. There were not 'acing r piss of the bed e ff ects of putting the nation under , the gui of the Goddess of Reason, as the annals of a neghbouring people could testify. He had only to r e p ea t once m ote, that he never stated any vision without a reason for it ; and wiles I=tigras so warranted, re si L nin it Gee why It should nut be lir at mush cousi dentbm as the Honourable Mensbey's for Perearibiton, er any other whatever. lk should only say, in conekalati, that unless prompt and easiest protecting duties against the Importation of every species of agricultural produce were harmed, the House • • , COLONIES. Mr. HUM E said, that the Howe was grolably not aware that the now Colonies were place/ ors a iMihront amen? than that which regulated the old ones, and that's madorr of Agents were thereby created, as he dangle, emosseasudip. if they were placed upon the old systems a ermarftbkiesoing would be effected. Ile should therefore move for a Return of the names of the Agents employed at the Colonies of Ceylon, the Mauritius, Malta, and the Cape of Good Hope stating by whom they were appointed, and the mount ot ;larks they received, and whether they held any other Aces or salaries. Also for a statement of the duties such Ollcers have to perform. Mr. HUSKISSON observed that such Returns had beers made, and he was at akw to know what good could be done by repeating them. However, thls could be made up again, if necessary. HUME made some obeervadons open the refusal of a Committee to make the returns as hem hed for thorn. Mr. WILMOT was not aware the returns could be made as the Hoe. M em ber desired. The information would be much more a matter for explanation. Mr. HUME said that returns of a similar nature had been mad, from other departments.—The motion was agreed to. NAVIGATION ACTS. Mr. SYKES presented a Petition from the town and port of Hull, praying that the Bill foe repealing the Navigation Acts might not pass into a law.—Ordered to be printed. Sir M. W.RIDLEY presented a similaryetition from New- caide•upon-Trne. Mr. BEAL MONT hoped tbe laws would not be altered o as to injure the coasting trade, In which so much property was etatharked.--The Pedtion was ordered to be printed. BANE CHARTER. Mr. GRENFELL observed, that be had recently moved for copies of the Correspond eoce that had taken place . between the Bank of England and the Government. As it was desirable that those returns should be made at the earliest possible period, he wished to ask the Right Don. the Chatwellor of the Excite querwhetber they would be on the table that evening, and if oat, when they were likely to be ready Ile also wished to ask when the question of the extension of the Bank Charter was ex pected to come on for discussion ? The Marquis of LONDONDERRY suggested that the Ilan. Member had better put the question when his Right Honour able Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer was hi the House. - IRISH POOR. Mr. CALVERT stated, that he had observed a considerable influx of Irish Poor into the metropolis within the last few days. They came in parties of 50 or SO together. lie understood that these poor people were taken away again in waggons. The Member wished to know from the Right Hon. Secretary of State whether this was done simply under the regulations of the pat lilies? Mr. Secretary PEEL said, that this was the first informatics he had received upon the subject. NAVIGATION BILL. Mr. LAMBTON presented Petitions from the Ship Owners of Shields and Sunderland, against the Bill for altering the Navigation Laws. The Petitioners stated their opinion, that the Bill now pending went to overthrow entirely that system of Navigation Laws under which this country had risen to its present state of commercial greatness; and, whilst it did this, it went to transfer all our present advantages to Ame rica and other foreign nations. The lion. Member said, his opinion certainly was in favour of a free trade ; but this was a speculative opinion only ; and if this Bill was really to have the effect of injuring the Shipping Interests of this country, as represented by the Petitioners, he could not, whatever his wish might be, support the Bill. The Hon. Member then entered into a review of the scale of expense of ship building in this and foreign countries, by which it appeared that British-built ships cost several pounds per ton more than building in foreign yards. If this was true, he must acknowledge that, unless the sailing of British ships, or some other particular cir cumstance, gave them a decided preference over foreign-built ships, it would be utterly impossible to throw open the trade, unless at the risk of the ruin of our own merchants. Lord ALTHORPE objected to the Bill on the same grounds. Mr. GLADSTONE was also opposed to any alte ration in the Navigation Laws. .Mr. M. A. TAYLOR was fearful the measure now before the House would operate to the advantage of all the rest of the world at our expense. Unless the system was to be free trade all over the world, he must oppose this Bill. General GASCOYNE thought the Right Hon. Gentleman who brought forward this Bill, should be prepared to shew some advantage likely to ori ginate in the measure before he called on the House to support it. Mr. WALLACE would not now enter into the merits or demerits of the Bill, but he trusted when the second reading was brought forward he should be able to shew good reasons for the adoption of the measure by the House. Sir W. CURTIS also strongly opposed the Bill. If this measure was adopted, there would be an end to all our commercial greatness. Mr. LAMBTON could not agree with the Right Hon. Gentleman in thinking that partial discussions were injurious. He thought them, on the contrary, useful, as serving to elicit truth. Mr. ELLICE said, that he could not avoid express ing his astonishment that his Majesty's Ministers had never proposed any regulation for reducing the charges on British shipping. He was prepared to state, that the charges at our ports were from one fourth to one-half more than in any foreign port.— Tor instance, a Collector at Quebec enjoyed an in come of between £3OOO and £4OOO a-year, levied on British shipping ; whilst, he would venture to say, the Collector at the port of New York, the next to London, Liverpool, Hull, and, he believed, Clyde, did not derive above £4OO or £5OO a-year from fees on shipping arriving at that port. In the West India Islands, likewise, a British ship pays the same fees at every island she has occasion to touch at. These were things that required immediate attention. Ile must allude to the subject already brought before the House by the Hon. Member for Aberdeen—namely, consular fees. In Sicily, for instance, a ship must touch at four ports, in each of which he has to pay consular fees. He was the more anxious to press these matters on the attention of Government, 'be cause Government had it in its power to relieve the shipping interest from these burdens, without the in-• lerterence of the House. Nothing was more neces sary than an immediate attention to this subject, If the country was to return to free principles, lei us endeavour to put our shipping as much as possible in a situation to meet the competition of the foreigner. The Petitions were then brought up. General GASCOYNE wished to know, as the se cond reading of th e Navigation Bill sto od for this , • - throughout Mr. Wits. they House could would take to discu lis ssi t c ie it tend Bili onth th e at a second die mot " ion " f b o u r tt its e if m bei , the being committed. Mr. LAMBTON trusted that the Right Hon. Gen tYeman siould lose no time, now that the Committer] on Foreign Trade was sitting, in pressing on its Inost ' ' serious consideration the represe nta tions of his Hon. Friend, the Member for Coventry. WunAdLe!..dAiCscEussiaiosin,inthiahte_ethoe Committee. had been already l After a few words from Mr. MARRYATT, Sir %V. Mr. Ds CIigiVICIFT ' and Sir M. W. RIDLEY, the Petition. was ordered to be printer'. The Navigation Bill uas then read a second time, and ordered to be committed to-morrow (this day), when a day would be fixed for the discussion of the principle of the measure. LICENSING SYSTEM. Mr. HUSKISSON said a Petition had been put into his hands, which he wished the parties had put into those of some other more conversant with their' particular interests. It was, however, his duty, under any circumstances, when lie found nothing objection able in it, to lay it before the House. The Petition came from a builder, who stated that he had built from 400 to 500 houses in the County of Middlesex,, about Mile-eod, the Commercial-road, and those parts which connected the metropolis with the new Docks. He stated that, when 100 of these were built and let, a great inconvenience was felt from the want of a public-house on the spot, the inhabitants being com pelled to go a considerable distance for their hem— Thiecircumstance being made known to the Peti tioner, he built a house in a convenient place calcu lated for the public business, and that alone; the ex pense of building it being upwards of 6001. It was intended that this should be a free public-house. In 1817 a memorial, signed by the principal inhabitants and Churchwardens, was presented to the Magis trates for a license for this house ; but,without making any inquiry into the circumstances of the case, the application was refused. The inhabitants then wished to present a Petition in their own behalf, but they were answered that the decision of the Magistrates was absolute, and that, for that year, the matter should remain so. In 1818 another application was made, the house being still untenanted, and the number of houses having swelled in the meantime to 200; but it was again refined. In 1819 the Petitioner finding, in his own language, that g , he had not interest suffi cient for a li cense," sold the house to a person of the name of Brown, from Bermondsey, for 1,1001. This person had been dealing with Barclay and Co. but, upon coming to his new quarters, he informed the Petitioner that he should change to Truman and Hanbury, as they alone had interest in that place to get him alicense—(Hear, hear). —A license was then in fact obtained. The houses still going on to increase to 400, the inhabitants again suggested the conveni ence of building another public-house, as the first was now some distance from those housei last built. Petitioner, in consequence, took a piece of ground at sonic distance from the other, for which, in 1821, he applied for a license, but was refused—(Hear, hear). —But it happened that another person had taken a piece of ground near the same, without any greater claims to be licebsed than the Petitioner's ; but, as this was sold to Hanbury and Co. there was no difficulty in procuring a license—(Hear). --He (Mr. Huskisson) had advised the Petitioner, when he first heard his, case, to have recourse to a Court of Law, suggesting that this House . was not the place for redress; but he was answered that it was the. pinion of Counsel that he had no legal remedy, and all that remained for him was to lay before the House the abuses of a sys tem by which he had been deprived of his property. It should be recollected that this was a builder—one whose business it was to sell.houses. But what was l the effect of this partiality upon him ? that the house, which, after remaining three years idle, he sold to Brown for 1,1001. Brown could now get 3,000/. for, from the single circumstance of its having a license —(Hear, hear).—Now, upon this Petition, all he would say was, that if the facts in it - were true, there was the greatest necessity for reforming the licensing system. It was not to be endured that the system, in addition to all the abuses arising out of the mono poly which it gave rise to, should also be prostituted to the depreciation of private property—(Hear, hear). —The town was now portioned into districts for licensing in the same way as water, that somewhat more useful beverage, was supplied by water cons panies--(Laughter).—He would ask how long was this system to continue? The case, however, was different as to the country, and, like the Poor Laws, this difference presented obstacles to any improve ment. He believed, however, that with the excep tion of some of the larger towns, there was no want of free houses in the country. Having stated these circumstances, he wished now to call the attention of the House to this important subject. He had before taken the liberty to put a question to the Hon. Mem ber for Weymouth (Mr. F. Buxton), touching the price of beer, and that Hon. Member pledged him self that he would state to the House when the time arrived for lowering the price of beer. Ile (Mr. Huskisson) wished to know whether the time had yet arrived when so desirable a fall was to take place? and at the same time he wished to tell him that, if the time had not yet arrived, something would be done to hasten it—Wear, hear). Mr. F. BUXTON said he concurred with the Right Hon. Gentleman, that if the facts of this Petition were substantiated, there was a strong case made out against the Magistrates. He had to thank the Right Hun. Gentleman for allowing him to see the Petition before it was presented, as it gave him an opportu ' say of collecting some facts which would completely reline the averments of thc Petitioner.. In the first place, be stated that he built the public-house in 1817, and in the same year applied for a license. Now it was not to be wondered that the Magistrates refused it this year, as they certainly wre warranted in considering the application premature. Ile'applied again next year,' but his case was 'no stronger,, for though more houses were - tindaubtkdly. built, yet they were entirely untenanted: Buethen in the third year the license writ granted. Now, up to this time, he contended, the Magistrates were strictly ri&lit in their conduct. But then it remained to cleats them trim , -..~ imputation of corrupt Melts—Ms, be h a d hope, he should easily do. It was said that obtained a license, because be transferred Barclay and Co. to Truman and Han. it was dear, if these latter Gentlemen , influence, that they Would use it only for their own good ; bat whit was she ease here?—dolt Brown's was an entirely free house, Besides, every one acquainted with the trade was aware, that no. thing was more common than this transferring frog. onobrewer to another. So firthen the Magistrates were acquitted es to the first part of the case. Bee what did the Petitioner do afterwards? Instead of being.disheartened, he proceeded to build two houses 'pore. To the first of these, however, there was as objection, for it was only 200 yards from the first house—it was in the same street, and was petitioned against by the person who first got his license. Th e other was only 150 yards off, but the House which Spradley built, who obtained the license, was 320 yards distant, and not in the same street. It was said that this house was sold to Truman and Hanbury, but this was not true, for he (Mr.-Buxton) had in hi s band Spridley's lease. So far, then, he trusted, he bad defended the Magistrates with success from the charge of corrupt motives. To come then to the question of the Right Hon. Gentleman, respecting a fall in the price of beer. It was very true that be (Mr. Buxton) pledged himself to state the time when a fall . might be made in the price of that article, though he did so without consulting the other brewers of the Metropolis. What he then said was, that when the stock of malt in the brewers' bands, which had paid the full duty was consumed, they would then lower the price of beer. The late reduction of the malt tax would amount to only a farthing in the pot, though the Public expected the beer to be reduced a halfpenny. But the reductions of 1818 and 1819 were to be also taken into account. He (Mr. Buxton) had never said that. the price of beer should not be reduced, for he admitted it would be outrageous to expect that the only effect of the reduction of the malt tax would be to put money into the brewers' pockets. With regard to the question, he would an swer the Right Hon. Gentleman, that the time had come for reducing the price of beer, which t% as low ered a halfpenny a pot, though the Government re duction amounted only to a farthing. Having thus said so much for himself, it remained to him to say a word on behalf of the brewers generally. A very general impression prevailed in this House, that the greater part of the public-houses were in the hands of the brewers. This was not true. • He had taken the trouble to make out an account of the number of houses which he had the honour to serve, and Gen tlemen would judge from it, that the charge was not very correct. He found that he served in all 766 persons, of whom 105 lived in the country ; of this number 49 houses belonged to him (Mr. Buxton), 22 were confined by loans, but the remainder were all free and independent. It was not to be understood, however, that he was now defending the present sys tem, of which, in truth, he was no admirer; and he appealed to the Hon. Member for Shrewsbury (Mr. Bennet), if he had not given him all the assistance in his power, in and out of the House, when he brought in his Bill? He had even suggested a clause to be inserted, with a view completely to cut off the brewers from the possibility of having a share in any public-house. This would of course interrupt the freedom of the trade, and would be felt still more in the country than in town. It was, however, of so much importance, that, for his own part, he was ready to submit to the restriction, in order to get rid of the abuses which were complained of. Another objection had been started, respecting the strength of beer. A gallant Admiral had said, that beer was not of the same strength now that it was in his younger days. Now he (Mr. Buxton) had taken some pains to compare the strength of beer now with what it had been, and the House would see that the modern bevy had the advantage. lie was able to ascertain that beer. was 25 per. cent. stronger than 20 years ago. This fact he stated, - not upon his own authority, but frpmthe. books of the Excise, where an account was kept of .the relative strength of beer. These facts, therefore, proved that six out of seven in the trade were free, and this statement was borne out by the Report of a Committee of this House. There was no. bar to sufficient competition, and under all these circumstances he had to complain of the charges which were too frequently made against the bteuers in that House. Mr. C. CALVERT said he rose merely to make one observation upon the statement of the Right lion. Gentleman (Mr. Huskisson). He had stated that monopoly did not prevail to such an extent in the country as in the metropolis and the larger towns. The reverse was the fact. It was in the villages the greatest monopoly prevailed; for he (Mr. Calvert) knew the larger brewers in the country supply all the villages in the neighbourhood with beer, without ad mitting of any competition. He (Mr. Calvert) had himself complained of this system, and stated to ihe Magistrates that they should not sanction so much partiality and injustice. He had given an opinion upon the subject, and he had now no difficulty in rz peating, that, if he was a Magistrate, he would n,;: give countenance to such a system. Sir J. SEBRIGHT said, that the great evil of the present system was, that it shut out fair competition, by which the Public were deprived of good beer. Mr. BENNET pointed out the defects of the pre sent system, which enabled the brewers in the coun try to drench the people with vile poison. He had been round to some of the houses and tasted the beer himself, and • had found it such stuff that he won' dered it could be drank at all. He was of opinion that the evil could only be • remedied by rermittrg beer to be sold as freely as bread. From doing tltts there were no just grounds to fear that drunkenne9 would increase, as that vice was not found most pre' valent in wine countries, where some could be pr . ' chased at almost every house. He wished every OC's to be allowed to sell beer, but he did not wis h ever! one to be allowed to keep a public house. The h!" forbade persons to tipple in public-houses ; but C'e Magistrates, the wise men of Gotham, required 11 . 1 " those who sold beer" Should have benches, table.. pipes, and newspapers, to induce the poorer classes"' drink more than they. would otherwise take. 11 ' . .` beet freely sold as he proposed, as bread or as 50!.;.1. r _ was at present, he was confident that it would be y..:•E the Public without at all injuring the Revenue. Soc.e loss might be sustained front such a change, but 4 was the duty of that House to look to the general !ir t I 1 I I 1 j . . weak' fail in reOrkt eanlidenee a e 111.10.41 thaw flagpif t wise now loohedat dear ntesforea vridt niniingeort."—yirr Petition was ordered toge ssi trtik ieinted. Mr. MAXWELL a Pedtie kat Or dam*. goner , of s em i" f or t h e ro use/ ReoffarK vitati'the subject of Agrttial LlWros.—Orderest b arid* • Colonel DAVIES gave notice, that urn same ham octs. skin he should move a series of Itesololons tor die raped a p r . tan Taxes. ...As metal. , P 4 • day, wisit tliel. , lost' .to ro -Ned with de Bill that the imputed, day ? because, Wow, ivereuW bit $ seem convenience - 4 s ome hope, ..] to hate a day fixed wben it would posidrely come os. I "sown obtael Sir I. COFFIN- said, that the fees on shipping himself from throughne the United States were most enormous. ury. Now Mr. WALLACE said, he despaired of being able us ed any infi . •,.._ _ TE___..........1.1 ...1............ mini I 9 • do alc, bc co Pr CI p tv CI C iii 421 is it 11 ei ./ 1 si ter MI We Mt