Star. — London, England, 1821-03-06 00:00:00

PARLIAMENTARY PROCEEDINGS. . HOUSE OF LORDS, MARCH 5. 41seit Lordships met at ten o'clock, to hear Appeals. In the Cause, " Linwood v. Vanshattome " being an appeal few the decision of the Court of Session, 4codand, Mr.-We dwell was heard for the Appellant, and Mr. Warren for the Esppon4ent. Further hearing postponed. Mr. Bananzx brought up from the House of Commons the Offenders' Transportation Bill.—Read a first time. Mr. Irmo, from the Custom-House, brought up a copy of the Order. to the Outports relative to the Importation of Irish Spits into Oseat Britain. Mr. Joaxsox, from the Ocoee of-Chief Secretary in Ireland, .pritented certain Papers pUrsuint to Act of Parliament. • A pelson from the India Board presented an Account of the Trade carried oa by America with India; and also of the Trade betweiii India and China. The Earl of SHAFTESBURY moved that a Message be sent to the House of Commons, requesting that John Hodson, 'Esq. be permitted to attend the Committee of their Lordships' on Foreign Trade.—Ordered. The Bill for regulating the Laws of Treason in Ireland went through a Committee and was reported. The Marquis of LANSDOWN moved that all the Petitions presented to that House last year, and referred to the Commit- Ate on Foreign Trade, should be referred to. the Committee which was then sitting for the same purpose.—Ordered. The Marquis of LANSDOWN presented a Petition from . several Roman Catholics in the City of Limerick, praying for the removal of the Penal Laws against Roman Catholics. He said, as there was a Bill now before the other House of Parlia ment on this subject, he would not trouble their Lordships 'with any remarks on this subject until that Bill should come be fore them, or until its fate in the other House was known ; but he felt it necessary to say, that although the present Petition was scot numerously signed, it contained the names of most respect able persons, and that be cordially concurred in the sentiments they had expressed. The Noble Marquis next presented a Peti tion from the Borough of Chippenham, in favour of the Queen. — Adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS. Shortly after four o'clock, Mr. COKE rose, and said he held In his hand a Petition from certain Occupiers of Land in the County of Norfolk, praying for relief. The Honourable Mem ber was proceeding to state his opinion upon the subject of the Petition, when he was interrupted by Mr. S. WORTLEY, who suggested the propriety of post poning the Petition until the private business, of which there was a great quantity before the House, was disposed of. Mr. BEAUMONT said, it was net competent for the Ho nourable Member to give advice against the tenour of the Or ders of the House. The SPEAK ER said, that there was no particular order upon the subject ; but it bad been the usual practice to allow the pri vate business to be disposed of before the public. Mr. H. SUMNER said, that if the public matter was allowed to employ the attention of the House during the time allotted for the disposal of private business, private buoiness could not be disposed of. Mr. COKE said he would present the Petition to-morrow. The SPEAKER said, he had no wish to suggest that the Pe- . tition might not be received now. He only stated what was the usage of the House. Bills for the Lighting with Gas of parts of the Borough of Southwark, by Mr. C. CALVLRT of Hammersmith, Brentford, and Its vicinity, by Mr. Resie ; and of the Towns of Bristol and Kingston-upon-hull, by their respective Members, were severally brought in, read a flea and second time, and ordered to be committed. A message . from the Lords announced their concurrence in the Annual Indemnity, and several private Bills. It also con tained a request, that Joint GLADSTONE., Esq. a Member of the /louse, should be permitted to Attend as a witness before the Committee in their Lordships' House, for the protection of Fo reign Trade. Answered, that this Iluit‘e had received the mes sage, and would send its answer by Messengers of its own. Mr. H. SUMNER presented a Petition signed by 800 per sons, who stated that they were owners of 250,0E)0 acres of land near Beverley, in the East Riding of Yorkshire, complain ing of Agricultural Distress.—lle also presented a Petition from the farmers of Winchelsea, on the same subject.—Ordered to lie on the table. Mr. CURWEN presented a slmilu• Petition from the Far mers of Workington, in Cumberland. The Petitioners com plained of the greatest distress, and stated that they had hitherto sQuggled in the hope that some relief would be given to them, MR that if its application was long delayed, they would be irre coverably ruined. Mr. CA RTWRIGHT presented twelve similar Petitions from the county of Northampton, all complaining of great Agricultural Distress.—Ordered to lie upon the table. Sir It. FERGUSON presented a Petition from the .Agricul turists of Kirkaldy, in Scotland, praying the House to make some alterations in the Import Duties onWooL Laid on the table. Mr. FELLOW ES presented a Petition from 500 Landholders of Huntingdon, complaining of Agricultural Distress.—Laid on the table. Mr. LA W LEY presented a Petition from the wholesale and retail Cern-dealers of Southam, in Warwickshire, similar to the shove.---Laid on the table. Sir C. BURRF.LI. presented a Petition from Saddleworrh, In Yorkshire, against the Duties on Wool.—Laid on the table. Mr. SYKES presented a Petition front the Merchants and t)hip -owners of Hull, against any alteration in the Timber aties.—Referred to the Committee on Foreign Trade. Mr. BEA U3IONT presented a Petition frees the Owner, .and Occupiers of Land in the County of Northumberland,com plaining of Agricultural Distress, and praying fur relief.— Ordered to lie on the table. Dar. B. WI LBIt .1 HA M gave notice of a motion for Thurs day for leave to bring in a Bill; the object of which was to enforce the more regular attendance of Jurors at Assizes. The Nova Scotia Trade Bill went through a Committee, and the Report being brought up, the Bill was ordered to be read a third time to-morrow (this day). Mr. BROGDEN brought up the Report of the New South Wales Duty Bill, which was ordered to be read a third time to-morrow (this day). The African Company's Abolition Bill was read a second time after a few words from Mr. Hume, Mr. GOULTUTOi, and Mr. was. SMITU, and ordered to be committed to-morrow. The Attoineys' Fees in Ireland Bill went through a Com mittee, and the Report was ordered to be received to morrow. On the motion of Mr. LUSH I NGTON the House went into a Committee on the Glass Acts, and the Report was or. dered to be received to-morrow (this day). NENVIRGTON (ARIBA SELECT VESTRY RILL. On the motion of Mr. H. SUMNER, the Order of the Day for the second reading of this Bill was read. Mr.DENNISON rose to state his objections to the Bill. He said that the Parish had been governed by a body of thirty-two Gentlemen, called the Gover nors and Guardians of the Parish, twelve of whom annually retired, and were liable to re-election. He stated, that the Parish experienced great advantages from the services of this body—the greatest regu larity was observed in the proceedings, and a consider able saving of the finances of the Parish was effected by their means. He denied that there was any dispo. sition to turbulence, and showed, by a reference to the numbers that attended the Vestries there, that no tumult or insubordination could prevail in them.— The Petition for this Bill was signed only by 106 persons, and that against it by 1,665: Two of the former had already•recanted, and of the latter there were 27 Members of the Governors and Guardians of the Parish, A Meeting was held about this Bill, and 1,000 rersons attended it, only 30 of whom were for it. But the Clergyman left the chair prematurely, amid cries of 44 Shame." There was no imputation on the conduct of the Governors. He had also the' strongest objection to the Bill in a constitutional point of view, because it disallowed dot only the holding of Vestry Meetings, but all Meetings of the 'Parishioners, without exception. Mr. Serjeant ONSEOW said, the question *as, Isbether er not there was anything in the circum aquas of a Parish of 30000 inhabitants, which made. It impossible for their affairs to -be governed by a . Select Vestry ? tie described the Vestry Meetings as most disorderly, and said that, on one occasion, a dog was introduced - for the purpose of barking at .a peculiar individual when helot up to speak. He denied that the Vestry Meetings were hitherto guided by anything like regularity : and as to the character of the existing Governors, he would state to the House, that one of them was convicted of being a receiver of stolen goods. Sir W. DE CRESPIGNY- spoke against the prin ciple of the Bill, and said it was only a step to the subjugation of the inhabitants of every Parish in the kingdom. Dr. LUSHINGTON opposed the Bill in foto. He entered into an examination of the powers given to the Select Vestry by this Bill, and thoughtchat they' were of such a nature as ought not to be entrusted, to any such body of men. With respect to the indi vidual alluded to, as being a receiver of stolen goods, it was quite true ; but then let the House remember, that this circumstance occurred nine years ago; that the individual was first appointed an Overseer by a Magistrate, and that a Petition for his pardon was signed by sixteen Magistrates, immediately upon his conviction. He admitted that there was great con fusion in the Parish; but he would not agree to a measure like this, which took away the rights and liberties of the Parish. Mr. PRICE said he thought it necessary that the government of the Parish ought to be taken away from the present Guardians, upon the ground that the Meetings were turbulent and disorderly. Ile said, that some of the Members of that body had been convicted of libel, contained in some of their Resolutions, passed at a Vestry Meeting. Sir R. WILSON spoke against the Bill, as one which took away the rights and liberties of the Pa rish; and looked upon it as an initiative step to the destruction of the elective franchise amongst the in ferior classes, and to limit it to property. Ile there fore called upon every friend of liberty to oppose it. He said that the Governors had been accused of li belling : he held in his hand a libel by the adverse party, without the name of the printer. Mr. WILLIAMS opposed the Bill, on the ground that it was proposed on the spur of the moment, and when the feelings of the Parish were in a state of the utmost irritation. It was of great importance whe ther or not the rights and liberties of a respectable Parish should be taken away ? Mr. W. SMITH said, he held in his band Paper,' presented to him on entering the house, in common, he believed, with many other Gentlemen, with the names of Clinton and Carter to it, whom he under stood to be Solicitors for the Bill. He was instructed to say, it contained many fitlse assertions. If it were stated by the Hon. Member for Surrey that the as sertions in that Paper were true, he (Mr. Smith) would vote for the Bill being committed. At pre• sent, lie did not think a case was at all made out to justify such a measure as this. Mr. MONCK opposed the Bill on general grounds. He had no local concern in the Parish, but telt great objection to the principle of giving such large powers, to a body for life. He considered it as an introduc tion of the Borough system into Parishes. Mr. HUNIE rose, but the cries of Question were so repeated, that he sat down, and Mr. H. SUMNER rose to reply. Mr. DENNISON explained. Mr. G. BENNET opposed the Bill, contending that the Magistrates had the appointment of the Over seers, not the Parish. Mr. H. SUMNER explained. Mr. BYNG complained, that the agitation of this question had produced divisions and dissensions of the wow st kind in the Parish. He thought these would be perpetuated by the passing of the Bill, as it would throw power into the hands of a few to the exclusion of the many, and he therefore opposed the Bill. Mr.C.Cm.veirr. spoke against the Bill, as did also Mr. P. Moone. Loud calls were then made for a division, and upon the Gallery being cleared, the numbers stood thus : Fur the Bill l2B Against it Majority —B6 The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered to be committed. GRAMPOUND DISFRANCIIISEMENT ETT.L. The Order for the Day for receiving the lteport on the Grampound Disfranchisement Bill being read, Mr. STUART WOR'rLEY said, that understand ing the Bill, on account of the amended qualifica tion, had been abandoned by a Neble Lord (Lord J. Russell), whom he did not see in his place—but not feeling that he (Mr. S. Wortley) was obliged, there fore, to give it pp also, moved that the Bill be re committed and printed for the inspection of the House. The only alteration he proposed to make in the Bill was this—in its present form it confined the franchise to such persons only at Leeds as had been rated at £2O a-year fbr their house alone. He would extend it further—he would make payment of scot and lot a qualification, and whether a householder was rated at £2O, or a less sum, for his house, if he possessed £2O a-year from lands or tenements, still he was to have the franchise.. Mr. ABERCROMBIE suggested the 'minting of the new clauses for the accommodation of Members, before the Committee was gone into. Mr. LOCKHART thought more time ought to be given for consideration before the House were hurried into a Committee. _ _ _ Mr. S. WORTLEY stated, that there were 1,690 houses in Leeds, which were rated at £2O a-year. "Mr. HOBHOUSE liked the former Bill but little, brit he liked it still less with the amendments which were now to be made in it. He thought the same person might, with great consistency have voted for one and opposed the other. The former Bill was un worthy the Noble Lord who brought it in, and only disappointed the expectations of thetountry. It was by ao means decisive enough ; yet he thought it would be useful, and he voted for it just to shew that a Reformer or Radical was not of so uncompromising a nature but that he would take what was offered to him, though he did not get all he expected. He did not expect the Bill would improve much in the hands of the Member for Yorkshire. When it was so in complete after coming from the Noble Lord, whose I views were known to be friendly to Reform, it could not, at least, be bettered by coming from another quarter, where a contrary feeling was known to exist. i ßy a new gill, one would have expected some provemettt ; the child ought to Wee beat More ami able than the parent—;—. Mater isikhrge, fdis poslobior. Yet the contrary was the fact here—not the mother's beauty, but the mother's deformity, had descended to her offspring. The Hon. Member then proceeded to - defend the Electors bf Westminster from an attack -U) __Jade upon them on a former bight by the Honour able Member for Taunton (Mr. A. Baring), whom he was sorry not to see in his place. The attack was mast wanton and undeserved, for the Electors of Westminster were an enlightened and patriotic set men. There was no city in the Empire, possessing, as it did, 1.5,000 Electors, where such small sums of money were expended. He did not see the Honour able Member in his place; but, hotvever, as the Ho nourable Member did not.spare him (Mr. Hobhouse) in his absence, he thought he was hatdly entitled to sty forbearance from him on that score. The Hon. Member had said, that on popular hustings, and he mentioned Westminster and Southwark, nothing but nonsense was talked to the people. These were hard words ; but they were made more offensive by the Mr. BANKES rose to order. It was unusual both to advert to a past debate, and to the conduct of an absent Member. The SPEAKER said, that in both these particu lars the Hon. Gentleman was irregular. The prin ciple upon which alisision to a former debate was pre vented, was, thatmisrepresentations might be guarded against. The Hon. Gentleman would see, therefore, that he was irregular in alluding to a past debate, and that it was aggravated when he himself acknow ledged that the lion. Member to whom he was al luding was absent. Mr. HOBHOUSE bowed to the authority of the Chair; he would be governed entirely by the course which it thought proper to mark out to him, but he thought it hard when he was charged with speaking nonsense, that he should not be permitted to defend himself—(licor).—The Hon. Member had no right to assume that any man's language was nonsensical, for what might appear so to him, would, perhaps, appear sensible enough to others. He recollected hav ing heard of a popular Member for Taunton corning into that town with four Cupids and a large log before him !—(A laugh).—But this he (Mr. Hobhouse) knew, that no Candidate for the City of Westminster would get a single vote by such a classical exhibition ! (Loud lauglder).—The Honourable Member then proceeded to argue against the principle of treat ing the people general.y, as if no regard was to be paid to their common sense. He next vindicated his own conduct towards the Electors of Westmin ster, remarking, that he had given them a pledge which he should never ♦iolate. He augured well to the cause of Reform, from seeing some of the Noble Families of the land coming forward in favour of it. It was also a good omen to see the Despots of Europe, though leagued against liberty all over the world, yet willing to give the people of Spain and Portugal the advantages of a Constitution similar to that which we enjoyed. He supposed it would be such a Con stitution as that which the Noble Lord delighted in; a Constitution which recognized placemen, pen sioners, and sinecurists, in abundance!—(Laughter). Though a Radical Reformer, still he should not oh; ject to this Bill; because he was glad to see anything that bore even the semblance of Reform acquiesced in by the other side. Mr. 'l'. COURTNEY said, that if the allusions he had made respecting Westminster were not true, the Electors were grossly misrepresented. As to what the Honourable Member had said respecting him (Mr. Courtney) personally, he should only treat it with profound contempt. Mr. lloatiouse and Mr. COURTNEY explained. Mr. HUNIE made some observations in defence of the Westminster Electors. He had had himself oc casion to witness the pure and disinterested motives by which they were actuated in giving their votes., His decided opinion was, that any individual attempt ing to corrupt them, would be instantly scouted. As to the Bill itself, he was a friend to it, though he should have preferred the principle of scot and lot. Ile hoped that this would be an earnest to the people that wherever a blot was found to exist, it would be speedily removed. His Majesty's Ministers were bound to give such a pledge to the people. Mr. H. GURNEY was in favour of the Bill, but wished that the qualification of the Noble Lord (Lord John Russell) had been adopted. In his opinion, the Amendment of the Honourable Member for York shire (Mr. Stuart Wortley) made it much less useful than it would be if the original principle were acted upon.—The Report was then brou*ht - up, and the Bill ordered to be recommitted forthwith. The Bill having gone through the Committee, and some vet bal amendments being agreed to, the Report was ordered to be taken into further consideration on Friday next. TAX ON HORSRS USED FOR HUSBANDRY. Mr. LUSHINGTON moved that the House do re solve itself into a Committee on the Act imposing .a tax on horses employed for the purposes of husbandry. Mr. CUR WEN urged the imperative necessity of abolishing the tax, as he thought that every possible relief ought to be afforded to the Agricultural In terest in its present'distressed state. Any principle was to be deprecated, the tendency of which was to add to the number of those 'labourers who were re ceiving parochial relief. The tax in question was peculiarly severe, inasmuch as it was unequally pro portioned—(Hear, hear). Besides, it was to be ob served, that the agricultural estimates were now made upon the same scale as when the nation was in ' a state of prosperity. This was not to be borne. The Honourable Member concluded by moving, as an amendment, " that it be an instruction to the Com mittee to make provision for the repeal against the Duty on Horses solely employed in Husbandry." Sir C. BURRELL supported. the Amendment. He considered the tax as oppressive as if it had been imposed on the cart, the plough, or even the labourer. Mr. LOCXHART thought that nothing could be more reprehensible than a measure which went to impose a tax upon a'man who was already ruined. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER was not prepared to say that a substitute might not be found for the tax in question, though he held out no hopes of that kind. He complained that this pro position was brotight forward without notice. - Colonel DAVIES said, that when the Army Esti mates should come before the nods*, he would be able to kw that double the amount of this tax might .he saved by t etretching in at part of t h e , establishment alone—(Hear, , h ear). cif Mr. MONCK concurred in thinking th at a effectual means of relieving the distress es ‘,.17410. pressed on the country would he retrenchmentoi expense and reduction of taxation—(Henn). Mr. HUSKISSON argued that the most 066. . ' nient mode for the Honourable Gentl eman to ma.- ceed in would be to take an opportunity of moving the repeal of the duty altogether. The instr act li e which the Honourable Member had moved wal k be inconsistent with the object of the Committee. • Mr. aNETT (of Wiltshire) said, he %%vad at. ' tainly support every motion for the repeal o f T uft . on Agriculture. He could not but feel with Ho mo able Gentlemen, that a real retrenchment, th at g ale 'of real public economy, would go a great way s ofa move the present excessive weight o f ta xat i on. Mr. BRIGHT complained of the anxiety 4c 004; try Gentlemen, who seemed anxious only to to their burthens to the mercantile interest. It oasis's: possible that the country could be served by tra n s ferring oppressive burthens from one gre at publii interest to another. As it struck him, the only e t % tual way of getting rid of the present Tax w as , the Country Gentlemen combining and oppo,ing the Taxes altogether. Mr. CURWEN explained. Ile said, he had la wish to take the House by surprise, or to act unfairly in any way. He had often declared his intention to move to get rid of the present injurious and odious Tax on Agriculture. Ile had no wish to press up ol Ministers: he knew they had difficulties to meet,* that those difficulties increased every hour. If ters would shew a sincere disposition to alleriatete public burthens, he would not only not oppose th e; but would aid them in the effort. The House then divided— For Mr. Curwen's Motion 6.5 Against it l2 Majority against the Motion: .... . ...... RETURNS. The Order of the Day for the House going into a l Committee of Supply having been read, Mr. BENNETT rose, and complained that cub) / Returns, stating the number of the Volunteess is Ai Army, which he had moved for some days ago,v ege not yet laid on the table. Mr. LUSHIIsiGTON said, he hoped the papen would not be long delayed. Mr. lIUME reminded the House that theme. cellor of the Exchequer had, at the beginning of toe Session, informed the I louse, that he expected t o t * able to spew a reduction in the establishment of de Army to the amount of one million. Now he could assure the House, that he had looked carefully its. the Estimates, and could discover only a reduction of about 1.:200,000. That reduction was only in com parison with the year 1820, when the !louse •dl knew the establishment was larger than in 1819. He conceived that the Return of the number of-Volta. teets ought to have been on the table before now ; -. and, since it was not yet given in, he hoped that few days longer would be allowed before the Army Estimates were brought under the consideration of the House. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER es. pressed his hope that the papers alluded to would be placed on the table before Wednesday next, whentlie Army Estimates would be brought forward. The question was then put, that the House do re. solve itself into a Committee of Supply on Wedoes• day nezt—(No, no ! ,from several Members). Strangers were ordered to withdraw, when Mr. BENNETT rose, and said, he would not press for a division now ; but he gave notice, that lithe Returns for which he had moved were not laid on the table before Wednesday, he for one would refuse the Supplies—(Hear, bear).--.The question was then agreed to without a division. TRANSFER OF STOCK. Mr. CURWEN said he had . never risen in this House under feelings more painfol than those which he now laboured under. He had been charged with suggesting a measure which went to subvert every principle of property recognized in the country. He felt that he had not justly incurred such a bawl charge as this: There was not a man in the Howe who entertained a more sacred regard for theft% of property than himself, and he was convinced** if a breach of public faith was once made, if eta prove equally destructive to every species af perty. He proposed no such measure as thar. conceived he had a fair and just reason for for a Return of the amount of the Transfers orSt made within a Certain period, and he openly and* didly avowed, that his object in obtaini#g this retie was to bring that species of property under the net of the House, as an object of taxation. When Pe liament had declared that transfers of stock ad sl transactions connected with public loans "Wadi exempt from duty, it was his opinion that meat had exceeded its just powers. He coal , that the right and the foundation of all Governed' was, that every man should pay for the peed! of himself and property. This was the only gram on which he could be taxed.' If that was the a t ' he maintained that the ezetnption of any one tea s ' or set of men, from the payment of taxes, vas fraud on the community. It was not in the Pm! of Parliament to grant such an.exemptioni uoleo was for the public good, which it was obvious 011 not the case at present. The Hon. Member stated the amount of the public debt at dela periods, and said that, at present, it was of 0 6 . 1 magnitude as to be equal to nearly the whole dr! real property of the United Empire. Was se . kj: fund as that, he asked, to be e x empted from OPT. The 23d of Elizabeth exempted from the charle y : the poor such property as was not of a local - visible character, and therefore the only obiec tki that could be made to the liability of funded . t' petty to pay Poor Rates, was where it was not ton and local. [Some impatience was here manifem, by several Member s , w h o coug hed pretty audib l y The Hon. Member beg g ed p a rdon of the Hom e he had trespassed too much upon their time, b ut ts hoped that they wou ld excuse him, for the sak e " his own honour, as he hied been accused of sufro i ing a monstrous and untenable proposition-4 The taxes pressed on thi country to a degree bey': its ability- to pay them. He hoped that no tome . would ever be called up o n to pay more than hisit a proportion ; thitt just proportion was definabletnt out any di ffi culty, and beyond that it would be extreme of injustice to go ; but so far every • ouSht to go. He could not but tbink that this cif ' V I or• tri rel ple 11 , Aleg air 411 .U. ;. a Abe trbi )let •~f ire . 51F biii toil Jon) tied into ?nu plo, to n • sure also hear into Itric vo it that tithe Cita a syl by II the] One in a dbui were Men !bat cue< firs, Chaff that Noel 111061 14