Star. — London, England, 1822-05-14 00:00:00

l 16"% • • ~z s •• v 4% Vi 6 N•iil4 ‘ lb 1 • \ "\ b ‘ • 01gPit'r Y PROCEEDINGS. HOUSE OF LORDS, MAY 13. Their Lordships met at twelve o'clock, to hear Appeals. Hewn, Appellant; Pass AIM Olinda, Respondent. This was on alTralfrom the Court of Session, Scotland. Mr. Measay.f the Arroatore-Geneeat. for the appellant; Mr. Wasik= rind Mr. Wet Mei= were beard for the re spondents • and the Arroaser-Gmeal. reply.--Judgment ed:' - Earl GREY said be had a statement to make on behalf of so me industrious men, occupiers of small farms in the County o f Northumberland, rho complained that they were likely to be subjected to a great hardship. The Act which imposed a duty on agricultural horses, some years ago, provided that per sons holding farms under 3E50 a-year were last not to be subjral ected to that tax ; and after this tax was taken off, year, a geae impression prevailed that those persons, as well u others, were not to pay any duty for their horses employed in agriculture. But in the part of the kingdom to which he alluded, those in dustrious persons were called upon to pay the tax, from which, in point of justice, they ought to be exempted. He wished to state this fact to the House , and begged to submit it to he con. sideration of the Noble Earl opposite, without intending to make any motion on it. The Earl of LIVERPOOL admitted that the individuals alluded to were entitled to the most indulgent consideration, but he could not say anything as to the particular point that had been just stated, until the matter was referred to the prope r au thorities. It should certainly be inquired into, and ascertained whether it was in the power of Government to grant them relief. Earl GREY presented a Petition from the Occupiers of Land in Monmouthshire, praying for rel The Petition being signed only by the High Sheriff, might be considered as the Peti tion only of that individual; but it had been agreed to at a very large Meeting of Freeholders convened by the Sherif —The Petition was read, and ordered to lie on the table. The Earl of DARLINGTON presented a Petition from Barnard Castle, in the County of Durham, praying for the revi val of a Bill that had already been brought before Parliament for the Recovery of Debts under ACI 5. A Message from the House of Commons requested the at tendance of Lord Stowell before the Committee of that House on Foreign Trade. The LORD CHANCELLOR said, their Lordships would *end an answer by Messengers of their own. Mr. Becalms brought up the Silk Duties Bill, and a Private Bill from the House of Commons. Mr. MASON, from the East India Company, presented an Ac- count of Salaries and Pensions granted by the Company for the last month. The Bishop of LONDON presented a Petition from the Parish of Sr. Martin's in the Fields against the proposed mea sure of admitting Catholic Peers to sit in that House. - The Earl of SHAFTESBURY presented a similar Petition front the Town of Beverley. The Marquis of LANSDOWN, after referring to the motion he bad made for the production of the correspondence between Government and the Bank of England relative to the establish ment of copartnership banking concerns in the country at a dis tance exceeding sixty-five miles from London, wished to know whether, for giving a greater security to the notes of those new banks, they were to be made payable in London? The Earl of LIVERPOOL answered, that they were not to be made payable for the purpose of being circulated in London. The Marquis of LA NSDOWN observed that hitherto the country Bankers had Agents in London, at whose houses their totes were payable. The Earl of GROSVENOR brought forward his annual motion respecting Pensions, Salaries, and Places in Reversion; and moved several Resolutions, recommending the abolition of the same. The LORD CHANCELLOR said, he should object to that Resolution which referred to the office of Clerk of the Parlia ment, which was held by patent.—The other Resolutions were agreed to. The Earl of ROSEBERRY moved the Order of the Day for the consideration of the Report of the Committee of Privileges for considering the qualifications of those who were to vote at the election of Scotch Peers. He conceived that, in all cases of privilege, it was competent for their Lordships to make any re gulations they should think fit. In this case, therefore, he thought it would not be necessary to bring in a Bill, but should move that notice be given to the Lord Clerk &sister of Scot land of the Resolutions which had been agreed to by their Lord ships on a former day, pursuant to a precedent that had been already adopted by that House. After some few observations from Lord Levi:immix. the motion was agreed to. The Earl of DARNLEY wished to know if the Noble Earl opposite would have any objection to give the date of the first communication made by the Government of Ireland to Ministers sedative to the wretched condition of the Irish peasantry ? The Earl of LIVERPOOL said, he could not then say any thing to the Noble Lord's question. Lord DARNLEY then said, be should be in the House to morrow, and would repeat his question.—Adjourned. - __ HOUSE OF COMMONS. I+'f ~:;R. ~ ~.~.~ I; Mr. FLEMING presented a Petition from the Landowne., of Ramsey Marsh, in Hampshire, complaining of Agricultural Distress, and praying a reduction of taxation.—The Petition was laid on the table. Mr. FLEMING presented a Petition from the Congregation of the Gospel Church of Seaford, in Sussex, against the Bill for the relief of Roman Catholic Peers.—Ordered to be printed. Mr. BERNAL presented a retition from a Parish in Sussex, against the Bill for the relief of Roman Catholic Peers.—Laid on the table. Sir W. ROW LEY presented a Petition from the Landowners of Suffolk, against allowing the Warehoused Corn to be taken out of bond at 655. per quarter.—Laid on the table. Mr. BERNAL presented a Petition from the Hop-planters of Sussex, praying a reduction of the Import Duties on that article.—Laid on the table. Mr. BASTARD presented Petitions from the Parishes of Kingsbridge and Dudbrook, in Devonshire, against the Poor Settlement Bill. Similar Petitions were presented. from the Ironmasters of Monmouthshire, by Lord GRANVILLE Sollzasirr ; from the Vestry of Salforn, by Lord STANLEY ; from the Governors of the Poor at Norwich, by Mr. Worisnouse ; and from a Hundred in Sus sex, by Mr. Ileaastr..—All ordered to lie on the table. Mr. CU RTEIS presented a Petition from the Landowners of Sussex, stating, that they regarded with surpri s e and dismay a plan for allowing Corn to be imported at so small a duty as ss. per quarter.—Laid on the table. . Mr. LEIGH KECK presented a Petition from the Clergy ' of the Archdeaconry of Leicester, against the Catholic Bill.— lAid on the table. Mr. STUART WORTLEY presented a Petition from the Manufacturers of Huddersfield, in Yorkshire, praying for a re peal of the Import Duties on Iron. The Hon. Member also presented a Petition from Whitby, in the same county, praying for a revision of the Criminal Law.— Laid on the table. Sir N. COLTHURST gave notice, that on the 6th of June be would move to take into consideration the 56th of Geo. 111. relative to the importation of foreign Butter. presented two Petitions from Brechin, in Scot- Royal Burghs Bill.—Ordered tobe printed. , presented a Petition from the holders of foreign Kingston.upon-Hall, complaining of the onerous duties - imposed on imported corn. The Petitioners stated in warehouse was so much deteriorated that they rr seventeen shillings per quarter for taking it out of mod. — Ordered to be printed. 'OUCH presented a Petition from a Hundred in Sur remission of taxation, and an imposition of high imported corn. Honourable Member presented another Petition from - division of Suffolk on the same subject.—Ordered to ,STNOR presented a Petition from the Fanners and Reigate against the Leather Tax.--Laid on the table. '. BEECHER presented a Petition from the Rev. Rector of Caed..Maynard, in Cork, on behalf parishionen, against the mac system.— Laid on WHITBREAD mo►ed for Returns of soy Ba. hands of the Treasurer for the county of Middle. £BREAD presented a Petition from the &mei. Poor and Churchwardens NI St. Andrew's, Holborn, Poor Settlement 11111.—Inid as the table. notion of lIr• WALLACII I the Order et the ,~~ Bid, . Lord presented cheap administrationdjustke. Mr. B. WILBRAHAM objected to the all emits general principle u a public measure. He also objected to It on the part of the remainder of the county of Lancaster.. Mr. BROUGHAM was in favour of the Bill; he would ever be an advocate for any measure that tended to facilitate or cheapen the administration of justice to the People. He was as tonished at the opposition of the Hon. Gentleman. Mr. WILBILAINAid and Mr. BROOOMAIII mutually explained. General GASCOYNE supported the Bill. After a few words from Mr. Se/Amor, Mr. P. Moose, and Mr. C. WILSON, the gallery was cleared for a division. The numben were—For the Amendment, 96—Against it, 70—Ma jority against the Bill, 46. Mr. HOBIIOUSE availed himself of this opportunity to nsendon the defective character of the Returns that had been made respecting the Insolvent Debtors' Court, those regarding the proceedings in the country had not been made. Mr. Ratestiot and Mr. S. Wonxxxr seve Yorkresented Pe ll.— titions from Yorkshire against the county ofPolls' Ordered lo be printed. Mr. MONCK presented a Petition from Reading against the Poor Removal Bill.—Ordered to be printed. Mr. BUTTERWORTH said, he bad to present a Petition of a singular nature. It was from the Churchwardens of the past and present year, other Officers, and about sixty Inhabi tants of the Parish of St. Matthew, Bethealtreen, disavowing a Petition which, they bad learned from a Newspaper, had been promoted, praying a remission of Mr. Hunt's sentence. The Petitioners said, they had not heard of any Meeting being con vened to adopt the Petition presented on a former day ; that many of the signatures must have been covertly obtained ; that the sentiments it contained had been properly condemned, and that the Petitioners were anxious to have an opportunity of die claiming such sentiments. The SPEAKER observed, that this Petition was, indeed, of rather a singular nature; it was, in fact, a protest. He apps beaded, however, that it could not be received, for several tea. aims. First, this document made allusion, in a disorderly man ner, to accounts of proceedings in that House on the authority of a Newspaper ; secondly, the paper now offered was a Pro test, and not a Petition ; and thirdly, the Petition referred to had not been received by that House, it was withdrawn. Perhaps the Hon. Member would see the propriety of withdrawing the paper which be had offered to the House. Mr. BUTTERWORTH acquiesced in the suggestion, and begged leave to withdraw the Petition--(Hear).—Petition, or Protest, withdrawn accordingly. Mr. LEN NA RD gave no:ice that he should, on Wednesday neit, move for a Committee to inquire into the Civil List (Third Class). If that motion were granted, he meant to follow it up with moving an Address to the King, for a reduction of that class of the Civil List. Mr. BIRCH presented a Petition from St. Mary's, Notting ham, against - the Poor Removal Bill. Mr. SCARLETT, to show the necessity of something being done, mentioned that six pregnant womtn had been removed from the parish in which they were seduced, to a place where they had not fur some time resided.—The Petition was ordered to be printed. • Mr. M. A. TAYLOR postponed, till the 6th of June, his mo tion touching the Appellant Jurisdiction of the House of Lords. Colonel DA VIES postponed till the next Session, his motion connected with the Dismissal of Officers without Courts Martial. Lord A. HAMILTON, in presenting a Petition from the 1 Merchant Burgesses of Edinburgh against the Royal Burghs Bill, desired to know from the Lord Advocate when that Learned Lord intended to proceed with his Bills, or whether he intended to abandon them? The LORD ADVOCATE said, it was his intention to pro ceed with the Bills, and that other motions of great national importance occasioned the delay that had occurred.—Petition read, and ordered to be printed. Mr. P. MOORE presented a Petition from Coventry against the Poor Removal Bill. Mr. DEN MAN moved that this Petition be printed. He considered it a measure of great importance, and one respecting which it was desirable that they should obtain every possible iuformation.—Motion agreed to. Mr. CANNING, the House having gone into a Committee on the Catholic !'errs' Bill, moved some verbal Amendments. He merely desired that the Amendments should be agreed to pro farina, so that the Bill, in Its amended form, should be printed.— Amendments %reed to; Report brought up by Mr. 111.113XISSON, and it was ordered to be taken into further consideration on Wednesday next. ORDERS OF THE DAY. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY wished that the Hon. and Learned Gentleman (Mr. Scarlett) would postpone his Bill, so that the Order of the Day for presenting the Report of the Agricultural Distress Committee might be received. It was de sirable that a Bill should be brought in as early as possible, because in that form the proposed measures would be more intelligible to the country. Mr. SCARLETT replied, that if there was not likely to be much debate on the Report, be could have no objection to allow it to have precedence of the Poor Removal Bill. The :Marquis of LONDONDERRY said, he did not apprehend that there could be much debate on the Agricultural Resolutions, as they had already undergone four days discussion. If there were any opposition to be made to the principles of the mea sure, or to its details, it might be mere convenient to reserve such opposition till the Bill had been in troduced. A gallant Officer (Colonel Davies) bad given notice that he should move Resolutions on the Report, to call on the House to direct a further di minution of taxes. He must protest against such a mode of proceeding. He thought it would not be fair to bring forward such Resolutions just as they were about to close measures of great importance to the finances of the country. Colonel DAVIES said he felt himself bound to bring forward his Resolutions. The country had asked relief; and his Resolutions went to recommend that relief for which there had been so general a call. Mr. SCARLETT observed, judging from what had fallen from the Hon. Member who last spoke, that the discussion of the Agricultural question would occupy some time ; and that as it appeared to be the desire of the House to proceed with that subject, be should postpone his Bill—(Hear, hear).—He then proposed that the second reading of the Poor Re- 1 moval Bill be postponed till the Slst May. Mr. GIPPS complained that so important a Bill should be postponed to so distant a day, and ex pressed his regret that the Government bad not more particularly directed its attention to the subject of such Bill.—Motion agreed to. AGRICULTURAL DISTRESS IMPORT. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY then moved that the Agricultural Distress Report be brought up. Mr. BROGDEN having presented it, and on the motion that it be read, General GASCOYNE said that he would take that opportunity to deny that the distress of agriculture resulted from the defective state of the Corn Laws. Such an idea was unfounded in truth, and he should avail himself of the first stage of the Bill that might be opposed to express his sentiments on the subject. Colonel DAVIES then rose. He should move those Resolutions of which he had fornierly given notice. He was not desirous of trespassing on the attention . .4170F9 Or..Nfir . " 7 ". • PKIII bring 4. given notice. The universal cry had been, and was, for immediate relief. As that was the case, he demised it but justice to the House to propose something that was calculated s : i o ut iive the country immediate relief It had been as that the distress did not result from the taxes, but was caused by a redundant sup ply; and the Noble Lord had improved on such statement by declaring that a reduction of taxation would not afford relief. The Ministers accordingly adopted such statement as their principle; they said reduction of taxes would be of no use. This was as, much as to say; that corn must continue at 70s. the quarter at least ; for, if the present taxes remained, it was impossible that The remunerative price to the farmer could be lower than 70s. and as he was of opi nion that nothing would be so injurious to the best interests of this country as to attempt to keep up high prices of corn, he should propose, as the only sound course of proceeding, a reduction of taxes,. That was the mode to relieve the distresses of agri. culture ; and he felt more particularly the policy of this course of proceeding, because he was persuaded that the price of corn could not rise. It appeared from the Resolution which he had to present, that the taxes on Candles, Hides, Soap, and Salt, amounted in the gross to 8,857,000/. of which two-thirds, or, about 2,500,0001. were borne by the agriculturists, besides a heavy proportion of the Poor Rates. On the 25th of March, 1820, the Poor Rates amounted to 7,500,0001.-6,000,0001. of which fell upon thel, landed interest. The Hon. and . Gallant Member then entered into a comparative statement of taxation in Ireland, and said he should propose the repeal of all those that came under the Excise Department in that country ; he next argued at some length to shew that a diminution of taxation , produced a corresponding increase of revenue, while, on the contrary, an in crease of taxation tended to impair the revenue.— After quoting some calculations in support of this preposition, the Hon. and Gallant Member said, that the object of his Resolutions was to repeal the whole of the Excise Duty on Salt, Soap, and Candles, and half the Excise Duty on Leather, producing in the whole a net amount of 5,204,0001. He next com mented on the injurious effect of the Excise Laws in their present operation, and concluded by moving his Resolutions, not, he said, with the view of doing away any of the Resolutions proposed by the Noble Marquis, but to be added to them, should the House think at to sanction his proposition. The SPEAKER observed, that the question now before the House was for bringing up the Report ; and if the Resolutions of the Hon. Member were adopted, the Report could not now be received. He also wished to state, that the Resolutions could not be added in a supplemental form, as they had not come before the Committee. Colonel DAVIES acquiesced in the decision of the Chair, and withdrew the Resolutions, offering at the same time a few words in reply to an observation from the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who com plained of the informality of the proceeding. Sir JOHN SEBRIGHT felt anxious to deliverhis opinion upon the subject of the Resolutions which had been withdrawn ; he should certainly have op posed them, if for no other reason than that they had not come before the House in a regular form. He was an advocate for all practicable reduction; but it was to be observed that the Resolutions of the Hon. and gallant Member did not bear at all upon the great and important question before the House. His own opinion was that the Resolutions of the Com mittee were calculated to afford very material relief to the Agriculturists, and he could not forbear from thanking the Noble Marquis for having brought them forward—(Hear, hear). Mr. WESTERN regretted that the discussion upon a question so vitally interesting to the country should be further postponed; for he thought the sooner something was decided upon the better. He differed entirely with his Hon. Friend the Member for Hert fordshire (Sir John Sebright), for he thought that the Resolutions of the Committee, so far from tending to relieve agriculture, went rather to give it another di rect blow—(Hear, hear).—The Hon. Member here recapitulated some of his former arguments respect.. ing the effect which the alteration of the currency had in producing the present distress. He contended that our prices did not keep.upon the same scale with gold, and till that was done the House would only be legislating in the dark. He had lately re ceived a communication from Hamburgh, from which it appeared that prices there were low in the extreme. Wheat sold at from 265. to 31s. per quar ter; Rye from 13s. to I4s. ditto; Barley from Ss. to 95.; Oats from ss. 9d. to Bs. He also understood that the freight from Hamburgh was not higher than from any port of the county which he had the ho nour to represent. As a proof of the distress which prevailed at Hamburgh, he needed only to state that in the course of the present year the Danish Govern ment consented to receive from the people there 70,000 quarters of corn in payment of taxes, no inlney being to be had. When we saw it proposed to reduce the import price from 80s. to 70s.he could not help thinking such a measure another blow at agriculture. The various communications he had received shewed most clearly that the Resolutions in creased the alarm which already existed. The ac counts that had reached him from abroad, and which were authenticated by our Consuls, stated that the . prices were calculated in British currency, which was not equal to gold—CHere Mr. RICARDO intimated his dissent.] —He bowed to the authority of the Hon. Member; but still he could not help thinking him wrong in disputing a proposition the correctness of which was not to be questioned. He was convinced that the cultivators of the soil would rather remain for a time even under the operation of the existing law, than agree to the Resolutions. Mr. J. SMITH did - not see how the House could adopt any remedy wider the circumstances in whic the distress arose. He had heard of remediei whi appeared to him ruin and destruction--(Hsu', hitar)i Remedies which threatened all the best interests • the country. He had heard that a motion had been made during his temporary absence from the Noise, to reduce taxes to the amount of 20100010004—(Crits ~~;. r , 7rtyr might have been misinformed with substance of the *notion ' but he cer. stood that the speech of an Hon. Member recommendation to reduce taxes to the 1,000,0001. He thought it would not be that if that Hon. Member wanted to altogetherOsecould not.have adopted method than such a sweeping re duction. He had beard that a Gendentan, whom he did not then see in his place, recommended the re. ducing of the income of the fundholdel s —W eer , hear).—}le believed he heard of * reduction of 20 millions. He {Mr. Smith) would beg the House td attend to the effects which would naturally follow such a reduction of 20 millions of taxes. He would suppose that Resolution to be canted. That would necessarily excite great alarm among the fundholdere in this country. There was also another class, with whose feelings he had opportunities of being a c .: quainted. He meant the foreigners who had vested large sums in the English funds, and who, on the passing of such a Resolution as that, would imme diately take the alarm and sell out, and take their property home. Among the English fundholders too there would be a strong disposition to sell their stock, and vest their money in foreign security. The St oc k s in this country would necessa:ily fall, as was the case in France in 1792 and 1793, and the exchange s would be 90 per cent. against us. In one month after the House had resolved not to pay the public creditor more than Iss. in the pound, the Bank cf England would necessarily cease to pay their notes. The Bank of England was the largest creditor the country had, and if Parliament violated the public faith, the Bank, of course, would be among the suf , ferers. Had the Bank of England a better right to be paid than any other creditor ? Certainly not. If they then were to receive but 10s. in the pound, they could not be expected to pay their notes, nor exist any longer as a Bank. Such, he was confident, would be the consequences of violating the public faith. No bank in town, nor in England nor Scot land could exist. If he was stating anythin,g that did not seem a fair and true consequence, and if he was taking an erroneous view of the subject, he would be glad to be refuted and to discover his error. Ano ther of the consequences of the violation of public faith by the reduction of such an enorninus sum of taxes, would be a scarcity of money, and the imme diate consequence of a scarcity of money would be low prices for every species of agricultural produce-- so low indeed that they would hardly support the cultivators of the soil, who would become patiptis.— He was sorry to have learned that two Hon. and Learned Friends of his, the Members for Vinchelsea and Knaresborough (Mr. Biougham and Sir.% Mack intosh) had supported that Resolution. 1k regretted those votes were given in support of such a Resolu tion—not that he thought his Hon. and Learned Friends would vote wrong, but he was sure they had not sufficiently considered the consequences. He also regretted it, because those votes would be remem bered when the qualifications and explanations given would be forgotten. He was aware it would be said of himself as it was said of other Gentlemen, that they were of the monied interest, and were not cen cerned about agriculture. In the history of those Hon. Members against whom that charge was made, he was not sensible that the charge applied to them. He wished taxation to be reduced to the utmost far thing possible, consistently with the true interest of the country. He would, for instance, reduce the Salt Tax, because it was most injurious in its effects. His objection to the motion of the Hon. Member for York (Mr. Wyvill) was, that it was not relief but ab solute ruin —(Hear, hear).—But there were other reasons on which he would resist that motion. He would ask the House, was there no national honour? Was there no moral strength in the nation—in a na tion which bad so far advanced the cause of learning, of humanity, and of civil liberty, the friend to tole ration, and after whose example bigotry was con quered and toleration established all over the world ? He contemplated that violation of public faith with horror and dismay. The sentiments expressed at the Public Meetings in different parts of the Island im plied that a reduction of taxation would be beneficial to the country. He would maintain the contrary; and would contend that the worst effects would fol low from such a reduction as was proposed. Eco nomy in the public expenditure could give some re lief, and particularly in the colonial and naval de partments. If the Gentlemen opposite took another course, and kept an eye upon economy in their cs penses—(Hear!)—they need not complain of want of influence, for they could then command such ht fluence as would be irresistible. Mr. DENNIS BROWN said, that he agreed with the Hon. Member for Essex, in thinking that the solutions before the House were not likely to be be neficial to the country. Sir W. W. WYNN declared his concurrence with the Hon. Member for Midhurst (Mr. J. Smith) that whenever we should fail to keep strict faith with the public creditor it would be a national bankruptcy. It was impossible that this nation could go on with out an Army and Navy ; and therefore any large re duction of expenditure must go to affect the Stock holder. But with regard to the Resolutions before the House, the particular advantage of them, he thought, was that they combined a mixture of pro hibition and protection duty, without which they would be liable to see the country inundated with all kinds of rain. Lord ALIHORP rose for the purpose of explain ing the conduct of his two Hon. Friends who had received the animadversion of the Hon. Member fer Midhurst. He considered that a man who voted in that House voted for the question put from the Chair, and not for the speech by which that question was intro duced ; but when he distinctly disavowed the argu ments employed by the Mover, it was indeed hard that he should in his absence be treated as having subscribed to them. This was the case with Iris Hon. Friend. He had himself voted against the motion of the Hon. Member for York (Mr. Wyvill) because he looked upon it as interrupting the progress of an ad journed debate; but if the motion were to come on snits proper place he would vote for it. Mr. J. SMITH explained.—He had said that lie knew very well that his Hon. Friends' sentiments were the same as his own ; and therefore be regretted that their votes might be remembered when their explanations were forgotten. Mr. CHALONER defended the conduct of his Hon. Friend the Member for York (Mr. Wyvill) in I" __ Mr. HUMS land, against the kjt , , Dlr. SY K ES i , ' f Corn at Kingsto . I l i about to be imp , . t h a t their corn I could not pay se bond.--Orsleret i 1 4 Mr. GOOCI folk, praying a i' , duties on impot r ' The Honours 1 the Eastern divl i l 4 ( bc printed. l i Lord EAST] I Tanners of Itch Mr. W. W. 1 1 . 1 , Joseph Cotten, i 4 •.: of himself and p the table. i 1 i Dir. &C. 14 1 1 i.forlames the Wu scx.—dered. 4 1 Mr. WHIT] moss of the Poo against the Poo Up* the ea iii , ay plating to do 11oeskostslog 111 war pos4wood tal W. of the sm. irim, los nor b ; - ?Q., so). —He I . ill: , - * Noisy ow. _I , __,. - _ ....; I °4 Orgitnoilff An • • , - =ret to the etti Mr. BLACKBURS moved die third sa w Ca im °l ll s - - w ith t sub)eat so* u , con - • ; ~, inly understood lundred Ellli. The ATTORNEY-CaItNER AL saki Mr wadi agsbnetbe but m there was not, in t r o y m on ief itof of tlle six . pl i ims , ' contained of a llo re m cor a, and moved that it be read on tbat .dardzamesubs. purported to be for , agricu tures an= amount , Lord ALTHORP observed, that several Petidcesehad been thing suggested that proraised isamediate relief, he dilcult to chew I resented in favour of the Bin, bp whisb tbo Hoses dh o w pa y had felt himself bound, in the discharge of. his duty, ruin agriculture a ment i on . The p.eolde,,beeo...nteoded, had a right to demand a to bring forward those Resolutions of which be had a more effectual . - _________l -1.. A koon orul sm. election. He hat