Star. — London, England, 1822-07-13 00:00:00

ended, it seemi.te me as if a course'of experiments was on t by philosophical•theorists to ascertain under what accunrr fated pressure of unequal taxation, and unequal competition with untaxed countries, the impoverished cultivators of r soil can possibly continue to exist. ER ou SKINF.. HOUSE OF COMMONS. The Sheriffs of the 13ty of London appeared at the Bar to present a Petition from the Mayer , Alderinen, and Comm on Council, paying that the Bill regulating the Orpbans un may not pass into a law..—The Petition was read, slid and may to be Th referred so the Committee on the said Bill. e Reduction on Leather Bill Went through a Committee. — Ordered to be reported,on Monday next. The Temporary Advances to I reland Bill pass ed through a Committee.—Ordered to be reported on Monday next. The Salt Duty Repeal Bill went through a Coinmittee.-r-Or dared to be reported on Monday next. The Court of Exchequer's Sittings Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed on Monday next. Mr. DENISON presented a Petition from the Licensed Publicans of the town of Croydon, in the county of Surrey, complaining of the Bill brought in to regulate the sale of Beer, And praying to be heard by Counsel against it. The Hon. Mem ber added, that while the interest of the higher classes received *very consideration from the House, the lower classes ought not to be neglected. Mr. BROUGHAM said that the observation of the Hon. Gentleman, that the vested interests of the lower apd middling classes were entitled to consideration, was exemplified by the Bill, for it was for the express purpose of protecting the lower and middling classes of the people. After a few words from Mr. Moxce and Mr. Daimon, the Petition was brought up, read, and ordered to lie on the table. Mr. LEN NAR D said; that in consequence of a question of breach of privilege, the fprther consideration of which was fixed for Wednesday the 17th. inst. he would postpone to the 23d, the first open day he saw on,the notice book, his motion for the pro- duction of papers connected with. the views of his Majesty's G ove rnment, as to the recognition of the independence of the South Americans.—Notice postponed. Mr. LEN NARD presented a Petition from certain inhabi tants of Ipswich, against the renewal of the Alien Bill. The Hon. Member expressed his concurrence in the opinion of the petitioners, as to the injustice and narrow policy of that mea sure, and hoped it would not pass into a law. The Petition was read and ordered to be printed. Nr. BROUG II A M presented a Petition from Thomas Flan vegan, complaining" no uncommon grievance," said the Learned Gentleman, of being ruined by a Chancery suit. Ile prayed that the House would revise the practice of the Court of Chancery, shorten the duration of equity suits, and cheapen the proceed ings.—Laid on the table. HER LATE MAJESTY . S HOUSEHOLD. On the Report of the Committee on the Pensions and Allowances to be granted to the Servants of her late Majesty being brought up, Mr. HUME repeated his former objections, that these Pensions should be placed on the Pension List instead of the Consolidated Fund, and declared it his intenticn, when the Bill came before the House, to make a motion to that effect. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said a few words in explanation, stating in substance that the course now pursued was the usual course. Dr. LUSHINGTON expressed his deep regret that, while pensions were given to servants in an inferior situation, those of a higher class were, contrary to all precedent, passed by. It was not dealing fairly with the servants of her late Majesty, that, while £18,300 was given in pensions to the servants of Queen Charlotte, only I.:2280 was given to those of Queen Caroline. .These individuals have been sub jected to the greatest privations, and after a service of seven or eight years, and their prospects of prefer ment disappointed, had been dismissed without a single shilling. It was not agreeable either to British justice or British feeling, or the respect due to Roy alty, to make a distinction between the servants of an unfortunate Queen, while a strict adherence was observed in remunerating all the servants of a Queen whohad lived in an uninterrupted career of prosper icy. Mr. LOCKHART said, he saw no necessity for remunerating so highly per e ons who bad been pre viously in very inferior situations. He thought 1:400 a-year was too large a remuneration for any of those in lividuals, while distress so generally prevailed. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, that the pension of 4001. a-year to Sicard was paid by the late Queen, out of her own income, for some time before her death, and it would be now too great a hardship to make any reduction in it. Dr. LUSHINGTON thought it was ecpially im perative on Government to remunerate the servict s of those who filled higher and mote important situa tions in the service of her late Majesty. These indi viduals performed their important and anxious duties with an assiduity and zeal seldom equalled, particu larly Lady Anne Hamilton, who to the last moment, adhered to her late Majesty with an unshaken fidelity. Mr. S. WORTLEY could not see why the rule for making provision for the higher as well a; for the lower servants should be departed from. He thought • it would be much more worthy of the character of the British nation that pensions should be allowed to all the servants of the late Queen. If any of the higher servants were absent with her leave, they were • not on that account disqualified from receiving their salaries. He hoped the question would be again brought forward. Mr. BROUGHAM agreed entirely in whit had fallen from the Honourable Member for Yorkshire. The long and faithful services of the individuals ill question certainly entitled them to some provision. From the situation which he had had the honour of filling at the time, he had the means of knowing what provision had been made for the servants of his present Majesty's mother ; and he could not help observing that the Report of the Committee on the subject was infinitely more liberal than in the present instance, for it included all the servants. He must not omit to state likewise, that Mr. Mathias, a gen tleman who held the office of secretary, he believed, to Queen Charlotte, received a pension upon her Ma jesty's decease. It might, however, be said that her late Majesty had been Queen Consort for a short period, but even if she had died when Princess of Vales, her servants would have been entitled to a suitable provision. He knew that one individual for whom provision was to be made had been in the late Queen's service, from her earliest youth, for a period of not less than fifty years. The Resolutions were then agreed to, and on the motion for bringing in a Bill founded on them, Mr. 3. WORTLEY said he should feel it his duty to move some amendment in the course of the pro ceedings, fOr making some provision for all the ser vants of her late Majesty. Mr. HUME did not agree with the Hon. Member Shot all the higher servants were entitled to compen sation, and hehoped that before the amendment was introduced, aninquiry would be. instituted into the particular case•of each individual. Mr. BROUGHAM took it for granted that an in quiry would precede the amendment, and he be- liIIIMII•ww..,.__ I hived that the number to be provided far would not be found considerable. Mr. S.-WORTLEY professed his determination to bring forward the question in some way or other. Dr. LUSHINGTON said, that of those who had held higher places, there were ottlp o sit persons whom he shotild feel himself justified in recommending as entitled to some provision. When.lia considered that there were among these_ladies of rank, who had for feited everything for hei M t rjesty i _eten charmer it self—who had adhered to her with Uirshaken fidelity through good report and evil report, he thought it would be extremely hard if they did not receive a compensation worthy of such devoted attachment. Mr. W. WYNN said, there was no instance upon the Journals of the House originating a proposition for granting pensions to the Royal Household, as such a measure had always come from the Crown. Leave was then given to bring in the Bill. LOTTERIES. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER brought ,up the report of the Lotteries Bill. Mr. BENNET and Mr. Monca, spoke briefly against the measure. Mr. HOME wished to know why a Government Office was"not established for the sale of Tickets ? As the Right Honourable Gentleman (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) was a Member of the Society for the distribution of the Scriptures, and also of the Society for the Suppression of Vice, he thought that 'the distribution of Lottery Tickets might be placed under his special care, with great advantage to the Public! —(A laugh). The Report was received, and the Bill was ordered to be read a third time on Monday next. MR. ARERCROMIY. Mr. W. COURTENAY, understanding that 6.! Hon. Member. for Caine (Mr. Abercrornby) would most probably attend in his place that evening, wished to call the attention of the House to the proceedings that had taken place in his case. The obvious views taken by the House of the papers referred to on Tuesday last, shewed them to be an infringement on its privileges, and also sheaved that the House was theguardian of those privileges, and not any particu lar individual. But it was impossible to.conceive that the Hon. Member for Caine might not feel himself personally injured by the transaction in question, and it was therefore the duty of the House to see that such transactions did not lead to consequences which it might prevent. He found, on referring to the Jour nals, precedents to shew that when a personal feeling was excited in the breast of a Member in consequence f any circumstance, the .House took care that that should not be made a personal matter which be longed exclu,ively to them. He found that the llotre enjoined the Member by name net to engage in a personal quarrel, and not to accept or send any chal lenge in consequence of anything growing out of the particular transaction. Ile proposed, that in the present instance, this course should be adopted ; and should first move that• the Resolutions passed by the I louse on Tuesday last be read, after which he should submit a Resolution which he had drawn up for the ptirpose in question. On the motion of the Honour able Member, the following statement from the pro ceedings of Tuesday last, was then read by the se nior Clerk : 18. " Complaint made to the Home au printed letter, signed John Hope and addressed to the lion. James Aberernmby, a Member of this House, taking notice of a speech made by the said :\ leniber in his place in this Mouse; and also a letter, signed W. Menzies, and addressed to the editor of the Courice News paper, and published therein on Ilronday, July 8, containing a correspondence between the said W. Menzies and the said Ho nourable James Abercromhy, in relation to the same speech, in breach of the privileges of this Houses The said printed letter, in the said Newspaper, were delivered in at the table, and cer tain passages in the said printed letter were read. " Resolved, n: m. con. That the said pt inted letter is in breach of the privileges of this (louse. " Ordered, That John Hope, Esq. do attend this House to morrow se'nnight, the 17th day of this instant July. " Ordered, T hat the lion. James Abercromby do attend this House in his plac.,. forthwith. " Then the letter addressed to the editor of the Courier News; paper was read. . " Resolved, twns. cm. That the said letter is a breach of the privileges of this house. " Ordered, That William Menzies, Esq. do attend this House to-morrow s'nnight. the 17th slay of this instant July." Tise lion Member nest quoted the precedents from the Sessions of 1765, ninth vol. of Journals, and from the Session of 1769, to show that in such cases as the present, the House prevented Members from either sending or acceptinge challenge. He concluded by moving the following Resolution : " Resolved, That as the said papers have been voted by this House to be a breach of privilege, the House enjoins Mr. Aber cromby not to prosecute any quarrel, in consequence of any transaction that may arise out of such breach of privilege, by seeding or accepting a challenge." This Resolution was carried nem. con. and The SPEAKER then observed. that if Mr. Aber cromby was in town, he would probably feel it his duty to attend. It would, therefore, be for the House to consider whether any other Resolution should be proposed till the present one was communicated to the Hon. Member. Mr. C. FORBES observed, that it would be ex tremely convenient if Hon. Members would not say anything in the House that they would- not say out of it—(Hear). —He thought, also, that Gentlemen who felt themselves aggrieved ought to take some other means of redress than the public press. It was then moved that the Speaker do communi cate to Mr. Abet cromby, in his place, the Resolution which the House had just passed. Mr. BROUGHAM deprecated the observations made by the Hon. Member under the gallery (Mr. Forbes), as calculated to frustrate the object which the House had in view. He hoped the Hon. Member did not intend to set up his judgment against the unanimous feeling of the House on the present occa sion, but if he had any such intention he could not have taken a more effectual method thin that he had adopted. The Hon. Member had flung out invidious remarks which were altogether uncalled for. He would ask if any man placed in the situation of his Hon. Friend (Mr. Abercromby), who had come for ward as a public accuser, could have acted otherwise than he had done ? His Hon. Friend had not thrown out random charges, which he could not support — no ; quite the reverse; for, having come-forward as a public accuser, he placed certain individuals on their defence, and gave them an opportunity of vindicating themselves, it they could. He (Mr. Brougham) was sure that, as nothing could exceed the distinguished ability, so also nothing could exceed the temperate and gentlemanly tone of his Hon. Friend on the - 4.- - -77 Lord BINNTNG then rote to address the Hou_", but was caned to order by Mr. H. Smarr. Mr. FORBES, in explamstioo, said that the ahast*. vations hi had madesveregesseral, not specific. Mr. BROUGHAM was rejoiced that the Boa.. Member had given so satitfactfry an explanation to the House. Lord BINNING did not rise to prolong the dip cussion, but he did not hold himself disposed to s anction all that had fallen from the Hon. and Learned Wither (Mr. Brougham), respecting a transudes? which involved the conduct of individuals who were shortlt to appear at their bar, and whose case ought not to be prejudiced. The SPEAKER then addressed Mr Abercromby, whop s of Tuesday, and the Resolution wh ic h stood up in his place, and read over to himth e roceeding the House had now passed ; after which the Hon. Member bowed and resumed his seat. bee Lo n.t r h d e A pe L rto TH n OwhlloPsethadenvicreoseandanaidssia,tiadn, c t e h w at a h s Navin by his lion. and Learned Friend (Mr. Abercromby) relative to this transaction, he felt the responsibility he had incurred, and perhaps the House would per. mit him"to explain why his Hon. and Learned Friend had not earlier attended in his place, in obedience to the order which had been made for that purpo.e— -(Hear).—llis Hon. and Learned Friend had left tows before that order was applied for, and had followed him (Lord Althorp) into Northamptonshire, and thereby incurred some delay. As soon as they met they pursued their course to the North as fast as they could, and, upon arriving at Ferrybridge, information reached them of what had taken place in that House on Tuesday last. Feeling that, under such circum. stances, it would be quite impossible for them to ac complish any object which they had in view, and also as the order directed by that House to be served on Mr. Menzies rendered it still more impossible to ac complish that object, he advised his Ilon. and Learned Friend lo obey the order of that House as promptly as possible, even though it had not been formally served upon him—( Loud.cries ff " Hear !" front both sides of the House).—lle advised him, without delay, to return and take his place in pursuance of the resolution of the House. - He was anxious to state this for. the purpose of strewing that no unnecessary delay had taken place, either in his Hon. and Learned Friend's returning to his seat, on being apprised of what had occurred, or leaving town in the first in stance in pursuit of his original intention. This ex planation he owed to his Hon. Friend, and he should not trespass further upon the attention of the House —( Hear, hear).—Here the subject dropped. EAST INDIA TRADE. Mr. FORBES presented a Petition from certain in dividuals interested in remittances from India, pray ing that no further restrictions might be imposed on the trade with that country, and no additional duty laid on East India Sugar. . Mr. BERNAL wished that an opportunity for in quiry might be afforded to all parties who were inte rested in the discussion on the subject. Mr. MONEY observed that English monopoly, sanctioning as it did a system of heavy duties, affected materially all East India produce. Mr. BRIGHT opposed the Petition. The impor. cation of sugar was of little importance to the East Indies. The manufacture of cotton was already de stroyed by the impoi tation of cotton from the East Indies, and he hopzd the House were not about to sanction the destruction of the commerce of the West Indies by favouring the East Indians—(Hear).—No country in the world enjoyed a greater commercial monopoly than the East Indies. Justice would be best done to the white and black inhabitants of the West Indies, by protecting them from so unequal a competition—(Hear). Mr. H UME said he protested against the statements of the lion. Member, and should have another oppor tunity of shewing their fallacy. The Petition was read, and ordered to be printed. PRISON DISCIPLINE. Mr. lIUME said he held in his hand a Petition, which was given to him to present to that House six weeks ago, but he had delayed it partly to inquire into the allegations it contained. He was not personally acquainted with the parties whose Petition he under took to present. The petitioners complained of the conduct of the jailer of the Jail of Shepton where their son had been confined for having laid snares for hares. In order that the Right Hon.. S ecretary for the Home Department might obtain the proper information on the subject, he would detail some of the allegations of the petitioners, who were a person of the name of West and his wife. They stated that their son, Isaac West, was confined in the prison of Shepton Mallet, for the offence ke had , stated—that he was subjected to the usual discipline —that, besides that, his hair was shaved off, and his head washed in cold water, in consequence of which he got cold—that he was afterwards denied all me dical assistance, although he had often petitioned for it—that he received some money from the jailer to hush the matter—and that he died soon after in con sequence of the treatment he had received. The pa rents alleged also, that a Coroner, who .resided in the neighbourhood, and who was related to the jailer, being requested to hold an inquest on the body, ab solutely refused, which refusal they ascribed to the influence of the jailer. Those were some only of the allegations of the Petition he begged leave to bring up. Mr. Secretary PEEL said he hail made some in quiries into the statements contained in the Petition. It was usual to wash and clean all the prisoners on their being received into prison. The prisoner was, according to custom, washed in cold water. Tire affidavit of the surgeon who visited the prison, satis fied him that the death of the prisoner did not arise from that treatment, but from drinking. With re spect to the three shillirigi he had received from the j iat a n i %A i d e , ari After drr i . t uaße u f - money in, , the et kitchen. becse erntitironr. u H .k yu r e ea , d M a r t . id D o a t w de s r o ed a,' to lie on the table. PETITIONS ON THZ SIARRIAOII ACT. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL presented a Peti w tion hod) Arthur Chichester, E • • z a e t l n o t i t o, p r g d r t i i hs y s prisoner froth r a sf h r u assistingsh Esq. against the Mar riage Act, which • had before passed . the . H ouse of Commons, but which had.received some amendments in the House of Lords; and was again the sanction ofsthiHotise. The . petitioner stated that the Marquis of Donegii had not any legitimate issue, and in the event of his death .without such • issue, by the existing laws, arid by the tl set ements of his grand 'Wier. h e (Kr. chiciwita)wes the Lingo the titles end property of the Marquis. The Petition tecited the cit- - eutnstances and the settlements by which the property was to descend. The petitioner added, that he should be aggrieved by the Act t it was ant: postfado law in its operation on him, and would deprive him of his vested rights: he, in conclusion; prayed that he migh t . be heard by Counsel at the Bar of the House against the Bill. The Hon. Mid Learned Gentleman added, that the Bill was in violation of the'law.. s of the land, because it went to strip the petitioner of 4 vested estate itt remainder: Although it was not an estate in possession, yet it was spelt as might be convey e d by will, Or brany other deed for tvaluable consiaer. ation. He referred the House to a case of a similar nature, in which a person named Wright sought t o recover penalties, by instituting three or four hundred actions against Clergymen, who had performed th e : marriage ceremony contrary to the Act of Geo. 11,- The house had brought in a Bill to legalize those marriages, and to exempt the Clergymen from t1:0- penalties. Wright having instituted theactions, a nc being entitled to the penalties, petitioned the 110.1,, e • to be heard by Counsel against . the Bill ; and 1:i; prayer was granted, although the House ultimately decided against him. He apprehended the kiou T was is the present case bound to grant the prayer of hthe petitioner. Although the Bill was not directed against him, yet he was affected by its operation. Mr. SCARLETT said the object of the l'etkion seemed to be only for delay, whereby the Bill would be lost for the present Session. Dr. LUSHINGTON supported the Petition, and said the petitioner should be at liberty to state hi s case to the House, and to chew how he would be af fected by the Bill. Sir JAMES MACKINTOSH opposed the Pe. tion. The retrospective clause, of which the Petition complained, was moved by himself; and the Bill was, after the amendments by the Lords, less retrospec tive than it was when that House passed it unali mously.. There was ample time during the seve:al discussions to have petitioned against it. There w.:s a Petition, indeed, to the Lords; but the prayer of that was not to be heard by Counsel. On the whole, it appeared that the object of the Petition was to create delay, whereby the Bill would be defeated !cr the present Session. He thought it was most taint that the Bill should pass in the present Sessicz, or be thrown out entirely. Mr. B. BATHURST agreed with the Hon. Mem bers on the other side, that it was too late now to be heard by Petition against the Bill in its present stice. He believed also that the Petition was ditecttd against some of the amendments which had been sent down to them from the House of Lords; and in that case, he believed the Chair would inform them that such a course could not be taken as that prayed fur by the petitioner. He rather thought, too, that it was too late for a Petition to be received now. The SPEAKER. said that Petitions might be re ceived in that stage; but he said that Counsel could not be heard against the general subject of the Bill now: and as to their being heard against the amend ments of the Lords, he knew of no instance whv:e they were admitted to be heard. Mr. WETHERELL thought it hard that an op portunity was not open for Counsel to be iieard against this Bill, which was substantially a new Ili!), retaining but a small portion of the original draft. The Petition was laid on the table. Mr. BEIINAL presented a Petition from William Pritchard, Proctor in Doctors Commons, on bella:i of Samuel Blythe, against the Marriage Act.—Laid on the table. Dr. PHILLIMORE presented a Petition from a Proctor of Doctors' Commons, on behalf of Sara:: Blythe, the wife of the former petitioner; in favour of the Bill. She stated that Mr. Blythe had obtained a . license for their marriage, upon swearing that he tea twenty-one years of age; that she was at the time ci 1 their marriage pregnant by him, and was now prez nant by him.--Laid on the table. Dr. LUSHINGTON said that the last petitioner Was a servant woman in the family of Mr. Blythe: ,that she was twenty-eight yeats of age at the time when Mr. Blythe, a youth of eighteen years, el:- tained a license, by making false oattiihat he wits of age, by via tue of which they were married at Dove:. As soon as the father Beard of the marriage, he stituted proceedings in the Ecclesiastical Court. • After a few words from Dr.'_Puttramoas, the 1 ) ,:- tition was laid on the table. MARRIAGE ACT AMENDMENT BILL. Dr. PHILLIMORE moved the Order of the Day for considering the Lords amendnients to the Mir riage Act Amendment Bill, which being agreed to, the Learned Gentleman proceeded to discuss the amendments, stating that he considered them entitled to the support of the House. The Learned Gentle man went on to contend, that upon grounds of jus tice to individuals, and safety to property, some teration should be made in the law as it at prese::t stood. It was now five years age since be first 1 , 7 0 • posed this Bill, and he then endeavoured to mike the House sensible of the extent of evil to which he calculated it would be a remedy. Every circumstance which happened since did but confirm what he thet stated ; he therefore besought the House to adds these amendments. The evils of the present lAa were great, and were not denied. Here was now c.- fered to the House a remedy pregnant with great be' nefit, and attended with no mischief, and Which in i g' t therefore be safely adopted. Dr. LUSHINGTON said he hoped that as the stei which the House were now called upon to td 4 would have the effect of ,repealing all the laws r , e , rating to marriage which had passed since 175+. -` should be indulged in expressing shortly what I; i4 opinions were upon such a measure. He was more anxious for the indulgence too, as this svas:.' only occasion on which he could oppose a Bill a ff,.c! ing a great share of the property, and comproini , i the respectability of many families in the c ountr , for, by the rules of the House no new clause wi' l'l be added to a Bill coming from the other Howe. His first objection to the measure was, t h a t it w•ls essentially different from, and contained but yor little of the Bill which passed this House. There were. not twenty lines of the original Bill remaining. whi bt full ten pages of new matter had been introduced. -- He could not look upon the Bill as it stood, othe r ; wise than as a heap of inconsistencies. He challenge d any one to say they understood every part of it ea' dray ; and in # measure of this important nature, h 1 contended that not-only every clause; but ever/ 643.