Star. — London, England, 1817-03-13 00:00:00

phial, he sail, they had repeatedly declared them 'elves satisfied. Mr. W. WYNNE thought that the Lunatics con fined in the prison ought to have been removed by order of the M.lttistrstes to their reveral parishes. Lord BINNING greed that this was An improper place of confinement for Lunatics. He was persuaded they would not continue there for any length of time. Sir F. MI RDET 1' was not satisfied with the state ment which had b: en mule of the satisfaction felt by the Evans's at their present situations. The House had formerly been told of persons being extremely well off, and of their declaring themselves so, when it afterwards appeared that these persons were very ill off, and very much dissatisfied. Mr. CANNING understood, that on 'a former night the Honourable Gentleman stood forward as the person complaining of the hardships which the prisoners were subjected to. The Honourable Gen• tleman had illustrated his statement on a former night, by relating the story of a cruel jailer, who de stroyed a spider, the companion of his solitary priso ner. On that occesiGn the Honourable Gentleman seemed inclined to impute cruelty to Government for having confit;ed the Evans's in solitude. Now the charge appeared to be a grave one against Govern ment, for having allowed them the comfort of so ciety. If, however, the spider should he destroyed, it was but right that the prisoner should know, and that the cou..try shoulJ understand, it was the Hon. Gentleman who had destroyed it—(Neer, kar.)— The motion was then agreed to. REFORM PETITIONS. Sir F. BURDETT moved the Order of the Day for resuming the adjourned Debate on the Reform Petitions The SI'EAKER said, he had examined the fit Petitions ; one had no names ; two had no name en the same piece of paper with the Petition itself ; 28 contained the same words as the Petitions re jected on the 29tli of January ; 468 were printed ; 11 were the same as the Petition front Halifax ; and four from another place; making .527. The first question to be put would be on that with no name. On the question being put, that this Petition be read, it was rejected ; as Were the two which had no names on the same skin. The nest question was on the 28 Petitions worded the same as that which, on the 29th or January, was ejected, es disrespectful to the House. Sir FRANCIS BuRDErr contendeJ, that these ought to be received. It was impossible, with the knowledge which the Public had of the practices w hich had existed•in the House, that they should ask for a reform of those practices without using strong language of indignation ; and that language might always be construed as disrespectful to the House.— He thought some rule should now be laid down ; but whet Oat rule should be. be was at a loss to say,' as different Gentlemen formed different opinions of what was and what was not disrespectful language. It the objection was, that the House did not properly represent the People, he was afraid no Petition for Reform would be received. _ I Mr. W. WYNN said, he had objected to a similar Petition to these, because the Petitioners went out of their way to throw abuce and contempt on that House. It was not possible for the House to lay down any rule as to Petitions ; it could only take into conside ration the general apparent intent and meaning of the Petitioners. It could not be allowed. that Peti tioners should use any words they pleased in com plaining of grievances to that House. Every Court and Institution in the country had the power of pro tecting themselves from insult, and should not tin House have the same power ? But these Petitions were sent round with a recommendation in the way of a Land-bill, signed by a far-simile of the Honour able Baronet's haad•writing. He did not believe that these Petitions contained she sense of the - people. If they I•id down any rule of expression for Petitions, other offensive modes of expression would be found. He moved, that the Petitions be rejected. Lord COCHRANE was of opinion. that these pe thinners did not mean to offend the House. But Hon. Gentlemen should state the words they objec ted to. in order to guard the people from using such expressions in future. The people did not expect that the Constitution was to be suspended, but that the House would rather have taken their grievances into its serious consideration. No disturbance bad Liken place in the country with a sieve to overturn the Go►ernment—why then did they come to them to suspend the Constitution ? The. ATTORNEY GENERAL said, that in tead of the Constitution being suspended to prevent the people from petitioning, there was to be a Meet ing in Westminster to-morrow, to petition the Re gent to dismiss his Ministers. It was the duty of the House to attend to the representations of the people as long as they did not attempt to vilify and degrade the House. _ _ - - - - - - Mr. MARTIN thought the House would do better by confining itself merely to refusing to receive the Petitioni. Sir G. HEATHCOTE said, the House treated the people of England with contempt ; for most of the Members had retired coolly to discuss their alin- 1 ners, instead of discussing five hundred petitions from the people. Mr. BATHURST denied that the House was ne glectful of the interests of the People; for it was known to all, in and out of the House, that 400 of the Petitions were printed, and could not be received. The Petitioners might again bring the same grievances before the House in an unexceptionable shape. Mr. ABERCROMBIE thought the House had Much to complain of the Petitioners, when they fdund system introduced, which, in his opinion, could only bring the great right of petitioning into con tempt. There were persons who had recommended these Petitions, well knowing they could not be re ceived. It did not come well from those who advo cated these Petitions to complain of the inattention of the Houty o lo such Petitions as these. Still the greatest credit was due to the People for their pa fence and resignation in this period of unexampled distress. Ms. BA BINGTON thought, that if these Petitions', were on ly roused to be ieceived, it would encourage' the people to consesmck to the House with their com plAints, touched in inottrespectful term. Mr. JONES said, Ott. if the Petitioners thought the House unit to legislate for the People, they ought not to tome there. M 4. SMYTH thought the Hoye should not reject the Petitions, but refuse to receive them.—The Peti tions were they rejected, without a division. PRINTED PETITIONS. The SPEAKER. intimated to the House, that the next question for its coneideration referred to the 469 printed Petitions praying for Parliamentary Reform. Mr. WYNN contended, that in conformity a ith the established practice of the House, these petitions, in their printed form, could not be received. The rule on that subject, as appeared from the Journals of Par- Lament, was ai far back as the year 1656: it had been subsequently acted upon in the year 1793; and 46 the Honourable Baronet (Sir F. Burdett) must know, he being a Teller on the division, so late as the year MS.—Six days subsequent, however, a peti tion from Major Cartwright was presented, praying that printed petitions might be received. No decision took place on that petition, as from circumstances it was withdrawn.—He begged to have the order of 1656 read from the Journals. The Clerk then proceeded to read—That no priTale printed petition should be received—( Hear, hear.) Mr. WYNN could conceive no other object in pre senting such petitions, but the hope of exasperation from refusal in the minds of those who presented them. The House, in support of its own dignity, should meet such an attempt with the strongest mark of its displea sure—(Dear, hear.) He did hope that the Honourable Baronet would have paid greater attention to the rule generally acquiesced in, and that under its influence the Honourable Baronet (Sir F. Burdett) would have recommended to these petitioners to have presented such petitions as they wished him to be the channel of introducing, in a decorous, usual, and unobjec tionable form. • Sir WM. GEARY contended, that the rule of 1656 applied solely to private petitions, and there fore could not bear upon the present question. He decidedly differed from the petitioners in their view of the remedy of the public grievances. still he con sidered they were right in stating openly and with candour their not:ons or the corrective. In regard to printed petitiu.is he would put this plain question to the House. W. re they anxious honestly to know the opinion of the great body of the people on an important subject, what more desirable course could they adopt than to have the petition submitted to the people put in that form which gave the best se curity of the question being fully understood ? (Hear, hear, hear)—To put them in a printed form, was, in his opinion, best calculated to produce that effect— (Hear). —He opposed their rejection. Mr. W. QUIN considered the rule of 1656 appli cable, inasmuch as every petition not proceeding from a recognized public body must be considered private. Sir F. BURDETT regretted he did not see ia their places those on whose support, from their uniform conduct, he could rely on, whilst the Treasury Bench was arrayed in full force against the Petitions of the People. The Callse, however, stood on strong intrin sic grounds, notwithstanding the-attempt of the Lear ned Gentleman (Mr. Wynn) to meet these Petitions with an obsoleto order passed by Cromwell's Assem bly sitting in that House, but into which no member could enter without previous examination from his soldiers stationed in.the Lobby. It was strange to see precedents drawn from such a quarter; but in the strivings of the present day to counteract public opi. 'lion, any expedient, however fallacious, was gladly availed of. But this rule had altogether a different application : it was to prevent the disreputable system, now toe often practised, of canvassing on private Bills. It did not refuse the presentation of Petitions on those subjects, but guarded against their being cir culated and dispersed in that shape amongst tbe Mem bers, under the penalty of being seized by the Ser , jeant at At ms—(Hear, hear.) Surely, in the course of human experience, a foundation more sandy was never assumed, on which to reject the honest prayer of more than one hundred thousand Englishmen.— In 1793, the very night of Mr. Grey's Motion for Reroute a printed petition from Norwich was pre sented by a Mr. Hobart, who volunteered his doubts as to the formality of the petition. The opportunity was snatched, as they were now snatching to inter pose obstacles to the expression of the public voice. One Member contended it was against practice— Mr. Pitt believed it contrary to the usage—two Ho nourable Gentlemen, one of whom was Mr. Burke, had their doubts, but of nine who declared their opi nions, five were in favour of its reception. Mr. Fox denied most forcibly, the application of the rule now alluded to, but even if it did apply, he scouted its value when opposed to the very reason of the thing. Mr. Sheridan, fully impressed with the propriety of receiving the petition, expressed a wish that the fur ' then discussion should give way to the important , question appointed for discussion. The petition was then withdrawn, thus the precedent of 1793 bore on the present question--(Hear, hear).—ln 1813, on a division, the rule of 1656 was made operative—but who would contend that such a decision bound Par liament—that such a temporary resolve could con travene the Bill of Rights?—(lleardsear)—So much for precedents. What said the reason of the thing ? Why the reason took the very contrary direction of the course now proposed. There were objections to written petitions that could not apply to printed ones. The great mass of the people by having their peti tions printed, were enabled fully to consider and un derstand what they were about to subscribe ;—and. they had the further guarantee that what they had determined upon as their petition, once being printed, could not be subsequently alteted, as might be the case in those written. Did the Bill of Rights limit and shackle the power of petitioning by such obstruc tions ? Was it in the contemplation of its framers to meet the exercise of that right, with objections of mere form, such as this ink or that type—whether written with a quill or a steel pen ? (Hear, hear.) The King had no objection to printed petitions. The House of Lords had received, within a very recent date, a printed petition from Barnstaple on the Ca tholic Claims. Wu the Housrof Commons, because the people complained, as the grand paramount grievance of the corrupt state of that House, alone to reject the petitions of between four and five hundred bodies of the people? An Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Quin) would get rid of them under the rule as private; that saved a world of trouble, and was the only way of applying it ; it could have no forte in any ra tional or consistent manner of arguing the question. The Learned Gentleman (Mr. Wynn) had read him a lecture on his duty in presenting Petitions—he thanked him for his condescension, but he could not surrender what be considered his greatest duty, namely, to _propose the Pedions of the people to thie House, wisbout ally reference to what might be its decision. Were they themselves always consistent ? Did it not happen that, on even the same subjects, they proceeded on one day one way, on the second day another ? Need he remind them of their versati lity in the case of the late Lor.P. Melville, when, on the one night, they voted for his trial by a Jury, and on the very next, with that modest acquiescence that was ever ar the beck of the Tieasury, they voted an Impeachment before that Hoose pf Peers, to whoa numbers the Noble Lord (Melville) was no small contributor ?—(Hear, hear.)—He would not say (het lie might appeal from Philip drunk to Philip sober; but he did feel it his duty, when he received Petitions from a distant part of the c , untry, respectably signed, to exercise no personal discretion, but at once submi! them to the consideration of the House— (Hear, hear.) Much was said of these Petitions bring circulated, and the great influence made use cite procute signatures.l How was every other Petition signed in counties but by circulation and by influence ? (Hear, hear.)- - Were not the Ministei s rt that very moment forward=l ing their printed Declarations to every Banker's shop in the Metropolis, and compelling signatures from those who feared their interests mie,lit suffer if they refused ?—( Hear, hear). — With Ministers, indeed, all practices were considered fair; with those who wished to check them in their career of ruin, all was com plained against as foul—(Hear, hear). —Upon the whole, a body of public opinion had been raised on facts which admitted of no denial .6 that the Repre sentation in the House of Commons was altogether corrupt."--( Hear, hear).--Gentlemen might rail, but they could not erase the signatures from the bond,l or stem the torrent of general reprehension—Wear,' hear). —.They might contend, that some monster of terror—some magician with his wand (who, in fact, was no other than a very honest-hearted individual, acting in all things for the best), could issue his Pe titions, north and south, and countervail all the efforts and tricks of Ministers. But, if they wished to con sult the dignity of the House—(not the dignity of be ing hated, as Junius called it)—if they wished to pre. serve the respect and affections of the People, with. out any hateful admixture of the oderint Jam *eluded— they would never reject the prayers of the Subject, because they were offered in a form of all others the most convenient and the least objectionable—(Hear, hear). —Arguments of this sort, he was aware, would carry little weight in a quarter where the sic wale, sic juke, was sure to carry a majority ; but he felt at his duty to take a division on the question, however small that division might prove. Mr. W. WYNN offered a few words in explanation. Lord CASTLEREAGH said, that if he might judge from the conduct of the advocates of the peti tioners in that House, their object ssas to procure the rejection of the petitions. The uniform practice of Parliament had been conformable to and had estab lished the rule of 1656. But even were that not the case, the manner in which the tight of petition Led recently been exercised, ought to induce. the House to proceed with some caution on the subject. He be lieved that the great mass of the petitioners were sound and loyal, although a few wicked individuals had endeavoured to excite them to use the right of petitioning for the most indefensible purposes. He should feel guilty of an abandonement of his duty were he to consent to a relaxation of the tole of Par liament on the subject a of printed petitions, at a time when he believed in his conscience that many peti tions were sent to that House in order that they might be rejected. Mr. H. SMYTH bad no doubt that the Honour able Baronet thought he was doing his duty. but he firmly believed that the course adopted by the Ho nourable Baronet was more calculated to defeat the object of the Petitioners than any other that could be adopted. As the House would always pay proper attention to the opinions of Petitioners, when those opinions really proceeded from themselves, so it wculd always consider opinions dictated to Petitioners by a few individuals, however respectable, very little enti tled to its notice. Sir E. BRYDGES observed. that when the House saw all the Petitions, not only couched in the same words, but (with scrrcely any exception) printed by the same printer, it afforded strong presumptive evi dence that such Petitions did not speak the sense of the people from whom they professed to proceed.— He should, therefore, support the motion for their rejection. Mr. BOSWELL said, that the helpless old man, whom his friends in Westminster called the Polar Star of Reform, had lately become a wandering star for the purpose of enlightening the manufacturing districts it the North of England and in Scotland ; in which districts he had promoted Meetings, at which he presided, and urged the presentation to Parliament of Petitions for Reform. These Petitions were all sent by a preconcerted arrangement from the same manufactory in London. The way in which these Petitions wereusually sigaed, might be inferred from one which he had happened to look at, pur porting to be from a Hampden Club, the two first signatures to which were those of an overseer to the poor and an old woman. Mr. P. MOORE, on the ground that the rule of 1656 referred to pirate Petitions only, ta:rely in or. der that an undue impression might not be made on the House prior to the so nbiderAtion of any private interest, declared his intention of voting for the te. ception of the Petitions. The House ought not to be so fastidious as to take exception against any l'etition presented to it, unless such Petition had on the face of it some gross insult to Parliament. On the con trary, Petitions from the People ought to be encou raged, that the House might get at the knowledge of the seal state of the country, of which it was at pre. sent ignorant, and which, whenever it might be clearly brought before them, would, he was persuaded, prove that the Report of the Secret Committee was a libel. The House then divided—For the Motion, 58— Against it, 6—Majority, 52. . The printed Petitions were consequently rejected. The others which had been presented by Sir 13ur. dett, from a variety of places in different parts the kingdom, were ordered to lie on the table. The Meths? Bill and the Marine Mutiny Bill were read a woad tlnse; and ordered to be committed to-roorrow• The Silk Ezportation Bounty Bill was reads Mame and passed., • The Lords' Amendments to tbe Treasonable Practices Bill Ind the. Boldlen and Stamens' Seduction were taken hit,, consideration, and agreed to.—Eogue further orders were die- posed of, and Ike House &Owned. THE EVENiNG STAR. LONDON. •;,* COatafilttt. —Msrcharts and qiip•O•trets, It it tobrnletag% wonit find it to their in fff ef t to th it Aq. rtt„tartains ; and ;:upercargoe., wi L Mr. P• 11.1.. Pi 3-tical Abe e dg e meret of the Custcm :till Excise Laws," the llord Editin.i of whteh, brought down to the Ist tsciv.rnihtt lase, is now robins' ed. TI is Edith rn embraces the whole of the ['nestles, in anytvist affecting British Commerce, recently co:ichided with Fswelge Powers, as wel; as the Corn law., and ever/ other tieriht tiun concerning iii: Trade between Grew reitaln and s l p ans of the World, either :IS to the mode in which Goole may be Itnitortrd, WarcLoust d, Ezpored, or carried Cosetwlie; tht the ipannine of Duties. tlrawbackt, Bounties et Prcriflrs to Lt: Paid nr alloy ei —Mr. Poet's 1A o h mr; he rrc-ured ‘t cv.ry Bookseller in the United Einpdon% THURSDAY, lARCH 13, 117. PRICV.OI - SrOCV•ruis DAY A I''I" , "F.IXE. nri,ocK It-tinted ebut—Con.. money, r9f —for Ace. ebtti 4 per Cent. J4n--5 per Cent. Noy, Lacherptyr Bile 44 Ilis.Fr.—ludia liond, 36 pr. A number of Petitions for Ref rm were las: niehr gfered to the House of Commons, brit many of them in a form so directly opposed to the rules of the Hon* that they could not he received. No less than four hundred and sixty-eight of them were printed Petitions, In the course of the evening, when the state of the Prisoners in the Metropolis fell under the corsidera don of the House, it appeared that the si.uatinn of those who are deprived of their liberty for seditious or treasonable practices has been made as cornhittable in all respects as a regard to the security of their p et . sons required. Any statements to the coutrary mast therefore have been founded on miLrepre.onta:ioris. MANcliEsTt it. By the letters of this morning from Mancheeter., every thing remained quiet there cn Tuesday. T.e number assembled on the previous inurriii,g, by the hest estimate that could be for n.e.l, to Lave t.: , en about 30,000 ; bf these a great majority were met.: spectators, and of those who took au ae:tive part in the proceedings, about three-fouttlis were wo:king people collected from the count' y--nut residents es Manchester. The number of lb kith , : who weie to proceed to London witli the PCIIII , II '.vAS abeao: Eve hundred, accoutred with knapsacks and blanket% They march-d off by the great Sent!) toad, leader of each division bearing a Petition. Iltfore five o'clock sixty of the wandeters were brougitt back under :entsccre of cavalry and lodged in prqou, and abut sin o'clock about 2.1'.) 'mat . o.ein were brought in ar.•.! put in du: ante. —The remainder were all dispersed: indeed many of them hid drcppeel away from tfc proup befcre the military came up with them, ::rl.l bad taken different ways fot homes ; and the probability ie , that the first rig! t's bivouac would have sickened the greater part of shun and terminated their pilgrimage. We have this morning received the Paris Papa-s of Wednesday. The storms which have recently ravaged different parts in this country, appear to have also extended to the Continent. On the night of Monday, the 3d inst. the same day on which the town of Hythe, and othet places in England, were visited by such severe tem pests of wind, lightning and rain, the cities of &no, burgh, Frankfort, and various other parts in Ger many, experiences! similar visitations. At Sum burgh the heavens appeared, for a time, all on fire. At Munster, a village near Butzbach, a house was struck and set on fire by the lightning, and the flames communicatiog, fourteen other houses fell a prey to the devouring element, The damage every where else has been considera-; We, and in consequence of the continual rains e.t have succeeded, all the rivers dud streams are swot= len to a great height. At Paris the Stine has rsen so much above its ordinary level that tl.e wh , )le of the lower part of the road to Versailles is under water. The Duchess of Balmy is now in a state of con valescence. A Dutch Mail has also arrived this morning. Tie following are the only notices of interest wt,:ci, it supplies : BRUSSELS, MARCH 3. We have the following from the frontiers: Some evil disposed persons have distributed !r. veral Departments at the same time, a pi in:ed Parr, which states that Great Britain, in consegitenne cf a revolution, had been laid waste by tire and swo7J, and that the Duke cf 'Wellington, with his uhcle army, was going to quit France to support the Royal cause !! Tite credulous were, however, ,ova made easy, and it is hoped that the authcrs of tl:e paper will he discovered, who arc supposed to be in habitants of the capital. The Doke of Wellington, it seems, will remain at Paris till the fifth part of the Army of o‘:.‘upreol has entirely quitted France. Count WoronvrA journey to Paris is intended to male arrarpiner , s. if possible, for the embarkation of the GoGO g;.:51;4... troops at Dunkirk, instead of rukiog them rev:t”. hence by land ; but it apFears th:q there are sere obstacles. MAUCH s.—Several British regiments are in ft::1 march to the coasts to he embarked. Within these few day: bu ge car t ; ors of earn save mired in the French ports, prtncipidy tram the Nl tie, but a part front North AtEenea. The co,n 's sent partly to the Army of o..elipation, and parlT to Picardy, where the scarcity is the Twist severe but above all to Paris, where the G,:vi.liroent i; ccf feeling l a rge quawitiA. iadi JO 1 lot r.r.: i i C iv.. Cey No 1311 %hi Cal Szc teil tell pir in: of ' rz vti 7