Star. — London, England, 1822-03-15 00:00:00

NrIMBrR 10 941 PARLIAMENTARY PROCEEDINGS. HOUSE OF LORDS, MARCH 14. LA nowt. (late Viscount Cowls) seas introduced, and took the oath: and his seat. A Petition was presented from the County of Kincardine, praying relief from Agricultural Distress. h►artro, from the Court of Exchequer, in Ireland, pre sented certain papers. Mr. Arlon presented the Report of the Committee for super intending the general Penitetwary at 3111lbar.k. The Marquis of LANSDOWN presented a Petition from 'fears. Fourdrinier and Co. in which the Petitioners stated that they bad invented a beautiful apparatus for manufacturing raper of a superior quality, for which they had obtained a pa tent, and they now prayed for an extension of that patent—Or dered to lie on the table. CIVIL LIST. Lord KING said, that it minht be scarcely regul.tr,to to what had taken place in another Ilouse, but he had seen that certain reductions were to he effected in some parts of the Civil List. One in particular, in which the tlonarch was concerned, would be highly gratifying to the country. Little, however, seemed likely to he done in other branches. lie should there fire ....ice notice, that on this day se'nnight he should call their Lortishitu' attention to those branches of the Civil I.ist not con nected n ith personal expenses of the Sovereign.—The notice was entered, and the Lords were ordered to he summoned. REDUCTION OF THE FIVE PER CENTS. On t h e S ir saw being put by the 'Earl of LIVERPOOL that thn Bill for paying off the Navy Five per Cents. be read a third time, The Fad of ROSEBERRY said be felt it necessary to say that if he bad thought anything unjust in this measure, he should have dissented from it on the second reading ; but the more be considered the transaction the more he was persuaded e.lt the intentions of the Legislature which passed the Act of Ceorge 111. were complied with. here the Noble Earl re .'ed :he same arguments that had been already used in favour c; the 11ii1, and stated that the best proof of its being acceptable tlt:te Public was, that no Petition had been presented against 2 : f-,nu any individual. Merquis of LANSDOWN said be would move an Ame.ttiment, with a view of correcting that which he conceived the ;zreattst imperfection in the Biii, the principle of which, in ed abet' respects, he highly approved of. The object of the Amt ailment was to extend the time of receiving dissents to one t:t oth I.,nger than the period stated therein, so that a fair lad t.tie might be given to the parties whose interests were com pternsed in the .measure, to know how they were to act; for be conceived that they should not impose on those parties the necessity of coming to a decision in a precipitate manner. He thought it more dvirable to move this Amendment in the pre- 1 sent stage of the Ilia than in the Committee, because it would he recorded on the Journals of the House, and serve as a pre cedent for their Lordships on future occasions of a similar kind. Ile then moved that the 16th of April be suhstituted instead of tbc 16:'n of March.—The Amendment was put and negatived; the Bill was then read a third time, and passed. DISTURBANCES IN IRELAND. Lord CA LT HOR PE remarked that the present state of Ire land was such as must excite a great feeling of interest in Par liament, and throughout the whole country. It would be ne cessary, then, for their Lordships to have the fullest possible in formation respecting the disturbances there, as a preliminary to ;my inquiry that might be made respecting them. He therefore moved an Address to his Majesty, praying that he would be graciously pleased to give directions that there be laid before the -•:se Returns of ail Commitments to Jails in the Disturbed Co:nties of Ireland withit, the last six months; and also Re terns of all the Convictions that had taken place during that time before Commissioners of As-the in the same Counties. — Ordered.—The House then adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS. Lord EBRINGTON presented a Petition from the Clergy, Gentry, and Freeholders of Newton-Bushel, in Devonshire, complaining of Ag,ricoltural Distress, and concluding with a prayer for Reform. Mr. COKE moved for a Return of the quantity of Wool im g fined into Great Britain, from all parts of the world, from the s:h of January, 1621, to the sth of January, 1822; and also a return , of the quantity of Woollen Manufactures, Cheese, But ter, Tallow, and Hides, exported front England to all parts of the world, for the same period.—Ordered. Lord AI.TIIORP gave notice, that on the 24th instant he should move for the Repeal of the Tax upon Leather. A message from the Lords communicated 'bat their Lord ships had agreed to the Navy Five per Cents. Bill. Lord NORM ANBY presented a Petition from certain Land holders in Higham Ferrers, County of Northampton, complain ing of distress, and pr Ping that the House may take their case into consideration. There was one circumstance stated in the Petition which he thought necessary to r.-.er.tion ; though the Petitioners received every indulgence front the landholders, yet r,:clt was the pressure of taxation, that their capital was con sumed without deriving much advantage from its employment. The Petition was brought up, and ordered to be printed. Mr. S. RICE moved for Returns of the Emoluments and the Sums received by the Clerks of the Crown and Clerks of the Peru. in Ireland for the last seven years.—Ordered. :Jr. BERNAL moved the Speaker to issue his writ for a new V _miter to serve in Parliament for the County of Lincoln, in thr rw - mt of Colonel Sibthorp, deceased. No man, he said, was resort respected for the honesty and sincerity of his opinions in life—none more esteemed for his virtues in private life, e± which the best proof was the numerous and respectable circle cf f:iends he left behind to lament his loss.—Ordered. VtI'ORTERS OF FOREIGN CORN. Mr. SYKES presented a Petition from the Merchants ell Fintston-upon-Hull, engaged in the Foreign Corn Trade. The' Petition he said, was signed by Gentlemen who had consider able fortunes embarked in the trade. They complained that in the years 1818, 1819, and 1820, they imported a large quantity of foreign corn, which was now locked up, arid must continue so unless Parliament interfered and afforded them some relief.— They ano complained, that by an Act passed in 1815, permitting the importaticn of foreign Corn, they embarked considerable stints in the trade, and that the Act passed in 1819, usually called ?Ir. Peel's Act, completely altered their situatien, by increasing. t? - .e value of the cnrrtncy, and consequently raising the price of the protecting duties. Ile felt himself warranted in stating, on authority of the Agricultural Committee, that the alteration in the value of the currency had the effect of raising the pro. Te•!...1:.g duties from SOs. to ices. The corn imported and now leaked up, amounted to two millions, which sum was thrown soot of circulation. If so large a sum were again thrown back into circulation, be thought it would be a great benefit both to the general and agrcuiturl interests of the country. He hoped the lIOV`C aCcct!t: tO the *prayer of the Petitioners, by taking their case into cot.sideration, and affording them relief. Mr. RICARDO thought those persons Suffered a treat in :rest -ice. They were permitted to import corn When the pro tecting duty was at a certain prize, which was increased subse quent to the Act that gave them the liberty of importation by the increase in the value of the currency. Any measure intro singed fur their relief, as far as they were affected by the altera :On in the currercy, should have his hearty concurrence; but as to the general policy of the measure, he disapproved of it. 24r. 13EN NET said, that all persons were as much affected by the alteration in the value of the currency as the Petitioners; and if they received any relief from the House, it would be throwing open the door to Petitions from debtors, and a number of other persons, aU of whom bad the same cause of complaint. lie thett;;ltt even the Petitioners bad less reason to complain, as they were indemnified for any loss they sustained in the altera f.en of the currency. by the advantage of the exchange being TOW in favour of this country. Mr. T. mr (MON said, that the Hon. Gentleman was oils then in thinking, that the Petitioners were indemnified by tie exchange being in their favour. 'there was nothing to justify varls a conclusion. So far from that being the case, the exchange was now conehlerahly less than during the war, it being now 4~ but 7i, and then from 20 to 23 per cent. Thus it was apparent that the Petitioners could benefit little by that circumstance. Mr. RI CAR DO said, that his lion *lend, the Member for Wiltshire, was quite mistaken in supposing that the Petitioners derived any 'benefit from the exchange at present ; the exchange had nothing to do with the question. They wereentitled to im port when the average was at a certain price, and that price was altered by the increase in the value of the currency. This cir cumstance put them under a great disadvantage compared with the home grower, which he thought unjust. Mr. S. WORTIF.Y thought the Petitioners made but no case in conseitsence of the alteration in the currency. If they really sustained a loss, they ought to be protected. Dlr. SYKES, in reply, supported the validity of his former statements.—The Petition was then brought up, and ordered to be printed. IRISH TITIIItS. Mr. S. RICE presented a Petition from the Lay and Clerical Proprietors of the Tithes of twelve Parishes in one of the southern Counties of Ireland. He said the Petition was one of importance, whether considered as to the subject to which It related, or to the respectability of those who subscribed it. The Petitioners stated, that after many years of experience, they were convinced that the state of the tithes, and the m ode of collecting them, were the causes of the disturances which now prevailed in Ireland, and prayed that the House may take Into consideration the present state of the tithes in that country, sked devise such alterations as might appear suitable to its wisdom.— From the great interest which they had in tithe property It was the less likely that they were influenced by any motives in peti tioning the House, than those which they believed would be beneficial to the country. They stated, that though thirty-six years had been spent in devising some measure that would make the tithe system less felt in Ireland, yet the present law was in. jurious and subversive of the best interests of that country, par ticularly as far as it regarded its agriculture. Ile put the con sideration of the question on another ground also; some altera tion should be adopted in the system, even for the sake of the Established Church of Ireland : by the present system its safety was endangered. lie hoped the Session would not be suffered to go by without taking it into consideration. He was aware that a more complicated, a more dangerous, or a more difficult subject, could not be brought under the consideration of Parlia ment ; but refusing to discuss it would only render it more dan gerous, and whenever it came before the House, it should be brought on its own grounds only, unembarrassed by any com parison with the tithe system of England, as nothing could be more different than the tithe system in Ireland and the tithe system in England.—The Petition was brought up, and ordered to be printed. MR. 11. num Mr. NEWMAN presented a Petition from Exeter, stating that the punishment of Henry Hunt was ag gravated by solitary confinement, and that he was suffering more than was contemplated by the Court which passed sentence on him ; and praying that the House may take his case into consideration with a view of mitigating his punishment. Mr. S. WORTLEY said that he concurred with the Hon. Gentleman who spoke last night (Sir T. Lethbridge). He thought Hunt exceedingly ill used, and that he was suffering more punishment than was intended for him. He hoped that Parliament would adopt some measure which would induce the Crown to extend its mercy to him. Mr. HUME ob .erved, that it had been said on a former occasion that Mr. Hunt was not in that soli- tary confinement represented, and that he was at liberty to walk about. He had received a letter that morning contradicting it, and stating that his door was fast closed except three hours in the day, by di rection of Dr. Coniston, one of the Magistrates; if this were the case, did it not shew a disposition to persecute that individual, by treating him with much greater severity than any others confined for similar offences? Mr. N. CALVERT said, that he was extremely happy to tind the good feeling entertained by the Hon. Member for Yorkshire (Mr. S. Wortley) on the subject. He hoped that it would extend to other Members, and that something would be done to miti• gate Mr. Hunt's punishment. S;r T. LETHBRIDGE said, that notwithstanding the letter from Mr. Hunt, he could not believe his puni•hment was so severe as was represented. The High Sheriff of Sumersetshire,whom he (Sir Thomas) saw but a short time since, told him that he had sent down orders to give him all the indulgencies— per. haps that was too strong a term, he would say free doms possible, and he understood that these freedoms were accordingly given to Mr. Hunt. It was said he was in solitary confinement, but he believed, on in quiry, it would not be found to be the fact. Some contradictory regulations were made,which, perhaps, on deliberation, would not have been entered into ; Mr. Hunt was indignant at these, and thought him self worse treated than he really was. He was con vinced, on inquiry, it would be found that he was not in solitary confinement. He did not stand up for an exercise of undue punishment ; he was ready to censure those who aggravated his punishment ;'but he begged the House would withhold giving anpopi nion on the subject until it was clearly proved that such was the fact. On his (Sir Thomas) passing through lle.ester some time ago, be had a confer ence with Mr. Hunt, and commiserated his situation; he wished to give him every indulgence if it were in his power, but he lived too far from llchester to visit the jail—besides, he was not in the habit of es:mi. ning such places. There was a time when Mr. Hunt thought Ilchester Jail the best in thz .country, and' that lie asserted publicly in one of his own publica dons. He (Mr. Hunt) must have altered his opinion even more than die jail was altered ; he once thought it a Paradise compared to other jails, which shewed that it was not now so radically bad as he wished to represent it. After what had been written by himself On that jail, some extraordinary alteration must have taken place in it to have changed his mind. He lhoped if any persons were convicted of ill-treatment I towards Mr. Hunt, 'hey would suffer the punishment due to malvetsation ; but he tailed upon the House not to hastily pass its sentence on the conduct of the Magistrates. Sir R. WILSON said, if Mr. Hunt went into that jail with favourable impressions, it only now fortified and strengthened the ground of his complaint.— When Sir Chailes Bamlield Weli High Sheriff of the County, he was treated with kindness ; but, after the expii ation of his Shrievalty, several regulations were then made which certainly gave Mr. Hunt just cause for complaint. Sir T. LETHBRIDGE shortly explained. Sir J. 61 SHAM said, that the present High She- riff had sent a letter directing that Mr. Hunt should be treated as he had been by Sir C. Bamfield. Mr. NEWMAN, in reply, said that he thought thi conduct adopted towards Mr. Hunt very impolitic, and when htkiase came before the House it ought to meet with due attedtion; and, if it appeared he was suffering an unmerited degree of punishment, it should be mitigated.—The Petition was brought up, and ordered tote printed. Mr. Alderrhan WOOD presented a Petition, • ed sign by eight thousand of the inhabitants of the town of Leeds and , its neighbourhood, praying the House to take into its consideration the punishment of Mr. Hunt, With a view to procure a mitigation of it.— The worthy - Alderman observed that the Petition was signed by the most respectable names in Leeds. It had, among" others, the name of the High Sheriff of the neighbouring county subscribed to it. He mentioned that circumstance to slew the House that the Petition did not come from that class of persons over whoM Mr. Hunt was supposed to have any in fluence. He would postpone his observations until the evidence taken before the Commissioners was printed and distributed among the Members of the House. He was led to expect, from what had fallen from the Right Honourable Secretary,' when Mr. Hunt's case was before the House on a former night, that some of the evidence might be distributed on Wednesday next, and the whole on or before Satur day week. Mr. WYNN observed, that if it was intended that the evidence was to be delivered to the House piece meal, as the worthy Alderman stated, no course could be adopted more objectionable in its principle and consequences. It amounted to the publication of ex-parte statements, than which nothing could be more prejudicial. The SPEAKER said he hoped the House would excuse him in observing that he had heard with asto nishment what had fallen from the worthy Alderman. When it was the pleasure of the House to order any papers to be printed, it then became the duty of the Speaker to see that order cal-lied into execution as soon as possible. But it was not usual to have them delivered piecemeal, but to wait until the whole were printed. That was the duty of the Speaker, and lie was bound to negative any such instruction as was implied in the words of the worthy Alderman. Mr. Alderman WOOD said that he felt great anxiety on the subject, and thought the papers might be distributed, for the convenience of Nlerisbers, as they came from the press. He, however submitted with great deference to the authority of ate Speaker. The SPEAKER said, he was always anxious to meet the general wishes of the House. If it was the pleasure of the House that the evidence- should be delivered to Members as it came from the press, he would yield, and alter the usual course. Unless the House did signify such to be their pleasure, he would pursue the system which had been always acted open. Mr. PEEL said he rose because he was alluded to by the worthy Alderman. He had no more contioul over the printing of the documents submitted to that House than the worthy Alderman had. He did not know precisely on what day the evidence could be printed, nor did he recollect that he had ever said I :hree days, or four days. He expressed his belief that the evidence could be soon put into Members' hands. The SPEAKER said he was sorry again to trou ble the House. The present case would govern all of a similar kind. The House would perceive the difficulty of his situation, if he was to take on him self the responsibility of delivering out part of the evidence before the whole was prepared. He should, in that case, be at the trouble of reading and exa mining every part of it, to see that there were no ex parte statement!. Mr. SYKES observed, that though Ilchester Jail had occupied much of the attention of the House, yet it was necessary to give it much more considera tion. He was firmly of opinion. that when Mr. Justice Best had drawn up and signed those rules and regu- 1 lations, that Learned Judge could not have had any intention that they should apply to the case of per- 1 sons convicted of misdemeanour. He thought the visiting Magistrates were wrong in reposing su much confidence in the jailer. Mr. Serjeant ONSLOW defended the conduct of Mr. Justice Best, and defied any Hon. Member in that House to produce one instance of inhumanity or cruelty in the whole life of that Learned Judge. Mr. SYKES explained, and said he made no insi nuation against that Learned Judge. He respected the characters of all the Judges. He had a friend- 1 ship for some of them—he had a veneration for all. After a few words from Mr. DICKINSON, the Pe tition was read, and ordered to be printed. BANK OF ENGLAND NOTES. Mr. BENNET said he held a Petition from a per son named James Ferguson, a stereotyper and printer, residing in Newman-street, praying the House to cause further inquiries into the possibility of detecting forgery of Bank notes. The Hon. Member said that the Petitioner submitted a plan to the Committee ap pointed by the House, in 1818, to inquire into the means of preventing forgery of Bank of England notes. Neither the Petitioner's plan, however, nor any other,was approved of by the Commissioners. He expressed his surprise that no effectual plan could he found for those notes, when it was well known that country bank notes, and the notes of the Scotch and Irish Banks, were brought to so much perfection that there were scarcely any forgeries. The Hon. Member said he had taken an account of the Bank prosecutions for several years, and found that there were 413 capital convictions, in the last seven years, for forgery on the Bank of England. In the year 1821 there were 70 persons capitally convicted, and 16 of those were executed. It was a most lamentable circumstance that some plan could not be discovered to prevent such temptation to crime. It was quite clear that punishment 'could not prevent it. The only way to prevent it was by inging the.paper currency to greater perfection, and by rendering detection as easy as possible. Hewas convinced the Bank would go on for the thirteen years to come, as they had for the thirteen years past, without making any improve ment in their notes, unless the House took it on them selves. No notes were so easy of imitation as those of the Bank of England.—On the motion for leave to bring up the Petition, The SPE A KEIt asked if it prayed for remuneration? Mr. BENNET replied that it did not. The Petition was then brought up and read ; and on the motion that it might lie on the table, Mr. MANNING said, that the Petitioner's plan had been repeatedly submitted to the Committee appointed by the Houie, of which Committee himself was one. It was under consideration in June; 1818, in 1820, and in 1821. The Committee, at each time, gave it great attention, but found it not fit to be approved of. He defended the conduct of the Bank Directors, and said they spared neither trouble nor expense in their en deavours to procure a plate that could not be imi tated. They could not, however, adopt any new note, if they had not decided proofs of its inimita bility. One of the many plans which were submitted . to the Committee had been under experiment, and he was sorry to say that it had completely failed. He was, however, inclined to think that the crime of for gery was not increasing. Since May last, the number of prosecutions by the Bank in Londi;n, for forgeries of £5 notes and upwards, was only fifteen, and there were only six more throughout the kingdom. Mr. HUME said he rose to correct a misunder standing of what was said by his Hon. Friend the Member for Shrewsbury (Mr. Bennet). The Hon. Bank Director, it was evident, had not heard.the Pc tition read. The Petition presented to the House last year by the Petitioner prayed for remuneration; but the present Petition was calling for further inquiry into the means of preventing forgery, and suggested a better plan. So difficult of detection were s9irre forgeries, that it was no wonder the Public could nit know them, since in some cases they were taken as good by the Bank itself. Whilst on his legs he wished to ask the Noble Marquis, whom he saw then in his place, a question. He understood that the Hon. Mr. Bagot, our Ambassador at America, was instructed to inquire, at the various Banks in the United States, to a.certain the general opinion of the Bankers as to the skill and ingenuity of Mr. Pei kips. The answer s of the different persons were communicated to Go vernment, and he wished now to know it the Noble Marquis had any objection to lay the communication , before the House? The Marquis of LONDONDERRY said he saw no objection to state to him the substance of the com munication of Mr. Bagot, so far as he remembered it. The inquiry, he believed, was of a more general cha racter than that now described by the lion. Member. The result was favourable to Mr. Perkins, and he had come over to this country, and was employed by the Bank to furnish a specimen of a note. This project was taken into consideration, with the different other ones, by the Commissioners. Mr. PEEL would call the attention of the House to the striking fact that there were but six cases of for gery during the Spring Assizes in the country.—The Petition was laid on the table. JOINT POSTMASTERS-GENERAL Mr. CALCRAFT said he was about to move for an account connected with a noble person, of emi nence in the country ; he felt it necessary to disclaim any intention of introducing the name of that noble person invidiously. The Noble Lord to when' he al luded was Lord Clancarty ; and he understood that his Lordship held the situation of Joint Postmaster- General for a period of two years, during the greater part of which time he was abroad, and engaged in transactions in which it was but fair to state that he acquitted himself with great credit, and highly to the advantage of the country. He then moved for an account of the number of days, during which Lord Clancarty attended the Post Office to discharge the duties of a Postmaster-General, together with the dates of his appointment and resignation. The Marquis of LONDONDEItRY was sure that the Hon. Gentleman himself would admit that it was usual, in moving for an account like this, to state some grounds why it was called for. Notwithstanding the Hon. Membet's disavowal of anything invidious in this motion, it did appear to him that the motion conveyed an insinuation that the noble person had not attended to the discharge of his duty, He begged to state that the non-attendance of this officer at the Post Office was no criterion of his having neglected his duty, for he believed the nature of the office per mitted that he might perform it at a distance. The House would bear in mind too, that at a time of great emergency, during the progress of the Allied Army, he was called upon at a notice of about 48 hours, tis attend the King of the Netherlands; and as he had enjoyed the confidence of that Court, he stopt there ; and finding that he was not to return to this country, be resigned the situation of Joint Post master. General. He saw no reason for a charge against Lord Clan carty that he did not attend the Poi t Office, because still he might be in the discharge of the duties of the office though absent. As well might o.e lion. Gen tleman con plain of the non-attemiance of the Master the Ordnance, or any other officer, whose duties admitted of being performed without persona at tendance. He believed that the Duke of Welling ton held the situation of Chief Secretary of Ireland whilst he commanded a regiment at Copenhagen. He hoped that the douse, therefore, would not lend itself to the infliction of a reproach on the character of the noble individual in question; and that, as there was no ground stated for the introduction of the account, he hoped the Honourable Gentleman would not press it: Mr. CA LC R AFT disavowed any intention to throw reproach on the Earl of Clancarty ; but he under stood the Noble Marquis to admit that one P master-General might be absent from the country without any detriment to t he business of the office, - , , 44. • . .. , • .. , • -. d i"' • . ~ • - ~. • . r . . 1 . . . .i. • .• illit I , • r.r::: - . ' -...-_-::=,,,•„.. r . ....-0 • •' f 47 1 Ai r ligi3i # . . '`. . ' l t i ~ .b i' /, . • . • Iak.VAIII It .... ~. 14. • ) 10 • • 7 -. . .1) ..‘ . • •.- 4 • ••;•10 , ....... 4 • , ! • . FRIDAY, MARCH 15, 182 1 4 [NICE SEVENPENCt. --...----• 1 - ..----..-/-.........-. i I but TA. and then from 20 to 22 ner cent. Thus ft was 111517arent I rialto(' taint o loth.. .14.....6:...• Owe Mr_ Hunt shnuld I tti arrostor noriectinti_ owl lw .....1....:-- .i.....-...! ..1 ; ~, . ~ I #1 11 ~ • ~i t I N e.•