Star. — London, England, 1822-03-29 00:00:00

t 14. S. ~. `• A PillittgrieTelltY PROCEEDINGS. H g 8 ELORDB, MARCH U. • Arlie s* Loas. .110mIale•bavias been detained at Cerium Palace da a late hour, tbe Hesse did not meet till balf-paat live o'clock. - Mr. Toxins, from the Treasury, niessined an Account of the amount of Five per Cest is toolts eonverteibso Four par Cents. and the amount of the 'per Cents. Aron the pasdnd of the Bate Act. • , • , Jonesox /ma the Chat Eseistares Office in Inland , i p rese nted certain Accounts The Earl of BLESINTON moved to put off tissistiOod reading of the 818 for the Registry of Deeds in Ireland to Mon day, the 2Sd of April.--Ordered. Earl of BLEST NTON said, that some time ago certain statements appeared in the Newspapers ng what was supposed to have been said by him in thartertse of the Fel lows of Dublin College who went out upon livings. The ex pressions he used were considered rather harsh abd severe; but be now thought it necessary to state, that he only meant to say that the Fellows who went out on livings left the College at a time of life when it was difficult for them to change their kabits, and when they were not in a condition to fulfil the dudes they were to perform. - BOARD OF ADMIRALTY. Sir. firma, from the Admiralty, presented at the bar a copy of the Commission for executing the office of Lord High Ad miral of England, which, on the motion of Lord Mramnas, bad been ordered on the preceding day. Lord NIELVILLIZ then rose and said, that as his Majesty bad lately ordered the numbe r of Commissioner of the Ad miralty to be reduced from seven to five, it was of importance that the present Commissioden should se enabled to perform the duties assigned to them, so fat as regarded the business in the outposts and other places: but this it was impossible for them to do, so long as that Act existed which required tint /b 0 business could be done at the Board unless three ware present. It was impossible, after the reductiosis question. for the Board to act, unless the quorum was reduced to two. Ile now had a Bill which he should present to their Lordships for that purpose, and its object was, to amend the provisions of the former Act by empowtring two Commissioners to act as a quorum. With respect to the proceeding which gave rise to the reduction in question, be must say that he could nut concur in the expediency of it; and if he had been a Member of the other House at the time the proceeding was adopted, he should have felt it his duty to oppose it. That measure, he must assert, had not the least tendency to promote economy; and considerable deterioration would take place in the business of the office so for as regarded the reduction of one of the Commissioners. If only one Commissioner had been reduced, he would not say that the public business was likely to be obstructed during the present period of peace; but in time of war he was confident that it would be necessary to raise the number again to seven. During peace it certainly would have been better to have kept up six Commissioners. He should not now enter into any detail of argument on this question ; but he must say that the measure he alluded to, instead of being one of economy, would be at tended with considerable expense. All he now meant to do was to present the Bill ; but be should be prepared to state his reasons for what he now asserted, if any Noble Lord should think proper to defend the reduction in question. He should also move to suspend the Standing Order of the House, so that the Bill might be passed in all its stages to.morrow, as it was necessary that it should be passed into a law before the ensuing recess. His Lordship then presented the Bill, which was read a firz t and ordered to be read a second time .^-nrosrmw Adjoot tad. lIOUSE OF COMMONS. - - - Mr. CANNING presented a Petition from the West India Proprietors and Merchants residing in Liverpool, complaining of distress, and suggesting, amongst other means of immediate -relief, the opening of the trade between the West India Cola ties and the United States of America. As his Right lion. Friend was about to open the subject of this Petition, by intro ducing a Bill to-morrow evening, he should not anticipate the discussion by any observation.—Ordered to be printed. Mr. CANNING presented a Petition from a body of Mer chants interested in the trade of Canada, in Liverpool, corn plainiog of distress, and praying the House to take their case into cut- deration.—Ordered to be printed. Mr. ELLIS presented a Petition 'from certain West India Proprietors and Uercliants to the same etlect as that just pre sented front Liverpool.—Ordered to be printed. r.I.LIS presented a Petition from certain West India Proprietors and Merchants, praying the House to institute a minute inquiry into the circumstances of the case before they consented to renew the Charter of the Vest India Dock Com pany.—Referred to the Committee on Foreign Trade. Lord NORMAN UT presented a Petition from the City of York, for the remission of the remainder of Mr. hunt's punish ment. The Noble I. ird said, without wishing to shew any special favour to Mr. Hunt, he thought the House would act with dis cretion by agreeing to the motion of the lion. Baronet, the Mem ber for Westminster. He believed that Mr. Hunt's punishment was very much disproportioued to his offence.—The Petition was ordered to be printed. Mr. 'HUME moved for a Copy of the existing Contract or Contracts for the supply of the Convicts on board the hulks, stating the time when made, the persons with whom made, whether private or public, and the terms for which made.— Ordered. Also for a Retirrn of the amount of the Expenses, Civil and Military, paid by Great Britain, for Guernsey and Jersey, fur the years 1807 and 1821a—Ordered. Mr. HUME postponed, until to-morrow, his motion relating to the Civil List (Third Class). Mr. URE obtained leave to bring in a Bill to the Ist and 2d of his present Majesty, explanatory of the Rate of In terest on certain Securities. Mr. BENNE(' presented a Petition from William Mason and Thomas Moses, stating that having been bail for a person of the name of William Clarke, a bookseller in the Strand, who had been prosecuted fora blasphemous libel. they were sur prised to have received notices that their recognizance' were estreatetl, upon the ground that the said William Clarke did not appear to plead. The fact was, that William Clarke did appear in Court, hut the case being called on for trial, it was found there was not a Jury present to try him.—The Petition was referred to the Committee of Recognizance'. Mr. W. LAMB presented a Petition from certain Owners and Occupiers of Land in the Hundred of Hudson, in the County of Hereford, complaining of Agricultural Distress, and prying relief. The Irish Five per Cents. Bin went through a Committee, the Report of which was read, and ordered to be taken into further consideration to-morrow. The Scotch Burghs Accounts Bill was read a second time, and committed for Wednesday next. MR. HUNT. Sir ROBERT WILSON said, he held in his hand a Petition, to certain passages of which he thought it candid to call the attention of the House. The Peti tion was that of the Parish of SG Matthew, Bethnal green, and was numerously and respectably signed : and it prayed that the House would take into its se rious consideration the case of Mr. Hunt. It adverted to the' equivocal offence" of Mr. Hunt, to the dis proportionate sentence, and the severe manner in which that sentence had been carried into execution. There'was one paragraph in the Petition to which he thought it right to call the attention of the House, that it might. have an opportunity of exercising its judgment on its propriety, when it afterwards came to be read. In this paragraph the Petitioners first disclaimed any intention of using any expressions that could convey an insult to the House; but they could not help calling its attention to the necessity of a Re form in Parliament, when they saw it circulated in print, stated in the House, that the purchase of seats in the House of Ciimmons was as " notorious as the sun at noon-day ;" and when they understood it eras stated, by a Cabinet Minister , t hat it was neces sary to have seats at the disposal of the Government, for the purpose of securing a majority in that House, which was intended to operate as a check on the Executive ; and when they read in the Newspapers of the llth of February lag, in a speech of Mr. Spooner, -,, e.ARW‘4 —3l , wwk ' ' bo la, Otedat Malting s bad sat bit a *Ott Ourrithte:Hause Commons; low enough howeeerto In the scandal nue way M which the most importnattioestions disposed of. Merb bays cane it and voted jab o f which they.were totally ignorant; and titles the most momentous quastgatt were when only 60 Members were present, 'whit thought on the subject on which they were to vote, but looked at the Marquis of Londonderry at one side and Mr. Tierney at the other, by which they were at once determined in their'ofoinioni, while the rest of the Members were amusing themselves at Balls, Theatres, and Coffee-houses. The Petitioners conti nued to state, that when such abuse notoriously ex isted, it ought to be removed, and he must be a nar row, shallow-thinded man who did not see the neces sity of a change in a House so constituted. Mr. Alderman WOOD seconded the motion, and concurred in the opinion of the Petitioners on the necessity of a Parliamentary Reform" Mr. DICKINSON said, that a Petition which con tained such language was an insult to the House, and ought ant to be received. Besides, it contained what was not true, in stating that boys voted in the House of Commons.- That such was not the fact was noto rious to everybody, when no person ss as eligible under the age of twenty-one. The gallery was then cleared, and: the House di vided on the propriety of receiving the Petition. The numbers were— =vying It it Majority against receiving it - --so On the re-admission of strangers to the gallery, Mr, Alderman WOOD was presenting a Petition from the Inhabitants of Ashton-under-Line, in Lan cashire, in favour of Mr. Hunt, complaining of the unnecessary severity of his punishment, and praying that the authors and abettors of it, whether Magis trates or Jailers, may be made to account for their conduct, and that Mr. Hunt may be restored to the enjoyment of his own mansion. It also prayed that the House may institute an inquiry into the massacre at Manchester. T .--The Petition was laid on the table, and ordered to be printed. PARLIAMENTARY REFORM. Mr. HUME said, he held in his hand a Petition from the Mayor, Bailiff, and Commonalty of Mon mouth, in favour of Parliamentary Reform ; but from the decision of the Rouse on the Petition pre sented a few moments since, he was quite at a loss how to proceed, as the Petition which he had to pre sent might not also be considered to contain language sufficiently delicate for the feelings of the House.— But it was in vain to shew such a di,inclination to re ceive anything which touched on Reform. He per fectly concurred in the sentiments of that Petition on the necessity of such a measure, constituud as the House now was ; and though it might be delayed by temporising measures fur a short period, the time would come, and was not far distant, when a Reform would take place ; and what had just occurred— namely, the rejecting the prayers of the People, con trary to their just rights and undoubted privileges, was a convincing proof of its immediate necessity.— When grievances were admitted to exist, he thought a refusal to hear the Petition read which contained a statement of those grievances, was an insult to the People—( Hear). The SPEAKER here interrupted Mr. Hume, and said the Hon. Member must be aware it was quite contrary to decorum to make such observations ; and when they would not be permitted outside the doors of the House, they could be much less so within. Mr. HUME submitted that he was not aware of having made use of any observations out of order ; he only said the Petitioners were injured, and their privileges violated, by the rejection of their Petition, and in stating that he never before understood that it was contrary to decorum. He contended that the House had not the right of rejecting a Petition be cause it might have contained disagreeable truths.— The Petition which he was about to present might meet the same fate as the former one, for the same reason : but he would refer to its most important pa ragraph, and leave the House to exercise its judg ment on it. The Petitioners stated, that they sought a Reform in the House of Commons with a view to the salvation of their remaining liberties, and that the rights of the People, which were now in a lingering state, might not be entirely extinguished. They also stated, they did not flatter themselves that the prayer would be granted, but they, however, wished to im press on the House the necessity of such a measure, and hoped that a Reform would be speedily intro duced into the House of Commons. In every word of the Petition he (Mr. Hunie) expressed his entire and hearty concurrence, and repeated, that he was the more convinced of the necessity of Reform from the rejection of the former Petition. He concluded by moving that the Petition be brought up. On the question being put, Lord GRANVILLE SOMERSET could not ad mit that the Petition contained the sentiments of the commonalty of Monmouth ; he believed, nn the con trary, that it contained sentiments in which many of the most respectable inhabitants disagreed. Mr. COURTENAY seconded the motion of the Hon. Member for Aberdeen, and he did so with the view of directing the attention of the House to the distinction betwten the present and the former Peti tion ; it contained none of the abusive language which so strongly marked the former one—it was free from the insults and imputations on the House which were con tained in that Petition. He could not agree with the Hon. Member in saying that the Petition was re jected without being read ; lid he not recollect that the gallant Member who presented it had particularly called the attention of the House to a paragraph which he read, and could it be then said it was re jected without its contents being known ? But when be heard the language of that paragraph, couched in such terms of insult to the House, he could not hesi tate a moment in rejecting it. He thought those who contended for the unlimited reception of Petitions, in whatever language they might be contained, wet e the worst enemies to the very interests which they pro fessed to support. He totally differed from those Gentlemen who held that the House had not the right of rejecting Petitions when they contained offensive language. There were a number of instances in which a similar course was adopted, and he bad no doubt that it was perfectly constitutional. I Mr. G. BENNET expressed his concurrence with the. Hon. Gentleman in the opinion that the House • *A. state ,ives, well known, and frequently mentioned both a... and without doors. Even the late Mr. Ponsonby, the Chancellor of Ireland, said that it was as cleat as the sun at noon-day that seats were sold in that House ; 1 and if there were any Hon. Gentlemen still disposed to be incredulous, he was ready to take the proof of it upon himself, and establish the fact in ten minutes, if he were permitted to call certain Gentlemen to the bar. The Petitioners also knew such a practice did exist : they thought it a scandal, and therefore prayed the House to put a stop to it by a ReForm ; they made these statements also upon the authority of one who had a seat in the House for some tune, and was most likely to be in the secret of all such practices, be cause, even during the short period he was in the House, he was deeply entrenched and embosomed should he likeH Gen tlemenont.oha amlleongtvethon e t the .] Secretary ppo e b e e p npcehs opposite called to the bar of the House: he could then tell how the Parliament of 1806 was constituted, and how seats were sold on that occasion—(Hear, hear).—He thought the Petitioners justified in their statement, when they made it on the word of an Ez-Member of Parliament—one, it must be admitted, who was no bad authority on such a subject. As to the objection that the Petition stated boys voted in the House, it was clear that the Petitioners did not mean boys from Westminster School. or boys, as used in the common parlance; thermeant those who, though they might have attained the age of manho od, were still boys in experience; and this was the front of their crime— there was no sneer, no insult offered to the House, but merely a repetition of what had been frequently asserted in and out of the House. On the necessity of Reform there was little doubt, and he maintained, in the language of Lord Chatham, if it was not re formed from within, it would at length be reformed with a vengeance from without. Sir JOHN NEWPORT thought that the House ought not to reject a Petition until it had heard it read ; it was not sufficient ground for its rejection that a passage was selected and read by the Member who presented it, which might have appeared to con tain offensive language; he had more than once wit nessed Petitions presented by Members against their inclinations, and it was not impossible that an ob noxious passage might be selected and read to the House. Now he thought the House should guard against the possibility of rejecting a Petition on such grounds, by taking care that it should always be first read by the Clerk. The House should never reject a Petition without having a full knowledge of it, and that could not be obtained without knowing the whole content. A passage which, taken alone, might ap pear offensive, when taken along with the whole Pe tition, might not bear any such construction. Nobody was more anxious than he was to prevent any insult to the House, and maintain its dignity in full vigour and power ; but he thought no Member ought to exer cise his judgment on the tenour of any Petition with out first heating the whole of it read. Sir ROBERT WILSON said, that in justice to the House, the Petitioners, and himself, lie felt it his duty to state that he did not direct the attention of the House to the paragraph in question with the view that it should then decide on it, but for the purpose of fixing its attention on it when the whole of the Petition was read by the Clerk. Mr. DICKINSON still contended that that part of the Petition which stated boys voted in the House of Commons was untrue ; and that, in the whole pe riod of English history, there was but one instance of a person sitting in the House who was under age, and that person was Mr. Fox, who spoke, but did not vote during his minority. Sir M. W. RIDLEY said, that having voted for ithe bringing up the Petition, he wished to state that his sentiments entirely coincided with those of the r Hon. Member for Waterford. He would be the last , person in the House to vote for any Petition which contained anything offensive to the House ; but, he maintained, the rejected Petition contained no direct allegation against the House; it only repeated what others had said before, and if it had been read, the House would then have had the opportunity of know ing on what ground it ought to be rejected. After a few observations from Mr. Alderman WooD, the Petition was brought up. Mr. HUME, on moving that the Petition be laid on the table, said, he did it for the purpose of giving the Noble Lord (Somerset) an opportunity of shew ing why he thought the Petition was not signed by the respectable inhabitants of Monmouth. He (Mr. Hume) contended, that it was signed by the greater number of the respectable commonalty, though, per haps, none of the signatures of the Noble Lord's voters were affixed to it : among the other respectable Peti tioners was the late Mayor. He had lately an op portunity of seeing the Burgesses of Monmouth, and he could vouch for the respectability of those who subscribed the present Petition. Lord GRANVILLE SOMERSET said, that he had his information from as good a source as the Ho nourable Gentleman opposite, and he was prepared to say, that the greater number of the Aldermen and Burgesses were entirely unacquainted with the Peti tion, and there were many of the respectable corn monalty who bad not signed it; but he did not mean to say that those who signed it were not respectable. The Petition was then laid on the table, and ordered to be printed. MALT DUTY AND SPIRIT LICENSES IN IRELAND. Mr. SPRING RICE said, he wished to call the attention of the Chancellor of the Exchequer to the late Malt Duty in Ireland: when on a former occa-' sion he asked him how mud) would be the reduction for Ireland, he replied, it would be L 200,000; but if the Right Hon. Gentleman referred to the papers on the table, he would see that such a reduction could not be effected : he wished to learn what might be the probable amount of the reduction now, as the former one could not take place. He wished also to call his attenticip to the spirit license duty in Ireland; the high charge of that duty only operated as an in crease to the evils which that country endured. He could not pass over the great expense and great delay atteniiled the production of any Returns ordered • . tide delay all fair dismsicni n n • documents were necessary, v:at not altogether prevented. He held ight to attend to the orders of the Papers were called for, they ought ithout any charge to the Public of I; but, instead of this, a severe inflicted on the peasantry : 4. point out instances where the Clerks of the *nd the Clerks oldie Peace had greater emo. hunients even than the Hon. Secretary opposite. li e knew them to have collected a revenue of three, four, and - five hundred pounds a-year, from the peasantry, for furnishing papers called for by the House. Il e hoped, that noticing the subject would have the effect of preventing such delay and such expense in future. He concluded moving that the Returns of the Spirit License Duty in Ireland, which were laid on the table yesterday, be printed. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER sa id i . he had calculated that the amount of the Malt Duty reduction in Ireland would be £200,000, but it now appeared that it would not exceed £lOO,OOO. Rut Ireland had no reason to complain of any injustice towards it ; it had its proportionate share of ti:e b e . nefit of the reduction; if it did not amount to more, it was not the fault of Government ; but it s oulcl be for the House to consider what other ii.easures should be adopted to give it a larger share in the advantage to be derived from the reduction on the Malt Duty. As to the Spirit License Duty, it was a subject of too important and extensive. a nature, and so closely con nected with the interests of Ireland, that he could not now give any opinion on it ; he thought it could he entered on with much more advantage afier the Re port of the Commissioners of Inquiry was know l , who were now investigating that subject. rt. gard to the Clerks of the C and the Clerk (.1 the Peace, it was the first time that he heard ,u:h a complaint against them. Sir JOHN NEWPORT said tiers was a subje-t which ought to be fully taken up. Since fist had a seat in the House, he was in the habit of Cori• plaining of the delay in pioducing Irish pai,eis, and he thought some measure should be aLio k aed which would facilitate their production. As to the taxation on the peasantry for these papers, he thought it a great grievance, and was entitled to the se. ions consideration of the House. Perhaps the House could hardly cre ' dit that there were counties in Ireland in which die Clerks of the Peace received from .5,0001. to 10,0001. a year, levied on the peasantry by taxation. When such was the fact, he was sure the House would see the necessity of giving this subject its serious attention. Mr. CROKER. said, if the facts welt" as state, that a sum of 4,0001. or 5,0001. was paid to a Clerk of the Peace, the Grand Jury should not. have passed any presentments at that time. The blame should be fixed on the parties who were really in fault; an,+ if the charges be taken for granted, he considered that the Grand Jury deserved animadversion. Sir JOHN NEWPORT said that the House could satisfy itself upon the subject by the inspection of the papers, which were above stairs for Hollow ab:e Members to see.—The paper ordered to be pl ante . chef bellied its di . . ,-- the Rouse; by' paterd4 norstiousaus. •A.. , i ll g et , v .fouse of or tho , . eubjects, where scandal- did Pod .' 4th J., . impeded, if no . ms were Patidons which oug ht , to ' ?-11 'thou ' I . ery officer ong )r on sub- it did not. The Petitiolers c , h a fair . on ! and when Pa i d so me- Meet Onfnlrievances for the pur . , of obtaining re - to be fu rnished, with d ec id e d dress, shad net to offer insult—they, even in the out- any other individual 6 n e wer set, disclaimed any such intention. They did not taxation was inflicted ta, ~,, I te_ state facts as from themselves, but as what had been He could point clerk • -I In ftis arta& ti% "4..i.:e. and/ the JAIL PIILSENTNIENTS. Mr. S. RICE then moved for a Return of the number of Debtors and Criminal Offende.s com mitted to the Jail of the County of Dubin:, between the years 1807 and 1820; also for an Account of the total number of Presentments granted within the same time; together with an Account of the total Amount of the Expenses for the Jail of the County of Dubiin. Sir JOHN NEWPORT made s, me observations on the charges made for Returns ordered by the House. He contended that no o!!icer had a right to make any such charges. He was bound to furnish papers ordered by the House, as one of the duties of his office, and he had no awl oricy to saddle the coun try with the expenses aaendant on them. Mr. CROKER said tkat the Honourable Baronet (Sir John Newport) had raised up a shadow on the present occasion. He objected to his pot.ition altl gether, with respect to the duties of officers making out Returns ordered by the House. If he considered that the manual strength of an office may be reduced to the lowest possible scale, as was at pre s ent the case in the Admiralty, and that people must be hired to make out these Returns, it would be most unjust not to allow the office that expense. It was only last week that some of the clerks in his department had complained that they had been obltged to work extra hours to meet the wishes and orders of the House, and they hoped that if a necessity for similar dispatch occurred again, they would be allowed to call in others to assist them. He considered that in such a case it would be unjustifiable to complain of an ex pense arising from the necessity of executing the or ders of the House. Mr. RICE would state a special instance in support of his former observations. The Clerk of the Peace in the County of Tipperary received 5,0001. a-year from the profits of his situation. It was found in an official paper that presentments were granted by the Grand Jury in favour of that individual, one of '2501. and the other of 3001. It was expressly prohibited by the Statute cf the 56th of Geo. 111. that an addi tional compensation should be allowed. The papers were ordered. MANAGEMENT OF THE NATIONAL DENT. Mr. BANKES moved that a paper on the table of the House, relative to the Sinking Fund, should be printed. While on his legs, he wished to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if it was the intention of his Majesty's Ministers to take into consideration the possibility of diminishing . the expense incurred for Inanaging the Fund appropriated to the reduction ci the National Debt? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, in ' consequence of the question which had been put to him, thought it right to say, that the charge alluded to by the Honourable Gentleman was not among those items which they considered open to a new and more economical arrangement. Till the expiration of the present Bank Charter, he considered that ques tion to have been set at rest by Act of Parliament. Mr. GRENFELL said that papers on the sub ject had been laid before Gentlemen of the 134 r for their opinion. He would not attempt to put his opi nion in, opposition to their decision, as he was aware that the peculiar wording of a case would account for legal opinions. He could speak on the opinion of a lawyer of great eminence, one who was now un happily no more, the late Mr. Horner, who gave it as his deliberative conviction frequently to him, that the subject was not concluded by the Act of 1808. Since f k ~, ~~. ' It T w - i74 il "in ic