The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser. — London, England, 1819-03-09 00:00:00

i Roped to be in town on Thursday next. Coder these circumstances, he would incise That the order for oxamining evidence, this day, touching the complaint against the Hon. Wyndham Quin, he rlix charged, on account of the inners of a trump's, and that the amid order be renewed for Thursday next.—Agreed to. PENRYN ELECTION. Mr. ll'. Wrest gave notice trod he would, on Wednesday next, move for leave to bring in a Bill for the better regulation of elections in the borough of Proryn. The CHANCELLOR of the EXcliFOuga . moved the Order of the Day for retuating the 0 41°°'"ed debate on the titration for issuing a new writ for a Member to serve in Parliament for the borough of Penryie in the room of Henry Swum), Esq. who has not been dole elected. Sir C. 13vaster.r., in calling tile :mention of the Moire to this subject, could assure Gentlemen that lie acted purely uu public grounds. He had no ceimexion with the borough, nor had he any ac qoaititunce with the Petitioner against the rehire of Mr. Swaim. If l i e were n ot borne nut by the rules al Parliamept in what lie was about to prrs. pew to the !loose, lie should feel happy to he cor rected, where lie was wrong, by Gentlemen of greater experience. He liegged leave to draw the stienthm of the House to those parts of the mos nudes taken before the Committee, which struck him as lining the moot iMportset. In doing this, he would divide the subject into four heads :-Ist, The acts of bribery and instances of general cur mph that weir proved before the Cemmitter— `.2,l. The imiteishiridite4 as to the common practice —3.1, 'Elie trllllllloll3*--:11111 4th, The course to be pursued. Ile re lie w wised it to be ob served, that he oltuuld consider it very wrong for ally person to Insist to his memory on all 1.11:CM1011 like the present, where the dearest rights mid psi 'lieges ~f his fellow-subjects were deeply concern ed. Ile bad therefore, made some notes horn the minutes, to which be would refer, in order to bring the subject clearly before the House.— Meer, hear.)—The first witness called for the Petitioner, was Mary Curter, who (page 6) stated that he hail received .51. from Mr. Swann, to induce him to vote on his side—and that Mr. Swann said to I " I expect that you went money as well as the rest of the voters." This mom prevaricated very much—and, it appeared, that though he got 51. on one side, lie voted on the other. Thomas Nos:tuns also ntateil, diet lie Revived .5/. from Dlr. Swaim, to induce him to vide for his return —but, on being pressed, he declaied, that though lie took the money, he meet meatit to vote for Mr. Swaim. It decant &strum (the son-in-law of the lag witness) was lists examined—(page 16). He stated his understanding of the general practice of vottre receiving money rat, or after, the period of election. Jobs Gill (Page 19) was the next wit nesa before the Committee. Ile desciibeil, very minutely, the means which Mr. SW3IIII adopted to entice him. He steles', that after Mr. Swaim soli cited his vote, he deniended 15!. for it, which Mr. Swistm agreed to give. In page 21, he further de pieresl, that lie got 61. from a person minted A bey Witte, to vote for Mr. Swann, but lie would not vine for that sum (although lie took it) us he con sidered 61. to be a were fiq, and out enough, t on bieteutly wills ti.e cuAoirs of Peorye, to purchase a vote. He totaled, beyond this, that lie took the y. but voted for Mr. A orlertlon and Sir C. Hawkins, li e acknowledged that lie had been offered more money than Its received f 31r. Swami, by somebody else—and Gentlemen would easily perceive drum fir examination, that those •lis had promised I ' more were in the opposite interest. lo 'mother place, he de posed that lie sow Mr. Swum' tars' a person of the if 11111 r of Charles Wilko, 61. This proved the cooloe pursued ;it Penryn. Spies were employed, ▪ every ineuvs were taken in circumvent the ad verse party, as well as to 'tribe the greatest number of voters. lii page .26, Wiliam 1 immin, another • i1. 1 .0,id that • perish.' of the name of was bribed by Winn, to vote for J. Swann. When be returned from the 11411, witess s saw him with live or six bank notes in his From the statement of this man, it appeared to be generally known that the most 011:•11 hhtlieiv was carried on in Peuryn. In page 30, Thomas ('ark, another witness., deposed to a variety of acts of bribery. Amongst the rest, that o man of the name of Donsford, an egont of Mr. Sc eon, gave 16/. to the wife of a Mr. Triadic), to induce her hipband to vote fur Mr. Swann. In page 43, 11r. Guodeve, a brewer of Neap', who was accused of hissing bribed a man of the name of Chas. Leckie Skinner, to vote for Mr. Swann, in his evidence fur that Gentleman, totally denied that he bad any participation in the bribery charged . to him, or that he had received any money from Mr. Swann, for such a purpose—and he also de clared, that Mr. Dmisford never said, that he bad given 111/. to Trill hen'. wife, to influence her hos band's rote. Tratheti was then called, but his evi dence was opposed, as lie was a voter, und a i)erson interested. however, the Committee decided, i p ' 4 that he was competent witness to the general transactions of the election ; but diet he could not be exesisined to rebut the evidence of the fact of his having be. a himself bribed." Ile (Sir C. Bur rell) did,uot approve of this decision;—for, when a witness was brought forward to tell the truths the whole truth, and nothilig but the truth, he conceived no obstacle should lie thrown in Ins way. los page 61, lie deposed that air. Anderdon had offered to make hint master of one of his Com pany's true's, if lie would give him his vote.— lit page 5!, lie stairs that this offer was repeated all the t.s-oii.g of the first day of the election. After einichiditig the uotes of the minutes of the 5 evictviice, he observed, that this was no party clues tion, and lie was sure that the House would give the subject that attention which so grave and so important a subject required. The present consi deration did nut partake of that wild and visionary species of reform of which so much had been beard ; it was of a tangible nature, which operated for the benefit of the country and the character of Parlia ment. He would, therefore, move fair a renewal of of the Committee to inquire Pith the existence of corrupt and evil practices in the Borough of Pen. rysi. previous to, and during the late election. The SPEA K ER said, that the Hon. Member's pro- position gas not strictly regular. The question before lilt House was, that it new writ be issued for illeioye, and the utliforin course of proceeding was to wove as an amendment, that the writ do not Italie till a certain day; iii the mean time the Hon. Member bring on a distinct and substantive motion. Sir C. Bunitete said, lie would adopt the sug gestion of the Hots. Member, and move that the I Speaker do not issue his warrant before this day fortnight.—This bring rei r oidereil IMO short, It was ell, that the Speaker do not issue his war taut to make out a new writ for the Borough of Pritryn, before this day month. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER Paid lie did not think that in the the Committee, statement in the Report of now before the Flouse, there were sufficient grounds to induce the House to make an I alteration in the constitution of the borough in question. The him,. Baronet had laid before the House a case of corrupt practices proper for the sub jsct of Inquiry its It Committee. They hail beets inqiiired into by • Committee, but the inquiry did not inculpate the entire body of the electors, and in a case where punishment would fall on the innocent as well as on the guilty, it behoved the liumw to net with the greatest caution. Ile was the less Inclined to agree to the motion of the lion. Bromet when I.e ricorierted that the object of his motion was to appiiint a second Committee, to re vow the decision of a former Committer. Ile con ceived that where a ConoWttee of that House had once decided tai a .pirmtion referred to them, their decision wits final, but the motion of the Honourable Member was for theappoisitment of e second Com mittee, fur the purpose of revi.ing the proceed. ings of the tiro Commit tee.—( C'ries of " IVo, no.") —lf he had mistaken the statement of the /lon. Baronet be was open to correction ; but if lie mideretood the Honourable Barmiet tightly, that was the amount of the Honourable Baronet's pro poodioti. In every fin 'tier crew, where the new writ was delayed with a view to the disfranchisement of therlertors, iii every instance of that nature it was first established that the great majority of the voters had been guilty of corrupt practices, but nothing of that I kind appeared in the present case. That there were many sinter, in the borough in question, he did not deny, but whatever steps of severity the House plight take against particular persons, he did not think that Parliament would be justified in deport. ; tog the electors of their franchises. The Right /bun. Gentleman, after complaining of proceedings instituted on surmise and tittle-tattle, concluded by expressing his dissent to the tnotion. Sir JAHL6 MACKINTOSH said, that important as the question was, he thought the reasoning of the Right Honourable Gentleman of more importeirce than the question itself. To one observation of the Right Hun. Gentleman lie would entirely agree. Ile beloved it was the only observation of huts he could assent to—namely, that the prssent subject was one of importance ; and if ever there was a time that the House should interfere, when they were called on to act with good faith, with zeal and with vigour, lie thought it was the present. He could not but observe on the Icsity shown in i he language of the Right (lots. Gentleman out this subject; he could nut hear without indignation the latiguege applied by a Minister of the Croton to a case of notorious, scandalous, and infamous cor ruption. The Right Hon. Gentlemen bad said, that thew was not evidence sufficient before them in authorise the House to disfranchise Peurysi—un doubtedly there was not—but was there not esi deuce to raise a prima /ode case, that corruption exists in that borough ? The disfranchisement of the borough formed no part of the argument of the Hon. Baronet—that was not the i tttt nediate ob ject of his !notion. The questiou brought before them by the Hon. Baronet, for which he deserved the thanks of the /loose and time country, well, whether they would inquire into the extent of the corrupt abuses of the borough of Petiryii ? and this was an inquiry in whirls he thought the charac ter and the tumour of Parliament were deeply in terested. There was, he said, • uniform colour and complexion of corruption, from the beginning to the cod of the transaction, that called fur a prompt and immediate inquiry. It was not the fist time that this borough had been convicted of the grossest acts of corruption. Ile could not for get the important fact, that a few years since, on aunt her election from the same borough, similar acts of corruption had been proved against it, but the Right lime Gentleman had objected to the inquiry, because the Committee would not have the power of administering oaths. He could not help considering this lengunge in any other light than as an outrageous attack on the rights of the I louse of Commons. Did the Right Hon.Gentletnan forget the Grenville Act ? Wes he itsiiiitunt that the pri vileges of that House formed part of the law of the land, when he said that not administering an oath suspended their inquiries and destroyed those privileges ? They had the power of impeachment, and of attainder—and had they not the power of ex amining into corrupt practices, of exposing them, and of punishing those who might he guilty of them ? The question was, had • Committee of that House ally 'tower at all ? If it had, surely the most natural and the most necessary exercise of that power was the r orrection of such corrupt and o d ious practices us were now before them. The extent, indeed, of those practices were nut known to them. The Committee had only examined ii,to those practices so far us they affected the conduct of the Member and of the Petitioner ; and though it might be true that what incidentally cause nut be fore the Committee might 'lot justify an imme diate proceeding to disfranchise the borough, yet, surely, there was enough before them to in duce the House to inquire into other matters, to induce them to probe this body of corruption, and to clear the representation from its foul and fatal •inipurities. He conceived that am inquiry was due to public feelisig—to the clialacter and the honour of Parliament—to the reveience in which they held the Constitution, whose best privileges were, in the present case, so much abused. Mr. ATRYNS WRIGHT said a few words, which we could nut distinctly hear. Mr. FRLDERICK DOUGLAS said, he considered the present as wt important constitutional pies tion. He was, he said, prepared to go to the full length with Use Honourable Baronet, and would agree to suspend the tenting of the writ, until en ultimate decision should he made by the House. He was not one of those who followed the wild schemes of what was called reform, but where abuses existed so flagrant as in this case, they ap. peered to be abuses which called down the reprobres tion of the country. Ile thought the case re quired a strict and immediate investigation.— could, be asked, after what bad come nut against the voters of Penryn—could the House order a new writ, as if nothing had taken 'Place, ajt, no corruption had been practise(' or exposed ? It was slot necessary for the present purpose to bring home guilt to any individual ; it was only necessary fu► the. House to know that improper practices had ex isted to authorise inquiry. There were two parties implicated—the person returned, and the person who petitioned against the return; and it appeared, that at a meeting of the Petitigner's friends, one hundred persons had attended and tnade public complaints of a nun-compliance with their corrupt demands. Sir FRANCIS BURDETT said, he could not but feel surprised at the virtuous indignation expressed against the practices of this borough, as if prac tices equally corrupt were not found to exist in other boroughs in the kingdom, as well as the borough of Penryti. Ile r' collected some years ago when charges were brought against the Minister of the Crown for corrupt traffic in seats in that House— that inquiry was stopped, and that Minister lass defended on this ground, that those metie rs were as notorious as the sun at noon-day. After that declaration, it was a little too much to believe that other boroughs were more pure, or were less corrupt than the unfortunate borough of l'enryn. The country would not shut their eyes to the real state of the case—the country would hot be deluded by an idle display of words— • "Species verhis nihil reinards." If any step were taken against Penryn without a general inquiry into the rotten borough system, he would consider it un act of gross injustice. lie could not call it by any other name, and as to the policy of the proceeding, it was too confined to he useful ; in his mind such a proceeding would ope rate in favour of corruption, it would be more se cretly and securely carried on. Without a general itiquiry into the system, an investogatiori like the one in contemplation would be a mere scape goat. As to those Gentlemen who cry out, No ! no !"—whose virtuous indignation is directed against Penryn, how properly might Mr. Swami turn on them mid say, " Of you the same story might be told?" Would he have said falsely? Is Penryii the only corrupt borough ?—is Old Sarum snore virtuous, or is Knareshorough snore independent ? lie did not understand the cry that had been raised by those who, strangely incon sistent, would uphold what appeared not more defenceable. It was not at all pernicious to the public to charge 4 or 5,000/. Tor a borough, but it was enough to rouse the virtuous indignation of Gentlemen to hear that a s u m of 20/. was charged for a vote; yet it was exceedingly moderate, not more than half the common price, which sliewed that in the borough trade the good people of Petorvii were very reasonable in their demands. He could not concur in the proceeding ; if evil exists, and he thought it was an evil, he thought there should he a general inquiry. Nothing short of that would satisfy the people ; for in his opinion the practices of Penryn were not worse, were not so bad, as a great many other boroughs. It would not therefore ameliorate the system, nod would only strike the public mind as an act of hypocrisy and injustice. He would much rather the sale of votes were pub lic, open, and avowed, than to see ass affectation of purity. He was sure there were many honest melt, who would willingly 'lay 4 or .5,000/. to sit in that House, with no other wish than to form and to forward schemes for the bentfit of their country. Many would do so—he knew many that did so. It was much more fur the good of the pub lic that the system should he avowed openly, thou to have it as it was, corrupted and concealed. Mr. BRAND said he rose to protest against the expressions of the Honourable 13aroiset. Ile was anxious as any one for it revision of the law of the representation of the people, but he protested against the wild and visionary scheincs so often ob truded on the House, aid which he believed Mal much to injure the cause of teleran. On the im mediate subject before the House, he war surprised to have braid it' urged, that because a Couitnit• tee had sat to try the merits of the election, that now the House laud not a right to inquire into the state of the borough. Would the Right Hon. Gentleman ray—that if he (Mr. Brand) pledged himself to Inner forward charges of cor ruption against that borough, that yet the door would be •Itut against investig aligns ? Here the Hon. Gentleman entered somewhat at large into the particulars of the evidence, and concluded by say ing, that some speedy means should he adopted to prevent the recurrence of such odious practices as had been imitifestrsi at the last election of that corrupt and contemptible borough. The CH 4NC ELLOR vi the BKO4E4OIEII. Said, though lie disapproved of the mode proposed, he would not object to an inquiry, if held at an early slay. Mr. MARTIN (of Galway) would object to the proposition, hecause at was a species of 'dorm. Mr. BA NKES, though lie condemned the cor rupt practices of the electors, yet he considered the mode of appointing a second Committee against the proceedings of Parliament, and egaitist established precedents. He would. if any tolio.r mode could be pointed out, willingly vote fur the fullest inquiry. Sir JOHN NEWPORT said, in considering flak subject it was itnpossible to pass over the character of the borough—it was impossible to forget that it was before convicted of the most flagrant acts of corruption. He considered small open b o rou g h s as above all the most corrrupt ; it was impossible to see w i t h ou t disgust eighty or one hundred persons publicly tendering their votes for sale—tinkling sap the representation to the highest bidder—and ac tually 'wilding for a cnotomer to town, the son-in law of a rich Bank Director, who, it was supposed, would give any sum for the corrupt suffrage. There was a great body of evidence before them, and further inquiry would no doubt expose many flagrant acts of profligate corruption. Was the House then, he would ask, in earnest ?—if they were, let them proceed to an iminediate inquiry, and whilst they avoided and discoun tenanced wild and visionary plans of reform, let them proceed to every useful inquiry, amid to every Pale mid salutary measure that would tend to cor rect abuses, to punish corruption, to reform, whilst tt preserved the sys•rm of our government. Mr. CA itEw spoke at some length in favour of the motion. Ile condemned the conduct of the voters' of Penryn, and instanced, as a proof of the general tor roption, the I.A oi,c of the candidates &refl to put the bribery oath to any of those freeholders who voted for the other. But he would not condemn the candidates altogether, because it was well known, that to tender the bribery oath was con sidered so great a breach of politeness in Cornwall As to destroy all the hopes of the Member who might lie so unwise as to propose it. Mr. WYNN said, that the case of this borough iu 1807 was one of the greatest corruption ever proved, but the case was not followed up by die friinclusing the borough ; he trusted that the House would now enter into the fullest inquiry. He differed with the Hon. Gentleman who said the course was opposed to precedent. and lie in showed the case of the county of !Jerks, not so strong u case as the preeent, where the House sus pewted the issuing of the writ. The question was, whethi r a new writ should be delayed ; and how ever Members might differ as to the amount of the evidence already before than, though that was evidesite of gross and shameless corruption, yet every ore must see that the case was one which de manded inquiry ; no one doubted but that further evidence would come out, and it would he difficult to say upon whet principle the produc tion of the' evidence could be fairly resisted.— From certain circumstances there was st strong ;Rs pression on the Members of the Committee, that it should he disfranchised. It appeared that • meeting of electors had been held, and that in consequence of what occurred there, a Member went down ; but the Committee doubted whether his part in the transaction could be brought home to the Member. Handbills, also, of a most illegal and indecent description had been circulated ; but neither were the Committee sure that they could lie brought home to him. lie could not forbear ex pressing his surprise at the cosine pursued by the Member for Westmioster. The Honourable Ba ronet denomiced the corrupt and shameful practices that had come to light, nod if be understood his words aright, he wished that further inquiry should take place on an extensive scale. But because the House did not do its duty in an individual case t e n years ago—because it had on one occasion passed over, unpunished, an example of gross cor ruption, the Honourable Baronet desired it should, in no other instance whatever, express its abhor rence of such abuses. vindicate its honour. atid guard its purity. The Honourable Baronet had de clared that the electors of Penryie when upbraid ed with their misconduct, might turn round on every Member of the House, and address them— " mutate nomine de te, faults narrater," But he should tell the Honourable Baronet that such au imputation was a calumny—so universal a charge was false and groundless.—(Hear, hear.)—How far it might apply to the Honourable Member him self, lie knew not ; lie could speak for himself— ( Ifearj—but no directed against him (Ir. Wynn), and those numerous friends whom he knew and valued, around him, the charge was utterly un founded. The House was boomd to take cog nizance of such scandalous abuses ; by that alone would it be. able to preserve its own dignity and character, as well us its power of defending the rights of the people. It was its duty to exercise the powers %sin) which the Constitution bed in vested it, for the correction of those evils. He did not look turn the corruption yet proved to be so gross as what had transpired in 1807; but when he Pew the same Member implicated, the same electors, and the same price fixed for votes (24/. each) as at that period, there was strong reason to believe that, on further investiestion, it would be established to • larger extent. He should advise the Honourable Baronet opposite (Sir C. Burrell) to move that the issuing of the writ should be delayed for a fortnight, in the first instance, at the end of which,. if the Commit tte should riot then have made their Report, a further delay might be given. Sir F. Bynum,' complained that the Honourable Member had misrepresented him, in saying lie had applied his remarks to every Member of the !louse; his statement was, that the persons accused might turn round no the Members of every other rotten horon:th, and make the same charge, and if the Hotiourable Member asserted lie find made use of ally other term, he asserted what was false. Mr. IVv:lst understood the remarks of the Hon. Baronet most strictly to apply to every Member of the I louse.—( Hear.) Mr. V. BLAKE made some brief observations, which were not audible to us. Mr. C. CALVERT, as a Member for one of the most irovtilous boroughs in the kiligdcrin, wished to observe, thut as the Hon. Baronet hart limited his charges to borougho, if he meant it to apply to him, it was most false. Sir F. BURDETT Mid it was hard to he called on personally in that way. lie had declared before, that to attribute so general a charge to hula had no found:nit - in in truth. Sir H. Wtr.sos would not have pained over the remarks of the Honourable Baronet in silence, had he not conceived them more limited in their application than appeared to other Mem bers. He hoped with him that a general and ra dical remedy would be npplied to the evil, but agreed with the Memher for Hertfordshire, that it was their duty to punish past inetancee of indivi. dual corruption. He thought that by strictly fol lowing up the present case, they were putting thens.ekes in the right road to reform, and that they ought not to be deterred fron► it, because there were some difficulties in their way. Sir C. BURRELL had no objection to adopt the proposed amendment. He did not think it neCti• sary to reply to the remarks of the lion. Baronet, they had been so effectually answered by the Mem ber for Hertfordshire. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, that the change from a month to a fortnight entirely obviated his objections.—(A laugh.) The SPEAKER wished to ascertain if it was the pleasure of the House that both the former propo sitions should be withdrawn, and the last put. The House having signified its assent, the last amendment. via.—" that the Speaker do nut issue his warrant for a new writ for the borough of Pen ryn till this day fortnight," was put and carried. Sir C. By Rent. then moved "that a Committee he appointed to inquire into the further existence of certain corrupt and illegal practices, which ap pear to have prevailed in the borough of l'enryn, previous to and (luring the late election ; and to report their observations thereon to the House." The question having been put, Mr. BANKEA was I, as ito.cutits an; li. initcr of the Howie to Lave most early iusestiguilon instituted; hut as he wi , 11,41 hut to depart front parliamentary usage, and to. t o . was not sure that the adoption of the proprewil motion would not pledge the House to do tto, 11 , hit himself obliged to dissent from it. Tn gmo!I time for more consuleration he moved, that the de bate be adjourned tdl IVedneaday next. Lord C. CHURCHILL could not con.ent to adjourn a debate of such importance to l'euryn no ,t 1 the nation a single hour. Mr. F. DOUGLAS was adverse to any pustpoo t . ment. Mr. Themes , did not see the objert a delay. He was doubtful whether it would be better to pro ceed by a Select Committee, or • Committee of Privileges. He believed there was nn precedent exactly applicable to the case on the Journals; but it would be a • monstrous proposition that therefore there should be no investigation when abases In n ( been proved to exist. lie should be extremely glad to receive some further information on the course proper to be pursued by any Member who might possess it. Perhaps the Member him (Mr. Ilat,kes) might state In.s resi I:ins fur delay. At present it seemed that delay had been moved for, merely for the purpose of delay. Mr. BAIiIC ES regretted the Right Ilan. Gentle: man (Mr. Twriley), should have supposed him ru suggest defiy, through any indirect motive. Irl,y 660(1 he %—or for whom ? There were four modes of proceerliii4—by a Select Committee -- by a Committee of Privileges—by stiminolimg tlof parties, and examining them at the bar—or Listly, by bringing in a Bill for disfranchising the goiry electors. Of the four, he least approved of a Sele'rt COIll til it t ee. m t r i . T der t , E ; ► t : o ft , N , d r. Y i r n e n r t ti him s i sa I h l n o t t, i i be Nem elnfule further lzh in his intention than to impute any improper mo;ites to him. 711 r. J. fl. Swill( would rather the debate adjourned till to-morrow. lie bad no liesiluti"ii saying it was a ease for di4rnsicliisement. Sir J. MACKINTOSH would vote for the meat of tile debate. Mr. WYNN, Sir C. nURRFLL, and Mr. t DOUGLAS !simian; made a few ob-eiiatiin,,, question for adjourning the debate till to-morrow was put and carried. . _ On the inotioo of Mr. WYNN. the further con sideration of the Report on the Penryn Ltertion was postponed•till this day st'imight. POOR LAWS. On the motion of Mr. S. kinuttnr, the l'oor Laws Amendment BM was re-committed to it Committee of the House. A liwg conversation took place on the el:oc.e providing in certain ca.ies for the appoiiiiineci select vestries, between Mr. Omni:limey, Sir C. Monck, Mr. W. L. P. Wellesley, Mr. Mr. N. Calvert, Mr. S. Bourne, and Mr. Punier, after which the clause was agreed to. The clause respecting the employment of alite bodied pocr by the parish, when they coold not obtain work by their individual exerti , :tc, agreed to, after a short conversation between Mr. S. Bounxr, Mr. HOLDEN, and Mr. T. COVRTENAV. On the clause for rendering the owners of 'nitres liable to the Poor's Rates, where the valuation of rent did not exceed 9.0/. per annum, sod ace net than 6!. Sir C. MuNot strongly objected to this transfer of the pujnient of rate from the owntr to the occupier. The principle of it wan not wore nh. jectionahle than the means by which that principle was to he carried into effect. There was i o appeal from the mode of making this trai:.fer. After a few words from Nlr. Alderman IVooD and Mr. STURGES BOURNE, this clause was asgerril to. On the clause for enabling the Overseers to me. move Scotch awl Irish vagrants to their re.pective parishes without previously committing tlwas to Bridewell, some I onver.atiun arose, in wlocti Alderman Worm, Mr. Alderman WAITHMAN, mai Mr. Wtr.twas, objected to the tonsuotiala for vagrancy in England. Mr. Alderman WOOD moved, us an amendment, For the omission of the committal fur it vet, 'lays to Bridewell previous to the removal of vivant. in Ltiziatiml, in the satne manner as this clause made au exesuptiust in favour of Irish and Scotch. vagrants. Mr. littomutnE cowllWined of the expenre to which Bristol was put by the removal of Irish va grants. Mr. STURGES POURNE lamented this incosiveni encl., and would be glad to see it remedied. Ile would also be glad to see the worthy Alderman'. Amendment adopted, if it could be agreed to, but in another shape. The Committee then divided on Mr. Alderman B'oon's Amendment, when the number' , w re— For it Agaiust it Minority against it ...... The Committee was then dissolved, ai,4l t, SPEAKER having resumed the Chair, the Reim: was ordered to be brought up to-morrow, COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY. The House resolved iiself into a Comm :tire of Supply, in which, on the motion of Libra PA T... MERsToN, a number of men, not eseeediag fj5,000, was voted, solely for the purpo►e of founding a Mu tiny Bill on it, and without Wedging the I lon-e with respect to any subsequent proceedingi , on the Army Estimates. The Muse re%mned.—Report to-morrow. Sir Jolts NEWPORT postponed hie motiom rt . lative to the Distilleries in Ireland till to . nn ,,, sennight. BANK BALANCEs.—FINANC On the motion of the CHANCto.Lott of the Ex- CIIIMUER, the House resolved itself a Coni miner on the Exchequer Consolidation Act. Lt the Committee, the CHANCELLOR of the Gs- CHEQUEIt rose and said, that at an late N period of the night (eleven o'clock) he should not trouble. the House at any length, but merely put the Committee in possession of his prop..-1! %heels might then with more advantage heeiiine the subject of future discussion. Anil): ding let the existing practice in the Ext hequer. the surplus of the revenue oldie Consolidated Fund, after meeting the particular services to which it was rustle ap plicable, was permittd to accumulate, oas not capable of being directed to the public service until the end of every quarter. liy this memos a large sum was locked up in the hs• chequer, accruing from week to wed:, while