The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser. — London, England, 1810-05-15 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. IROVSE OF LORDS, MuNIMT, STAY 14. Mr Caves, Mr. GaarwatLL, awd other Mesahers front the House of CUMIIIIOII% brought up several Private Bills, which were at spa the table, wad afterwards read the fist tie• CRUELTY TO BRUTE ANIMALS. lord Baseline embed to render the Bill tor the P tam or Creeks to Brute itainsals agreeable to the seutintents of Noble Lords who at protest differed frost hint in opi nion For that purpose, he tweed " That the Older foe buridav, fur the re-eotatnitoseat of the Bill, be discharg ed." Oraltred.--Adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS. To t►e third ►eadinq of the Wiltshire, &c Canal Bill, Mr. WN•1111.T011 objected, and moved, as an amendment, "'that it s►sold be read a third time this day t►ree mout►s." Lord POIIICINESTeR supported thu original motion i and, after some disrussioo, a division took place— For the Amendment Agatust it Majority The Bill woo accor•liugly read a third time soul pencil Sir Jowa NOWPOIIIr gave sulky, that he would take to morrow her ►es "notion relative to Sir George Slier. A Committee of tlw House, on the subject of Foreign Salt, was agree.' to for to-sourrue. Mr. Wu •irroo toured foe, sad, having obtained leave, ►emght up a number of Papers relative to the Trade and Gterersisorist of the Island of Trinidad —Laid on the table The Excbrirer Bills Bill, and t►e Einbeoslement Bill, third mere mail • , time mid passed. Yr. Wet o brought up the Report of the Com mittee on &tempter Bills, jec. which sae laid on the table, mad ureteral to be printol. THE CATHOLIC QUESTION. Mr. GRATTAN, in conavquesice of the nee.. • absence of a Right Hun. Friend of his, who was to support him in advocating the cause of the Rotitatt Catholics of Ireland, postponed his notice on the subject of Catholic Eimuicipation, which stood for to-murrow, till Friday next. EAST INDIA COMPANY. M. A turrs74prvstnteelairetiW;iii from the East India Company, claiming Lgoo,uoul. as • debt due to them by the public. The CuAul eLLOn of the EXCHFQUEII signißed the concurrence of the Majesty's tiovennuent in the reception of this petition. The petition was then brought up and read by the Clerk. It gave ■ history of the Committees on East India Affairs in 1905, 8, and to. Del:Lived the Cnnspany'a obyections to the rules and prin• ciples acted on by those of the two Ginner years, and cunplained, last, from the nature of their in strut-boas, the sitting Committee did not conceive itself entitled to esaintue into their present The debt was demanded as arising from expenwra paid by the Company in late Indian wars and ex peditious, for the common good of themselves and the public, and from their costs in subduing Cry.. loci, which had since been annexed to the natioual possessions. The petition haying been read 111r. AVM RN moved, That it should be referred to the Committee on India affairs to examine into, and report upon the same, with their opinion. thereon." Mr. Cativry was surprised that the E.ist India Comeany could mike any demand like this upon the public. Their accounts had been referred to • Committee in toed, which reported, that the auto owing by the country to the Company was 2,300,0001. Of thin sum two millions had been paid at different times. In 1808. another Com mittee was appointed, which, from some mode of argument of several •ble Gentlemen, and, among others, of the Chairman (Mr. Grant), were induces] to swell the balance of 300,0001. to I..Stin,oool. On that occasion, the Member for Bedford (Mr. %Whit bread) had asked if these accounts were now finally dosed and it was not denied by Gentlemen on the ether aide, but that they were so to be understood. The Company, however, even after this, now agent came forward to claim 1,900,0001. as a debt from the public, though, three months ago, when they came to ask for • loan. they had not such a elem. He conceived it to be a desperate at tempt, on the part of the Company. to get that by petition, which it would be hopeless to get by bring ing a Bill into the House, on which there would he too many opportunities of discussion. It was tow four years since any discussiou had taken place on East India affairs. or since there had been • Budeet. All that the House, therafbre, knew of India, was from the petitions of the Company. From these they learnt, that, in tar, the Company had to burrow two millions. In inOS. they re ceived 1400.0001, in payment of the public dgle; and in 1809. the receipts were not equal to the es- peaditure. It was now impossible. so near the sad of the Session. to omit to a full discussion as the affairs of India. He would not, however. oppose the motion; and concluded with en obser ?sties on the Company's dividends being Ini per cent, which was more than the law authorised. Mr. GILANT maintained. that the Company had nitwit claim to what they now asked ; a claim they bad never forgot or abandoned. Though they were silent to the question put by the Member fur Bed ford, yet that did not imply conseut, as there was at that very• time • report before the House, one• quivocally insisting on these very claims. They now appealed to the justice of the House to have their demands examined, and if anything was found to be due to them, to hare it paid. The Company had never subecribedlo the doctrines of the Old Committee, in 1805 ; aad. evea now, if they obtaised all they asked. they would not be half compensated for what it had cost them in ware and expeditious for the country service. With re spect to their ditidends, they hal never divided more than they were entitled to do on the profits, by Act of Parliament. Lord A. HAIHLTON expressed himself astonished at this petition. He had formerly objected to the grant of money to the East India Company, unless the exposition of their affairs was laid before the House. He now wished for that exposition, before bi- granted any more. The whole accounts and trump:none were laid down and closed by the Committees in 1805 and 1808. and hr was sur prised, after hating read their report., that the Rigiit Hon. Gentleman oppr..ite. on part of Grisernruent, should lee found to assent to any new claim. The CIIIVICILLLOR or the EXCHWER eeptait.cd %hut tn. conduct had been on the former payment et 1400.0001. Ile assented to receiving the pre neat petttisin. because he was informed that the Company thought their claims inequitably det i lid against them, unit that the Conintitteeitiow pitting on their affairs were not itnpuivered to inquire into the justice of this allegation. lie thought it but fair that the matter should be exatniued by the Committee, and, un whichever side it was—justice done. . . Mr. WHITIIRRAD reverted to the question he had asked in 1808, when the snine Gentlemen were Chancellor of the Exchequer and President of the Board of Coutroul as now, and it was understood that the Company's claims were finally settled, and balance struck. They ought not, in his °Militia, after this, be suffered to come with other demands. It would lie most disadvantageous to the public were the Company to be allowed to plead as an ex cuse, that they had always a current account, and that having been 'twat s dissatisfied with the deci sion of the Committees of 180.5 and 8, they might re-open it whenever it appeared most convement fur them to do so. Much had been said of having the doors wide open to petitioners—they were to-day too open to this, which lie considered a very improper petition. Mr. DUNS*, SAUNDERS said, that when the question was asked by the lion. Gentleman (Mr. Whitbread), he, concluding upon the doctrines laid down by the Committees, had believed that the Company's accounts were closed. But it would be very hard, if, ou the lion. Gentleman's theory, the Company, or any party who thought themselves aggrieved, should not be allowed to state the nature of that grievance. Many persons thought that the rules and doctrines laid down by the Com mittees were very hard on the Company. The Company had never ceased to complain of them ; mid the origin of this petition was the incompetence of the Sitting Cotriniittee, us now constituted, to in quire into the grounds of these complaints. With respect to the observation, that the Committee in MIA had swelled the debt from 300,0001. to 1.500,0001. it must be recollected, that they had many addaional accounts and claims before them. The house would not shut the doors against persons, supposing they had a claim on the public. They had not done do with a Gentleman. (Mr. Pal. finer,) who, fur twenty years, had preferred such claims from the Post-Office, and they ricotta not do it to the East India Company. As for the ex position mentioned by the Noble Lord. it would be added as an Appendix to that report of the Committee now sitting. The question was put and earned. CREESES gave notice, that he would, ti - moirow, move for the Reports of the Counuitke ou India Affairs, in 1805, and MOS. MAJOR CARTWRIGHT'S PETITION. Mr. tViii Tette AD said. he lied in his hand a pe tition on the subject of Parliamentary Reform, per. porting to be the petition of the Undersigned Freeholders of England." When put iu Ins hands. he, not holding the opiiiious iiiiplited to him by Gentlemen on the other side, that petits, in what ever terms they wt re couched. ought to be received by the House, had read it over, to see whether or not it contained any thing of offensive language ; that ifit had, the iiiilividual, whose composition it was, might have altered it in such a manner that he could present it. That individual ass a person well known. for the share he had taken in those questions for mauy years. It was Major Cartwright, who bad spent the greet. r part of a long and laborious life. in put „oho( the great design of restoring the British Constitution; and who, whatever difference Gentlemen might feel, from his political opinions. must be ackuow. ledged to be of the utmost worth and inte grity in private life. This was the same Gen tleman. whose Address to the King the Right Hun, Secretary (Ryder) had not thought worthy that mark of atte n tion to read it to Its Majesty. But, it appeared that the Court of Admiralty thought this Gentleman amore worthy a mark of honour than the ftglit lion. Secretary ; for. they, out of pure repent, had appointed him to the rank of Master and Comm iuder in the Navy. now he our upwards of 70 yeas vier, and 54.) years since lie had left the sersi.e as a - Lieutenant. Front what be had ever sees of the public %traitors of this Gentleman, his language always appeared to Le decorous, and it had invariably been so in his public or private letters to him, (Mr. Whitbread), whether approving or condemning his conduct. He con sidered it to be decorous in this petition, and there fore he presented it, though it contained opinions with menv of which he agreed, some of which lie doubted, soil from smite of which he differed. The petition was brought tip and read by the Clerk. It was very long. and set mu by stating. that the late proceedings of the House, ou the il legality of which, hr conceived there could be hut one opinion, had brought the question of Parlia mentary Reform more immediately to issue. It referred to the decision of the House on the night between the 11th and 12th May last, on the charges brought against Lord Castlereagh and Mr. Per ceval, which it characterised as a fliwant outrage; as when seats in the House were bought and sold, Englishmen were bought and sold—sod this prac tice it asserted was past endurance. It then wee thru' the common topics of the profligacy of eellingurats, and the audacity of vindicating it ; the likeable the House assu aaaaa tic higher powers thou belonged to it—higher than the united Parliament or the King himself. It laid down what the House ought to be. to be entitled to the reveren:e of the people, and argued, hypothetically. that it might bethe re. vase. sod abandoned to every vice—as sesta to be trafficked in by unpnocipled sharpers—unfaithful ‘liiiisten---Ainatic Nabob,. 4c. in proof of thus, it cited the Nabob of Areses having purchased seats for seven or eight of his agents. and the agent of a French, King's Mistiest. (we believe Madame da Barre:, having • seat in the House. By ibis means, the Constitution miest be murdered, and. unlike the King. who never died. as one succeeded another a ithout a bleak, the Constitution. if it once r fell. a otild never resuscitate. Froinithea doctrines. it argued the necessity of a radical Reform, and concluded by condeinuing die employment of a standing army, as had beets done in taking Sir F. Burdett. I • infer the Civil Government. the country would acquiesce, but under the military it was rank despotism. Mr. WiIITOREAD moved, " That Vie petition should lie eu the table." - - Tke CMAIICELLOR of the Euneguigu, from the Meat laud downier it coutaiucti t I.ad selected oue or two passages. which, iii his opinion, rendered it unfit lot the House receive. .1-le then noticed two passages; the first, in which the House was accused ota "flagrant injustice. past endurance, as an outrage upon an Englishman;' and the other, stating that "of the illegality of their proceedings, the petitioners conceived there could be but one opinion." For these, among many others, he thought the ilouse mast reject the petition, if they were not content to he uceused of" flagrant injustice, beyoutl endurance." mud to herald that there could be " but one opinion of the illegality of their pro ceedings." He also noticed die extreme length of the paper from a single individual, not as anobjection to receiving it, but to sheer hew iliconvtment it would be to load their Journals, by encouraging such folios. Mr. WHITBREAD sold, he was sure there was no intention on the pert of the petitioner to offer insult to the House. If he could guess any thing from hie demeanour, conversation. ar.d political life, he could not have such an intention, as his great am bition seemed to lie to have his opinions recorded —recorded, not according to the new-fangled doctriue of the Kight Honourable Gentleman op posite, who would refuse the petitions of the sub ject, and would not open the doors wide enough to admit those which, from the windier of the grievances they complained of. were too long for the clerk to read, or him to attend to. He then en tered into a jnatification of the words " past endur ance," as applied in the petition to the proceedings of the House. Might net a House (unlike the vir tuous one he saw around him) do an act that was past the endurance of the people ? (He was aware the petitioner had applied it to the present House.) And could any thing he more desirable than that the House should be apprised of this by • petition, before any thing toward* redressing themselves broke out among the people.— The vote of the I lth and kith May was most dis gusting to the people. mud their dissatistaction might. go on in progress till tots late to be coo trouled. Was it then toe intich to say, that these proceedings weie past endurance? A person on the rack might say sii, and Isis executieners might go on tormenting hue, tilt the unhappy wretch, by expiring, proved the truth of his assertion ; and so might the Honse eontnair to yr% and harass the people. who said it was past endurance, till the Coo stitution, expiring. proved it true. Past endurance was a common expreision, when duly thing bore heavily upon persons. It might be applied to the income tax, or the assessed tuxes (so grievously col lected). Hurl, if used in an appeal &Oust them, it wool I be too much. for that rearm'. to reject the petition. It was only figurative, for 'the matter of which it compianied, the vote in tavour of Lord C.istlcreagh and Mr. Perceviii, had, in fret, b-en endured. Tin re was, therefore, no impro priety in that expression. As for the other. ques tioning the legslay of their proceedings. was it not enough for the Holier to entrench themselves behind their privileges, aid say, No Court. no other House, iio Kiiig, shall question our proceed ings? Were they also to tiny, the people Asti not al:oatetl to gitr,! their opinions ? For himself he could not be persuaded that that was proper, which every branch of the Constitution, but that which issued it, refused to acknowledge. A Habeas Cor pus would bring the matter into Court ;and, in fact. their plea in bar world bring the legality of their warrant under cognizance. Many able Lawyers were kuowu to disown its legality. and, under all these circumstances, could they reject a petition for doubting that which was. sub Sudice, for decision? On these grounds he conceived it to be impowilale to reject the petition fur questioning that which, till tired and set at rest, and even after that, might be questioned. The Cue NCELI.OIInf the Exc tit:4mm explained. It was not for doubting or yeestioising their privi leges that he objected to the petition. It was for directly asserting that there was but one ripiiimi; tlitt they were illegal. and the acts of the Huu-e so outrageous, as to be past endurance. Mr. BRAND maintained that it was the undoubt ed right of the subject to question every art of authority of the House, or say other branch of the Constitution. He would, therefore, be sorry if the petition were rejected on that account. He was entering into a justiticaton of the words “ past endurance,' but applying it to a passage where they did not occur, he was corrected, and, after acknow ledging bisector, iota winch he was led, from Dot beating the petition read, but only the comments of Mr. Whitbread, he concluded by giving his support to the petition, were it only to hare it re. corded in opposition to the H.-solution of the House, that their privileges were not to be quystioued out of Parliament. Mr. Henna was not surprised at the mistake into which the Hon. Gent. had fallen, seeing he had only heard the comments of the Hon. Gent. (Mr. Whitbread) on what had fallen (rota his Hight Hon. Friend (Chancellor of the Exchequer). His argument was not that the petitioner questioned their privileges, hut assvrted there (-meld be bat one opinion of their illegality. The other passage he conceived to he decisive If the House endured to be told, that their treatment of the prople was past endurance," they would deserve such 'meta meat. The gallery was cleared for a division. roe she wog ion AI Apkun Shia sty —7l Mr IlenAT But Tit preseated a prtitios from lb* pre prieiors of *be Glatatirgansbire Collieries, sr►icb be tutored should ►e real, and referred to a Select Ciestatittee, to rots stile, and report their upialua thereupus. After some disrs..inn, in which Lord A. !twurrsrt, Mr Lablioek, Mr Jarul., Mr. D. Giddy. Hr ILoliurst, Mr Hall, anJ Mr Atlas, took part, As Hesse drttdr•J upuu t►e ywtstiva, alien tits re !mama, Fur the wain& Against it. 43 M ajoi si y —l 11w Cowne.ttre .nno‘teardingly appoionril Ketones of the twined Bounties titre preeruted, snd or dered to he on the talAr. Lord A. SONTASET gave notice. that he tvould at a N itre dap . WlOwe for Certain pawn rela!tug to I Ain Mr. BLACIIIOIIII Mamma fulf him to bring i• • 11 , 141 to aoseod so abatis of the •ad Act of His iirrsrut •tojr•tF, pertain,' the retailing of tan .11 L.ar ithout I.rettse.. G. oiled DUKE OF BRUNSWICK Mr. Tile% blf tile he trouble the Howe but very .heath upon the subject, winch he felt it his duty to bnng finder their cou•idrretiou. He eu sorry that His M.j.••ty', Miutittrola.4 tta• •--, , . • posed the task open hi it, by arglectinz to in some wry. for his , tigiine,o, without og in s Parliament. Withist theiie two year: they 1,:, t voted 10,0001. a-year to her Roy .1 11 14hilv s . th e Duchess of Brunswick, a vote, iu the prorrieti of which be perfectly concurred ; but the graiii Is ; Duke of Brunswick stood upon • different groutil, and, much as he (Mr. Tiern e y) l amented s„, misfortunes, he did not think that they s ect of a nature to call for pecuniary resistan ce ; tea r was he so much allied to the Croon as to justly the Hight Hon. Gentleman in demanding. 4. most as a matter of coarse. a grant o f 7,nO Q L What he contended for was this, that tither, a a ., snffitient fund at thrdispwsal of thee Crown to lo t t z , good the annuity, His Majesty's hiiiiii,ters stieti4 not call upon Parliament. This fond. he thought, did exist in the Droits of Admi ra l ty , and he ic'tki, not to what more wholesome purpose it could b e applied. As he could not figure to halogen• what objection ails to be brought armpit his a,etis , toe should, without further preface, more for an a d. deem to His Majesty, statiag, That, acionodang His Majesty's recuinnieudation. they had u , kai into eonsideration the propriety of a gram to the Duke of Brunswick ; that. anxious to mak, a provision *nimble to his rank, they had voted Lo ut sum of 7,0001. payable out of the erins,,tadated fund; lout, iu consequence of the great and inertial's); holden' imposed upon the people, which. thou:a they kiwi" not how to alleviate. they felt dieweb es hound not to add to unneceactrily; pssrog that t would be grocioudy pleased to 'hetet to be loud out of the Droits of the Attrotralt). into the c 0,,,. lidoriA fund, a sum sufficient to purchase au ail. malty equal to the gtaut of Parlaosant." The CHANCELLOR of the El.ittraust thought. that even if the House saw a orteonty for an) deem to His Majesty upon this sulaect. it aas ig prefer a general one, as more relsectful and ohm proper, than one eo worded. %Vito, he svoiltd Was the plain interpretation of, this addre.4? Aft., stating the satisfaction of the House at aiskiiig a provision for the Duke of Brunswick. it tumid round and 'lofted lii. Majesty to pay them f or liut His Majesty had already applied muck of the fund alluded to. to purchase fr.mi tit capt o r. if Copeahrigen vessels, which the country would ~ then. wise have to pity for. He did hot see the diliht tion attempted to be drawn between the Duke sad Duchess of Beutiseick. Many other 11 , 11 sonages. who were drivels from their kii ware considered to be entitled, by their tunes., to the protection and suppott of The Duke of Brunswick had, at lest, the uwe claim to public liberality. He was driven Neale dominions for his attachment to this country; w that there was nothing in his case which should da. tinguish him from others. The mustily mu m , grinted to him on a contint,rency ; and if soy Treat should occur, which would have the effect of re. storing him to his dontimons. it would treas.-- There wasp therefore, uo necessity fur purrhaiiiig a certain income. Upon the tvliii!e, he wag .art that the House would not approach His Majesty with a prayer of that description. Mr. CRESTS`, did not admit that the Dods of A n d . hen ira h l e tY sa ir w ere an act, l 4 wbyhichrigthhte iriswa pCrvoes; its revenues for 800,0001. a-veer, he timid het think that it had afterward.. right to china the Drotts of Admiralty. Could any one think, that those who made that set, intende d that the t:,o•st should appropriate several millions to itself' An lion. Friend of his, (Sir. F. Borden.) had already made a motion upon the subjecetand it ea, prolaib.e. when he took his seat again. he could taro his mind to it once more. nut, supposing hr did ail. mit this property in the Crown, still the address he should have prapoosif would have been different from the present. He would have referred to Hit Majesty's conduct, in 1763, stated the burden no der winch they had since laboured, the want- th.y had so often made to His Majesty's (*attic, ~ . d advised him to imitate his former conduct, In sp• plying, not the limited suns now asked for, bait the whole of the Mints of Admiralty. to alienate the expenses of the public. Mr. Huseissue was of opinion, that His Ma jesty was as much entitled to the Droits of Admi ralty. after the Act alluded to, as before at. The House of Commons generally abstained from any discussion upon the Civil List, except in particular eases, and this nine principle, he thonglit, would apply to the question before them; they should not enter into discussions upon the fund, unless when some assistance was applied for, or sloe some improper use was supposed to he made of it. If a fond did exist. from which it sal reasonable to expect that resources could he drawn, without trespassing on the people, • Cl'. was made out, which should induce Parharhe to inquire how far it was adequate to soy pa • !trudge occasion. The English Cavil List as often 'Air yed by the Scotch Cisil List. 11:1e great difficulty he felt, was to kn'.w, whether these was stick a fund or not ? He approved of a grantta the Duke of Brunswick. H•s case was not KS that of a private individual. there were ma n y 411I"' pendent upon him. who had shared his dasigrus and partaken hit exile. It was true that, its INS. the K u eg had applied money from that feud.** the public service. without any a pplicatioa to pi , - humeri , , sod. in the seven years' ear, he had acted upon the same principle. Mr. Dawns contended. that the Crnwo easel.. titled to the Dro.ts of Adiniraltv. He thoegi:t it rather hard, that at a time a hen every private C la drama's expenditure was tO 10Crt111" 3 1 the Crown should be expected to keep to the 1 , 4 rs income. If they were to draw upon any fund tot the Pnrprise now proposed. that was not the fool Mr. HUSIII4tOII explained. Mr. Stiotianate represented it as. most Jare . 'l nes doctrine, to permit the Crown to amass ..0 sums of money. over which the radiamen base ,_ no t"Teottla It would hate a tertr r y make the Crown independent of the Par. A Kitts might go Is war fur Dreams of Adiet's • :, • It was no iragfiulle! ell!. C ronies the Sectril'l ..a gone% war fir the purpose of obtaining the ' 4 . ellet• Parliament should always hate the know what were the sues. and how liti" . "; Plied. He agreed that some pros:moil made for the Dube of liruissaick ; but the was, whether the cousstry was railed orn an sly' it from its own isoak-t. at snubs tine,o' •'". sow eld sot hat tattle, to rise 3 '0 tile sitar