The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser. — London, England, 1818-03-11 00:00:00

the fact was, that if he had a wish I. do se, lie bad only to go to another brewer, and say he preferred his porter, and then he would, for changing its rostoni, he enabled to repay the lien on his lease. Ile 'toil give on stronger proof of this than by Mating, that within two years, a cheep of from two to 300 of the houses of his own arm (that is, one-third of their whole number) had taken place. Now it wee aboard ter suppose, that if this practice of loans was done sway, with, beer would become any cheaper or better, fro oak-twelfth part or a holt. peurry on the price of a pot of porter, in the total average o f sale, would pay the interest isis their whole aggregate amount; and was the reduc tion of such • fraction as that likely to bo unlit the public? while, on the contrary, the practice of snaking those advances (whirls he h«I clearly sheen did not bind the parties to particular brewer) were of great atleissitage to industrious individuals, who were thereby set lip in trade, and enabled honestly to sup rort their families. It thereto* 11,01 i the source of benefit to individuals, and eseirijory Whivever to olio public at large.. The rest greased of comp/Mut alter that of monopoly, was the anosemeary (as it was said) advance in the prices This, he world un dertake to prove, was the Moat aftauthOrked charge that had been ever made upon any body of Men. I le would o 3 this point again refer to ilie Police Coin unite', the Chairman of which acknowledged the readiness of the brewers to give him every infor mation in their power. Now how did the prices 'stand ? Forty years ago the price was 61,4. per pot ; vonteiiine after id. Was added, which made the price 41. ; subsequent addit made it 6r1.. /Ls colleague (Mr. Calvert) had clearly proved before the Police Committee, that the articles used in the siosnufacture of porter had increased in price ur late yeses from 100 to 800 per 'cent. and some of t:uemn inure. Look then et the addition made withiu the saMe time by the brewer, and see if there we* the smallest foundation fur the imputation cost supon his character. The average price of malt and hops for the lot forty-eight year. ass before the Committee. For a 'series of -twenty years the price of hops had been from 31a. 6d. 'to 33.. 91. the cut. Malt hist year was 864. ; this ear they stood about 8016 ; and its malt alone there ass an increase of 160 per cent. The highest price 'of hops in the old average was 41. 9r. BJ. ; it was slow from 28/. to 301. The rise of id. per pot at a 'former period was in con sepience of the additional malt dory. The lowering the price iu 1816 was he. cause that duty was taken off. This _gave an expla 'ailors to the points on which Mr. Beaumont ow peered to be mistake*, sod accounted For that 'Which he could not comprehend. ThatGentlenusn hhiteritirely mistaken animiuts and circumstances. lie hml, Tor Umlaute, stated the price of hops at ..t3/. rhos 'it was 1511. and 111. when it was 8/. This led to ble rata Coiehtsiook Mr. Deaumuut had also 'ghosts lb* price if malt lest year at 103 s. whereaslfires 06a. Oa the gaieties of the stock on baud, the public had decidedly berielited truss it. The price of melt hod. within • year two, varied fechn Us. to 80e. and there was no comparison between the quality of the arti cle itself. An illusion in the course of the proceedings, froth which this Petition emanat. 'al, had been made to the Gulden-lane Bresiery.— Isiow this was an establishMent raised and supported on subscription shares—the proprietors* , could or tonne sell it a cheaper rate than Other . lamb Mich befodged to indiwittuale, who of cobra 'expected to receive is fair iisterest 'for their capital and superintendence. This palliate establisherent had, by shares, started with 'capital of3411;(100(.for years they derived no interest fur their money, ICA ' shares were now selling at such a toss, tliat it would appear the whole or the capital, except 1 . 00,0004 had been sink—not only brewers but publieans hid undersold their porter, but he belieirtl there was hardly en instance where they bad dune so at a . penny under the price, in which they had not mixed either table beer or water with what they kid so sold. The house to which he belong ed kid been applied to by such persons, but they • refused to sell the:, beer to houses who practised such means of imposing on the public. There was no combination of brewers in the manner alluded to—on the contrary, the whole elect of the large concerns was to bap down the high prices which the small owes, if left to themselves, would have a tendency to 'create; the effect of the large houses was, in fact, to lower the price. The next point of objection win the ea of improper ingredient., of a different character from malt and hops. He most decidedly anted there was not a shadow of foundation for such a charge—he could tasswer fur one !moor, and he believed for others, that it was wholly elesfitute of truth. There were some parti cular convictions of this nature, but not one, he believed, in Loudon. If the brewer wished to in cur the guilt of such a practice, how could he, in fact, eaecate his infentious? He must, in the free of the itteiii&Olficers, and the great smother of urea an his concern, bring in cart loads of these deleterious ingredient.. It was impossible he ennid attempt such a thing—the mere report of any such practice would he ruinous to hietn. Ile could state one ca.e in point--a (die and Infainous report lied guise forth, from whom be could not say, though roost certainly the preparations for this. Petition bad an effect on the rumour, that his own • firm had had a seizure oo their doneeru. Such ins rttect had this rumour, that in the 'space of i few toys the publicans whirl:holt with them came for eard, mid entreated Cult a public cuntradictiou . 1 . 11Ui2161 br Veil to the report, or else they could tit sell au) , of the porter o n h an ds. We s it p oe n.. I,le, the n , that any concerti would risk such couse totem:es ? it free trade had, in fact, been effected 1 y t he large Concert's in a great degree. O si the 1,01.11 of the general opening of pnblic-Ilituses free ur . rekrainr. Hi a n individual, it would pro . mote li is interest; but yet he could lint forget that a large body of publicans hull embarked their property un the faith of their leasehold advantage.e, and could not be deprived of them without an hilequate equivalent. They 101 l a right to be pre trcted its What they had fairly purchased ; anti in cue house alone the amount of such homes could cot Ire e.tumnattd at less than half a million. Ile w,.• siestas for nil laqUiry, merely to %hew the telseliotatef the imputation cast oil kewers of the metropolis. hl.. Ihcztusott here arose and said, that :is . I Mot Ind. seer pending which it airs mitterial should ht *cut up le the Lords this evening, he , only matters of account were to be adjusted, that the sulsject could be properly investigated. Mr. cimpsay hard no wish, at this moment, to press the matter nu the attention of the House: but he Must my that he never, in the coarse of his life, saw so false a 'statement as that of Alt. Beau ninon's; and for the atti.fartion of the public, es well . es fur the public safety, he wished for au in tinily into the statements of the Petitions. The' further discussion on the Petition Was them adjourned until to-morrow. BANK AFFAIRS. Mr. GICIIFELL. iu the abortive of his . Non. and Learned Friend (Sir J. Mackintosh), postponed his motion relative to the expense of Bank prosecu tions until this day week. Ile also gave notice, that on the 15th April he would move for returns of the amount of issues from the Blank of Ireland. simi lar to those ordered from the littlik of England. It was his inteutiou to frame the motion, so es to have, the accounts made out iu the clearest and most iu-' telligible manner. REFORM IN PARLIAMENT. Lord Foh.sseona presented a Petition from • person stained %V. l'aul Rogers, who represented himself so a respectable tradesman residing in the parish of St. Luke's, Chelsea, and who had suffer ed a variety of iipories, into which he now sought an inquiry, on reef eeeee t of his principles iu favour of Parliamentary lteforan.—This Petition was laid on the table. The Noble Lord postponed the second reading of tile Gaul Chaplains Bill until Tuestiy;the 14th of April. . Sir FRANCIS BURDETT rose to present a Piitition from some tolialsitants of %Varrieigton, praying for • Reform is Parliament, mi the principles of annual Parliaments and universal suffrage. The Attorney- Generul had List slight said, that such principles in volved nothing less than a conspinit7 to overthrow the State. Now the precedent of ancient times went to .hew the existence of annual Parliaments. Lists or Nlembers were then published, sometimes more than twice a year; and when Parliaments were called, it was always understood that each sum moning was a new election to Parliament.— From these circumstances it might be inferred, that Parliameuts were originally annual—and, when this doctrine could he supported by argument and rea soning, thaw who advocated it ought not to be met by assertion and abuse. Now, with respect to uni. versal suffrage, it was more difficult to prove that it had existed than that annual l'arliaments had formerly prevailed i yet, from • variety of ancient decumenb. it might be coutended, successfully. that universal suffrage was once the practice of this country. If they looked to the old coronation oath, they would find strong remain' to believe, that the system of universal suffrage anciently prevailed.— By it the King swore to defend the Taws--/egos qua, VULCITS elegii—and it was not possible to translate reigns as meaning any particularly.privileged class of people. Again. Parliament was spoken of as consisting of Renames. lawn texentes. et COM. MUSICS TOTIUS 11161011, which expression had a most extensive application. When he found words like these in ancient instruineuto, he thought they had a right to suppose that, at one period, universal suf frage was perfectly recognised. He should pursue the subjeLt no further—and he wily took this op poitunity *f objecting to that course. now so much adopted, of answering Petitions and Petitioners, not by argunsent but by obloquy. The Petition was then laid on the table, and or dered to be primed. Mr. Lirrurrou presented a Petition from the Twitters end Corriere of the Town of Waiver ' !tampion praying for a repeal of the Leather Tu.—Laid on the table. POOR'S LA WS. Mr. STURGIS BOURNS twought up the Report of the Committee on the Poor's Laws, which was ordered to lie 011 the table. The lion. Gentleman then ga►e notice that he would, on Thursday stein, mo►e for lea►e to bring in a Bill to emend the said Laws. STATE PRISON ERS. Mr. BILOUGHAN;;seto prawttt• Petition from James Rubinson, weaver, of Glasgow, complain. ing of the hardshipt he had suffered during what he celled '• the late enhappy measures of Govern ment." This poor man told his tale in u very simple inaisner—and he begged to call the particu lar attention of the Horne to it. Many l'etitioris had been presented on similar grounds, sod several of them it appeared had originated with persons osiwo►thy of credit, t h erefore it had become fn.hios►able to treat them all as if Oily had no foun dation iu fact. Ile cusiceived this to be a ve►y unjust proceeding. He could hot, of his own knowledge, or from local information, speak to the truth of the assertions contained in the present Petta• boos, but, as a Alettilier of Parliament, he felt him self bound to present to the Hogue any Petition merited its respectful terms. The Petitiouer's coon. plaint was of a very sevious nature—and, if wholly Iletitious and unfounded, so far from compassion beingestended tuition, he deserved to be visits il by the severest cens'ure of that House. But, even if his distress hail induced him tOgive a tittle additional colour to tine facte, should the fundamental paints prove to Iss• true, he coaceived that he had a right to 'dettiattil an investigation. He stated that in the month of Februrry, 1817. twill; to the ektreole. dirtresses of the testes, he and hum, others were obliged to apply to the Sheriff of the county for parish relief. This nseo•esrarily brought many poor prairie together, so devise plans fir their relief— and one evening, when nineteen of them were as sembled) they wets interrupted by a person of the name of Salmon, an individual, also, lie (lir. 11-migliam) believed, had been mentioned by fin Noble Frieod the hl.u►her for Lanarkshire, On a farmer occasion. Ile nod his tonatehle proceeded to search the limn* far papers, lint not finding any they took all the parries to prison. Petitioner wad examined fair orientl times before the Sheriff cal and S• 11 • . W i tten he declared that he knew of no improeer useetii►g, the Fs+e•sl told him lie would l*liirsigt.d, if lie dcvsirJ the fact. but he said that *ions of the penalise who _ been arrested with his—who formed part 'of tire meeting. With re spell to the conduct of the Magistrote, it was rant whin the Petitioner had represented. lie would boldly affirm that—for he knew all the Magistrates in the district. end there never were a more re spectable or V.uniane set of men.—(hear, hear) Sir F. Durn:re hoped the House would not take the assertions of the lion. Member. though lie had given them so great ass extent. or absolute proof.—(Hear, hear.)—The Ilan. Member dishes [leved the allegations in the Petition. out only be cause be was acquainted with the circumstance's of the case, but. 'that was a most extraordivary rea son, because lie knew all the Magistrates. Surely sods a statement as that. did nut afford any ground for withholding inquiry. Mr. BROUGHAM asked. what did the argument of the Hots. Member unionist to ? lie knew w ilting of the truth or falsehood of the present Peti tion. but, it seemed, he was acqiiainted with the groundlessness of Petitions that h.:d been drawn up by other persons, with whom the present Petitioner was wholly unacquainted. The Hon. Member would not listen to this Petition, because it came from the saute quarter from which others had pro ceedesi. Certainly it was from a mass—a man of Glasgow—e roan who complained of ill treatment— end that was the whole similarity. Now, though some Petitioners might have acted improperly. the Petitions of all who complained of ill treatment were not therefore to be looked upon as fabulous. The Hou. Member said the meeting was for a very diffe rent purpose from that preteuiled—and this state ment he founded on the confessions of certain persons who had been taken, But there was another sort of evidence. which, be *as sorry to say, was falling into discredit in that Rouge. namely, the evidence of while's.s before a Jury. Why was not the man brought to trial ? The Hon. Member said there was abundance of evidence in the confessions of the persons taken with him, and added to that, Mr. Salmon might have given his testimony. There was then abundant evidence to convict him if he had been guilty of any crime—arid why was it nut put to the test ? Had not this mats a right to say, " You knew you could prove nothing against one --end therefore you abstaiiied from bringing we to trial." Surely this was not a fair. • humane, or a decent Way of treutiog ass accused person. Mr. FINLAY explairied. He could speak ems fidently to two points in the Petition—first, that the Petitioner war not innocent, its he had repre sented himself to be—and next, that the Magi strates had not acted improperly. Mr. BROUGHAM presented a Petition of a similar nature ' from John Keith, weaver, of Glasgow, one of the persons arrested with the former Pe titioner. Mr. BROUGHAM presented a 'Petition from Wil liam Edgar, of Glasgow, schoolmaster, who had beet, arrested on the same occasion, in which he complained that though wholly innocent, be was shagged about like a felon, and three tinges tried for the same alleged offence. That, as one of the victims of ministerial vengeance, lie was.shut up in a prison for twenty weeks, mid called before a judicial tribunal, as often as the caprice of his pro secutors rendered it necessary. lie was, however, acquitted, and covered his prosecutors with great disgrace and confusion. He now prated the House fur redress. Mr. Boswait. said, those persons were trot ars rested under the Suseiension Act,—and, therefore. if the Bill of ludeinnity passed, its prdvisions would not screen them front whom they alleged they had suffered wrong. The Petitioners would have redress at common law, but. he believed, if they went into a Court of Justice, they would not recover the smallest % damages. Mr. BROUGHAM observed, he had, on a farmer occasion, stated his opinion, that the Members of that House were by no means acquainted with the provisions of the Indemnity Bill—and the speech of the Hon. Gentleman was a complete illustration of the troth of his statement. It was perfectly self evident, that the Hutt. Gentleman knew no more of the contents of the Bill, for which he voted last 'tight, then the child that was not born.—(A lattgh.l—He said it only ionleinnified persons for acts cutntwittrd uuder the Suspension Bill—but the fact was, it node ttttt died all persons, for acts done, in arresting snit imprisoning his Majesty's sub jects, from the q6tio of Janurry last. If the Hon. Gentleman's vote, on the second reading, depend ed on the justice of his supposition, that the lu deotnity Bill only covered acts dune under the suspension of the [llamas Corpus Act—if he would vote again,t it, provided his (Mr. Brougham',) statement was accurate—then he might safely reckon on his support. Mr. Isoswn.t. would not place his vote on any such agreement. Ile co etsiotly thought the Indem nity 801 l only extended to things done under the Suspension Act. But when ha recollected the be- On net tele, , 1 0It he was cont. Ptficia rift ell wil.isii Scot Lana derived from the u l e gaol, where he t led fur dye mouth measures promptmeasures taken at the time wised the state seised with i aim , and his physician de. *of affeirs wore a very threatening aspect , he shou:d that, if he tesua t in prisms, he certai illy be goose ram plc tely to blame, if lie were not to extend 4 , . His liberation was, however. refilsrd— to those Alagistrates, whose c loot w.. 4 so praise .s (Lays after, the physician drew up another I worthy. every possilile protection. lle did not certificate, still more decisive. Petitioner was then before know the Bill extended to them—but he was told that if he could procure bail to the amount of extremely glad to Lind that it did. SOL he would be set at liberty. This some chari- Mr. BROUGHAM presential a Petition from a most table Iversen enabled him to do, and he was Idle- respectable body of Merchants of the town of Li. rated. His !liminess" being ruiord, and himself in verpool, expre.siog the strong feeling of indigos. the deepest distress, he applied to a benefit society thou with which they viewed the intraluction of • to which he belonged for relief. But the Justice Bill into Parliament. for the purpose of indeinni berme whom he went 'for that purpose objected to rb hug Ministers for their conduct last year. By granting him any—observing, that, as the Petitioner their directions 30 persons had heen arrested and was a state prisoner. he 'Could not be a good mein- placed in solitary confinement. They were after. her of the soci e ty, um % Th e refore, aid was refused. wards liberated without any trial, by the mere pro. ; He (Mr. Brougham) feirril, that similar abuses of "cess au Secretary of State. The Petitioners pray. 1 authority had been committed by many Magistrates ed that the (lilt might be thrown out. in their zeal to prove themselves active aupporters General Gascotorrx said, the Petition Was sign.' of Government. Under all these circumstances, ed by very few persona, cowaileiing the extent or ruined in his health, and deprived of his butiness, population of Liverpool. The signetures were,' he had recourse to that House for redress. and laid perhaps (fur he had not seen them), those of respect. this statement of his sufferings before it. abl e wen . B u t he believed the great body of floe. Mr. Fitt Lair said, he had, od former occasions,; itiliaktaitts of Liverpool did not coincide in the seas offered has sentiments ass similar petitions. but he' timeline contained in the Petition. did not intend to dwell on that winch was now be. Mr. Bitten said. the Petition was signed in • fore the House ; but this he would say. that the very great hurry ; but the signatures compriied time allegation of his innocence, which the Petitioner so • assumes of the promivii individuals comiected with much ratted on. was wholly unfounded. The pre- the mercantile interest in Liverpool. tended object Grille meeting was, he admitted, to These several Petit were read, and ordered to devise some meaus of procuring relief—but the real lie on the table—and those relative to the State Pri one was of a very different nature. This statement tamers to be printed. he founded on the best of all evidence, the codes. SALT DUTIES. had Mr. CALCRAFT soul, lie would not have to trou ble the Hinow r as he hail intended , with any details on the subject of the Salt Ditties. lie was extremely hippy to find, since he came down to the House, that a Comuottee on the Laws reining; to the Salt Duties, fur which he meant to move. would be con ceded without opposition.—(lleor, hear.) —I litisi 7 haul a communicritiois with the Right Ken. tieutle num opposite (Mr. Vatisittart), lie Agreed that Committee ore'. sl Id lie appointed, and he gave him a list of incest respectable pet• 'there were supine of those persons whom he would not probably, himself. have mimed ou Ilse Coe ttttt but still lie was by no weasel dissatisfied. 'flue Hon. Member then moved— " That a Committee be appointed to take into considera tion the Laws relating to the Salt Duties, soft the asteuts or remell ) isis she inconveniences arising therefrom." Mr. CuRWEN, io seconding the motion, congers. tulated the House tot the course adopted by the Right Hon. Gentleman. He believed that the most material benefit would be derived from the labours of the Committee. both with respect to the revenue and to the public morals. A revision of the Salt Duty Laws *as the greatest boon that could be bestowed on the people. He believed he would •he able to p.o.e, that, between unit 3,000,000/. a year might be saved by a mitigation or cow ttttt tattoo of the duties. Mr. EGERTON was extremely glad thilt a C - mitte had been granted to inquire into this subject. The greatest benefit would be produced by it. 'Elite county which he had the honour to represent (Cheshire) suffered much front the existing system. The mischief was great, in eu agricultural point or view, but it was still greater, as tar as the rola of the country were concerned—which were mate rially injured, in consequence of the temptation to smuggling, induced by those high duties. Mr. DAVENPORT was very happy that some re lief was about to be afforded from one of the most oppressive taxes ever imposed on the country. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER would not, after the manlier ice winch the motion was brought forward, detain the House by many re marks. The subject, in every I • tof view, was worthy of the most serious consideration S he hoped those who would be appointed to inveetigide it. would recollect, that those duties affirded a very large revenue—mid, if they were withdrawn, it would he necessary to adopt some other mode of raising a sum equivalent to that given tip. Mr. CA LCRAFT said, he could not be so indis creet as to interfere with duties that produced 1,500,0001. per annum. without proposing some thing that would balance it. He felt the seve r ity or the tax—but, in the present state of the cowl tty, that if it were removed, some substitute must be found for it. 'Else Committee was then tippointed—lnd the Petitions presented on the subject of Salt Unties—the Report of the Committee of 1801, and of the Rock Salt Committee of last year— were ordered to be referred thereto. ELECTION LAWS. The Hon. J. F. CAMPBELL. after briefly nd. vetting to the difficulties which certain freeholders encountered, when they proceeded to vote fur Members of Parliament. in consequence of errors made in the entry of their laud-tax assessments, moved. " fur lessee to bring in a Bull to repeal so Much of the Election Laws as relates to land-tax assessments." Mr. 13iNeep cenceived that some alteration was desirable. Bad, however. as was the present sys tem, it was better than isune—and he was glad' to find that it was not to be silmoduised until a better substitute was formed. Leave was given to bring in the fill. INDEMNITY BILL. The A?TORNeY•UENEnAv. To; to move the Order of the Dly for the second reading of the lie demnite Bill. . Mr. LAM ITON observed, that there were, on the paper, two orders. before .that now moved. which, he supposed, ought to take precedence of it. The SPEAKER said, he believed the understand ing of 'the House was, that no one order had Omer.. deuce of another. The individual who first caught his eye, wits, he believed, entitled to proceed. But the House would decide whether the lion. irinlier was misled. as to his notion of precedence, or whether he (the Speaker) misconceived the usual Course of practice. Mr. LAIIBTOX said. the order would take up but little time, and might be disposed of at once. Lord C AST ;ARE A UK observed, as the order now moved was the most iinpurtnit, and as there was no precedence with respect to Orders of the Day. the IllonourableGentleitimi . wmild feel the propriety of suffering the Indemnity Bill to proceed, and not put it off till a lute hone in the ev • g. Sir W.'llu Ram:lug insisted on the neeessitr of de. lay. The Bill now before titem indemnified - Maw, trates and others for havilig searched houses foe antis —fur ivpisg seitesl the papers of individuals—iiii fur having arrested sold detained persoiss coucer.ped in tumultuous assembliss. Ilere there were th.v4 new heeds of inquis v sl..closed to this House, for the first tissue, by the BM. It woe, tilers fo;.e, but rt„;Ppt that some opportisity eantl,l be given to ex suespe into them, sod i4ll illYtitig,itt the eirt•Usnst sor es that occurred relative to the sletessiism of perSONS alit) were taken in tisiuultuoiss Hbsemblies, &c. The Susipensi 0000 Bill did not relate to any ouch pert so. ; it did no snore than enable Isis Slaijesty's Govern scent to arrest persons snepected of 'cesium or I f treasonable 'ffictiCes. Not one of three Seer s t Committees had the least opportunity of inquiring into the circumstances under which arms were seit ed, or papers token, or pers:oies arrested, fur being :hood in unlawful .assest4iftes. And yet tins Bill, taking the flouts. by 'surprise, weld to grant ass in demnity to the indieitleols, Magistrates, or others, who hail committed those nets. An account had been prodeced this Session of persists. arrested on suspicion of treason, or for treasonable prae t►ces—but no statement had beets furnished of those who were taken up for bring present at tumultuous assemblies—or in whos•e bowies arms were taken, or papers seized. He slid nut means to sae, that grounds might not hav e existed for committing those before they agreed to indemnify those who 11411 perpetrated them. time should be given to investigate the subject. They were now its the tacistitiiissisd 5w uction'could be brought by any ',Arty !sgaisust a Alagistrate or other 'person, fir seizing ttrill!., Ake. with any degree of effect. Until next term. Lord CASTLEREAGH 1 , 441, what had fallen from •the Hots. Baronet would bee good matter of sir gittnent its the Cosustutter—hut slid isot operate against the second t ceding of the Bill. Mr. TIERNEY Observed, thin the question had notltiog to do with the second reading, or the Speaker's leaving the Chair—it went inertly to title. whether they would stop the progress of the Bill. in order to give tune for inquiry ? If the No ble Lord woold take the sec I residing tiow, mist post off' the Co tttttt ittrr, well mid good, that would answer every purpose. But his view evidently was,, to proceed with the Bab without enlisting any information at all. The Noble I r on' recollected his former success, us well he mtglit. amp con ceived that nu man ought to snake any inquiry ou the subject. The statement made by the lion. Baronet was unanswerable, soil. was unanswered. Here were three new beads of bidet tttt ity disclosed, un which no information whatever hail beets given --and they ought not to be 'parsed over without ior yeasigatioes. Sir C. MeNCIIC said, 'searching .hotioes for arms. sod taking thesis away, was nu light matter. Mitch discussion hail waken place in that House on the subject of ol low Mg such a power to be exercised in Ireland. Evesy mats knew, that, according lii the constitution of the country, au individual might not only keep *hat arms he pleased is. Isis dwelling. for the protection of . himself earl ( m u s k—b u t, if he did not keep arms, lie ICI* considered as deficient its his duty to his cows try, Isis Sovereign, and Isis family. At what time was it the search for arms took place? In trouble some buses. Amid at what proud hail a Mats a better right to ret:toi arms Ist his Is se' than iss troublesome time*? Were they to suppose, con trary to every constitutional presumption, that, because a macs had arias in his possession he meant to do what was contrary to Isis duty? He was alionished when heloaral over the Bill, and found it iisdes tt t ified Persone se:sidled liar Hod took away twins. Whets a 8111 was pr-temled to Ise bwined on the Report of is Secret Committee, and matter was isitrodueed into it, never thought of by that Committee, lie conceived that time fur inquiry' ought to be conceded. If this were r-fused, it was no matter how quickly they sent through the other stages of the Bill —for it was a mere mockery, and the sooner they got rid of it the better. Mr. BATHURST tititi, the observations of the Hon. Baronet (Sir W. Burroughs) slid not apply to the second reading of the Bill. They belossgell .properly to the C 'tier, where he 'night move fair the omission of those chsuses which he conceived not to be borne oil by the Report of the Secret Committee. • On the q►►e•tion that this Bill be now read a second tinn•— Mr. GRENFIEI.I. mid, he had no intention or de toi JJ IJ kg the House lou t oil like prewitit twee- . , hot he could not let the motion pass with a silent vote. He was one of those who, in the last Sessiott Pairfitment, voted twice for the suNsesistots of the Hubei. Cot pus Act—and lie did so in consequence of the confidence sod reliance lie placed on the Report' of the Secret Committee, 'ma JJ I 1111 l usly agreed to by the Members of that Committee, and to which he saw appended the names of H Noble Lord, the Member fur Yorkshire (Lira Khoo) who usually sat on that side or the House—of the line Mr. Ponsoulty—und of oilier Gentlemen, whom he considered great c autheiitter. Now, although so far as the disclosure of - facts 113 a been mad:, they were not exactly of lb tt character cod suagiiiiiitle which he imagined, from the Report, that they would hove been—ikevertheleso, recollecting the temper of the public mind, in the anetrooolis, in the mom k of Decemlo r, 1816 —recnileeting th e roomier in which that Home, iu the mouth of January, 1817, was assailed by petitions, some of them a compound of folly soil mischief . , while others seemed to aim et nothing shot of insurrection kind revolutioa—tit a period too ei -general distress, which bore hard on the I..wL: classes of the community, on their an fat Niel, cud labourers—recollectiog 01l thtoCciicum , tnuct s. he did not regret the vote hr gaire nu the Sus pension Act in the lost Session or lrat liawrut.— lle owed it to himself and his constituents to tm: , - port the measure. lie did dose last aright, he u n ui:t to-night, mid in every future stage. Lord LAStal.t.Pg MSe to advert to a statement contained in a Petition presentekl to this Unice trout A person of the name of Riclond Lee. it stated very stroitgly the hardships the Petitioner ei - dured while a prisontr last year in You k Coady, such as being obliged to dents *way with his es hoods the blood of another prisoner, of the Moue e; Riley. who hod committed suicide in the s..kite i•. It. To .11 this he hail a strong contradictio n i n the stik davit of moot f!er prison, of flu" a biller tir C.kiter, imptironed in the cell w ills I: e. Mr. ti enr t - iititteJ himself initocent of t try tie' •g t.' • would rsievOliat this dioltiesioo'be edjeitned futil ienseen tu.morrew, aiming. —/ Hew.) ma"' 10 1 Mr. WM. SMITH agreed, that the limcsusibus He *Ns $e ought to he adjourned. He differed fete tato aired. th, from his Hon. Frieuill who had introduced this would die. Petition. and was 'terry that he had not concluded and, IS d. his motion by calling for a Committee of Inquiry. certificate, It was only us such a Committee, where so massy told that --~- 0 •i I + 1 0 tl ti sl ri YI re lii iu hl to is • ►r •ti CO ay lDi Iti r mI •CI p u Of 11. OIC in Nn Cn Wel 11 4 1 be td • I e fft i Oti • • r~ ~~