The Sun. — London, England, 1829-05-26 00:00:00

allegation the whole Bill was founded, did not pos sess funds adequate to the purpose of completing the Bridge, or that the funds .it possessed could not be or ought not to be - applied to this purpose. In stat ing his objection t 6 the petition, he did not wish to oppose hearing the counsel, Whenever the public interest required it, he thought their Lordships could not be too indulgent, or open their doors too wide to the petitions of the people ; but their Lordships must, at the same time, guard their own privileges. He also agreed with the suggestions of the Noble Lord, that the Lord Chancellor should be instructed to apprize the petitioners of the subjects to which - Counsel were to confine their remarks,•and with this lirri;ation he should not object to hearing counsel. Lord ELLENBOROUGH moved, " That the Lord Chancellor be instructed to inform the Coun sel that they were only to speak of the injury the petitioners would suffer from complying with their Lordships' order." Earl GREY observed, that the resolution did not contain an intimation to the Counsel that they were not to raise any question about the privileges of the House, or the mode of exercising them. Lord ELLENBOROUGH considered that as a matter of course, and that it was scarcely consistent will) the dignity of the House to include the words mentioned. Earl GREY then drew up another Resolution in these words—" That there be an instruction to the Lord Chancellor to inform the Counsel when called in, that they are not to be allowed to raise any ques tion about the privileges of this House, or the mode of exercising it; and that they be directed to con fine themselves to the manner and degree in which their interests will be affected by the production of ;he accounts ordered by the House." The Marquis of LONDONDERRY—This pro ceeding, if Counsel were heard, would form a new and inconvenient precedent, and he thought u Com mittee ought to be appointed to search for prece dents, before it should be concluded that Counsel be heard on the subject. In his opinion there was no precedent for the proceeding. The object of the petitioners was neither more nor less than to set aside their Lordships' Qrder ; and. if their Lordships agreed to do this,.they would establish a dangerous precedent, and trench very materially on their own privileges. The Earl of ELDON suggested, that if the at tention of the Counsel were to be confined in the manner Mentioned in the Resolution, the present petition alight to be withdrawn, and another pre sented with a prayer confined to the particular point to which alone the Counsel were to be allowed to address themselves. The prayer of this petition was not certainly so confined. Lord I?.LLENBOROUGH could not pretend to recollect very accurately what happened some time ago ; but if he was not very much mistaken, it hap pened on occasion of the late Queen's trial that Counsel were directed to confine their observations to particular matters, when the petitions were much more general. That happened, he believed, in two instances at least, on occasion of petitions presented by her Majesty. Besides, if new petitions were to be required to be presented in such cases, it would lead to a sort of correspondence between their Lord ships and petitioners as to the practical matters to be included in the petitions, which would be at eetuded with great inconvenience. He thought that the much better course would be to agree to this Resolution. Lord DURHAM would not object to the Mo tion, -on the understanding that the Counsel were not to apply themselves to, the injury that would arise with reference to- the objects of this Bill, but only to the injury that would arise to the City from the production of the papers ordered by the House. Lord GODERICH suggested that the question should be 'put whether the Counsel should be coiled n, before the question eras put on the instruction to the Lord Chancellor. Lord EXLE,S - BORo.VPH—If . the Counsel should bes.called in, it would - heionly for, the purpese of ordering them to withdraw egatn; for they could not regularly be present while the question was put .on the instruction, The Earl of MALMESBURY did not feel dis posed to object to the hearing of Counsel, confined as it was proposed they should be; but he wished to 'know whether this Resolution would appear on the Journols.of ,the House, as he thought it very material that it should appear that, although their Lordships consented to hear the Counsel, they were properly jealous of their privileges. The Marquis.of LANSDOWNE—The Resolu tion would appear on the Journals, and shew that the House had been properly jealous of its privileges. The Resolution was then agreed to ; and the Coun sel, Mr. Harrison, Mr. Denman, and Mr. Lane, were caned in, and the instruction of the House read to them by the Lord Chancellor. M r , atantsos briefly addressed their Lord ships, and. stated that he had no instructions what ever to question their Lordships privileges, or the mode in which they chose to exercise them, and theref.ore requested, that daily thing that should ap pear to have that tendency dropped from him, their Lordships would ascribe the inadvertence to him self, and not /a those by whom he was instructed. lie then called the attention of the Lords to the situation in which the city stood with reference to the approaches to London Bridge, and the circum stances attending the rebuilding of it, or the build ing a new London Bridge. Their Lordships were aware that the state of the old bridge was not such as to c.ll for the immediate building of a new bridge, but Just the call for the building of a new bridge was very general among the public, and more particularly among those connected with the coal trade, on account of the obstruction p r esented by the flux and reflux of the tide by the old one, The city of - London had a fund called the Bridge House Estate, applicable to the repair of London Bridge, or the building anew one, if necessary or convenient; and the city was'under no legal obligation to contri• bate anything towards that object beyond the pro ceeds of the fund to which he had adverted. But when the Bill for building the New Bridge came before theLegisiature, it was insisted, on behalf o f the public, that the Bridge should be higher and more extensive than the city proposed; and the eity, then, in consenting to the alteration in the plan, obtained the sanction of the Legislature to two clauses in the Bill, by which it was provided that the city should not* be liable to contribute anything to wards the expenses occasioned by the alteration in the plan of the new Bridge, and the approaches to it, in case the rents and profits of the estate, on the credit of which the funds were raised, should not be sufficient. The city had desired that the b u ilding of the new Bridge should be postponed until 1:2 1 e Bridge Estate Fund should accumulate so as to answe7 the intended purpose; but this was not agreed to, and Bill was passed almost without their consent. The adjitional expence, therefore, both with respect to the brims .e and the approaches to it, had been occasioned by the Legislature, and ought to be provided for by the public, in as far as they exceeded the particular fund nzplicable to the purpose possessed by the city. Of the receipts arid expenditure of this fund, the city were ready to produce an account. As to the rest of their funds, they submitted that the property acquired by the corporation by grant or purchase, was as much its own private property, and applicable solely to its own private purposes as much as the property of any private individual, and so it had been laid down by the highest living legal authority in the course of some late legislative discussions. This was a private fund applicable only to the private purposes of the corporation, and not to publicpurposes, which had usually been provided for by a rate on the inha bitents of the city generally. But in the present stance it would be extremely hard that the whole burden should be thrown on the heart of. the city, containing the Bank, the Royal Exchange, the great Insurance Offices, &c. while the matter concerned the public in general. If he was correct in this pro position, that the city was not bound to apply its own private funds to this public object, the argu ment annlied still more strongly to the property which it was bound to administer according to the provisions of the trusts, and which it could be called on to do by the ordinary legal tribunals. By their Lordships' order, the city was called upon to pro duce an account of their income, and the mode in which it had been expended from the year 1813 to the year 1829, both inclusive ; distinguishing the income and expenditure of each year. The city could produce an account of the income and expen diture of the funds applicable to the purposes of the Bridge Bill i►► a short time ; but of the other funds, even if they had any connection with the ob. jects of that Bill, they could not make up an account before the end of the Session; and if their Lordships shoul.l think it proper to enforce their order with out modification, the progress of the works, which the public were so deeply interested in forwarding, must be suspended for a considerable time, to the great inconvenience of all, but particularly of those who had property connected with the navigation of the river, or otherwise depending on the speedy conclusion of the works. The amount of the facts then were, that the funds applicable to the Bridge and its approaches in the hands of the city were ex hausted; and that the city was exempt by the law, as it stood, from contributing any thing beyond the amount of that fund; that as the alterations in the plan of the Bridge and its approaches were the work of the Legislature, the public ought to bear the ex pence; and that the city, as the mode most analo gous to that of imposing a general assessment on those who derived the benefit, had proposed this continuation of a small duty on coals for a ce►tain period, coals being an article of the most general consumption. The production, therefore, of the private funds of the Corporation had _really nothing to do with the subject under their Lordships' consi deration, an►}, therefore, that it would be an unne cessary hardship to compel them to produce them, and for that reason they humbly hoped that their 'Lordships would make some modification in their order. Mr. DENMAN was about to follow, when Lord LAUDERDALE rose to order, and Coun sel were ordered to withdraw. He observed that this was the first time that their Lordships had thought proper to hear Counstlagainst a compliance with their own order; he therefore moved that the hearing of one Counsel was sufficient. This motion was put and agreed to ; and Counsel were called in and informed by the LORD CHAN CELLOR, that their Lordships hod determined to hear but one Counsel. Counsel were then ordered to withdraw. Lord MELVILLE said that the Learned Counsel at the Bar had made out no case to induce their Lordships to decline calling for the accounts in ques tion. They had two courees open to them—the first was either to allow their original order to stand; or, secondly, to make a new order expressive of their determination to have the accounts produced. Lord DURHAM thought it right that the City ought to be compelled to furnish the accounts forthwith. Lord MELVILLE objected to the word forth with, as it was represented that it would require some time to mike out the accounts. Lord DURHAM said, that by the term " forth with," he merely meant the earliest period at which the accounts could be made out. Lord E LLEN BOROUGH thought it right that the motion should be entered upon the Journals in the regular form. The motion was agreed to, and their Lordships were about to adjourn, when— Lord DURHAM said, he had a question to put, which he considered of great importance. He wished to know what was to be done with respect to the London Bridge Committee ? That Com mittee had given notice of its intention to adjourn to-day, and meet to-morrow ; but how could they meet, and proceed to busiaeas, without the neces sary evidence before them ? Lord MELVILLE said, it was for their Lord ships to decide upon hearing the whole case; for hiMself, he had not heard, and, therefore, could not decide upon it. It was clear, however, that the Committee could assemble and decikaccording to the evidence before them. Lord DURHAM said, it was stated in the preamble of the Bill that the funds of the City were not sufficient to carry on the proposed improve ments in making approaches to London Bridge. Now his object was to chew that the City possessed ample funds for that purpose. The Noble Viscount urged that the accounts could not be immediately produced, when as he (Lord Durham) contended that the Committee could not proceed without these accounts, which the Counsel said could not be furnished within a certain time. How then were they to act? The Committee might sit for three or four weeks, and then find that the statement of Counsel could not be borne out. Objection was taken to delay, but he thought it would be most ad visable to delay for three or four days, until they saw it could be done. Ater a few words from Lord ELLENDOROUGH and Lord LONDONDERRY, The Duke of WELLINGTON said, that in dis cussing this question, some blame had been cast upon the King's Government, It was certainly true that a question had been put to his Majesty's servants re lative to the new London Bridge, and the conse quence was the introduction of the Bill in question ; but he begged his Noble Friend to understand that there had been no concealment on his part; neither had there been any treaty entered into by him; for when he had been asked the question, his a nswer was, that he could not consent to the reduction of the duty on coals, either as it affected the revenue of the country or the funds of the City of London. He begged their Lordships to bear this in mind, as by. doing so they must acquit him of anything like a charge of concealment.—(Hear.) —The Bill to which allusion had been made, had been introduced into the othet H9use of Parliament, and had occupied the attention of its Members for nearly six weeks before it was passed. And the question for present consi deration was, were their Lordships prepared to inter fere with the labours of the Committee sitting up stairs upon the subject ? Were their Lordships pile= pared to say that that Committee ought not to come to a decision u ntil these accounts were pro duced ? If they determined upon doing this he would tell their Lordships what weuhl be the con sequence? The bridge would in the meantime be completed without any practicable approach to it, even by foot passengets,•—( Hear.) —This was a situation of things which could not be looked upon as creditable either to Parliament or to the country. If after this their Lordships should be of opinion that the Com mittee ought to wait for the production of these ac counts, he had no further objection to offer, He felt that he had done his duty in explaining the facts of the easo, and putting the whole matter in a train of inquiry, and haying done so, he would leave the re sult to their decision. The Noble Lord opposite stated that the city complaitted Oat they bad no funds with which to go on with the Pliely London Bridge, unless what were to be obtained under the provisients pf this Bill. He begged the Noble Lord's pardon %Oleo be stated that no such assertion was made. What the e4.) , .did say was, that the Bridge House Estates were not eta ciept for such a pur pose, but not one word did they say shout their othor funds. The fact was that they did possess a fund, aris.igg from a 4d. duty on coals, which, by Act of Parliantaat belonged to the city, and which, though directed to the Orphans' Fund, was appli cable to improvements in the city, and, therefore, to the building and improving the approacles to this new bridge. He thought that, under all the circum, stances of the ease o it would be most advisable to leave the q uestion to the Committee, and judge front their Report whether, in order to make fitting approaches to the bridge, it would become necessary to lay on a Lrger tax. Lord DURUAM observed, that by the time the year 1832 arrived, the City of London would have taken n o less a sum than 1,731,472/. from the Or phans' Fund. The Noble Lord went on to remark that the mode of proceeding in that and the other House of Parliament, with reference to Private Com- L House the Committee were empowered to send for persons, papers, and records; but in their Lordships' House it could only be done by a distinct and sepa• rate motion. But this was not the only difficulty which presented itself to his mind ; he very much doubted whether the Standing Orders had been complied with, and if so the whole proceeding must fall to the ground. After what had fallen from the Noble Duke it was not his intention to p e rsevere, but he hoped no obstacle would be thrown in the way of the production of the papers as soon as possible. The Earl of CARNARVON gave notice that he would to-morrow present the petition from Birming ham, of which he had given notice for that evening. The other Orders of the Day were dispOsed of, and their Lordships adjourned at Half-past Seven. HOUSE OF COMMONS —(LAST NIGHT.) Mr. LITTLETON presented two petitions, one from the bailiff, burgesses, &c. of Litchfield ; and the other from the freeholders of that city, com plaining of the state of the elective franchise there, and declaring that measures had been resorted to by two Noble families of the neighbourhood to alter the state of the franchise in order to secure their own influence. The petition was laid on the table. Mr. WODEHOUSE presented a petition from Canterbury in favour of the East India Offices' Bill. Mr. O'NEILL. moved for a return of the number of persors entitled to vote at elections• in cities and boroughs in Great Britain, the return specifying the number of voters in each place. Mr. H. GRATTAN presented a petition from the Roman Catholic inhabitants of a parish in Monaghan, and from the united parishes of St. Mary, St. Thomas, and St. George, Dublin, against he - Sub-letting Act. Sir J. MACKINTOSH moved for leave to bring In a Bill for the relief of the sufferers by the in- solvency of the Registrar of the Court ut Madras. Mr. ASTELL should oppose the Bill in every stage. Mr. E. DAVENPORT declared his intention of withdrawing the Juvenile Offenders' Bill. On the motion of Mr. DICKINSON, the Di of Counties' Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed to-morrow. Mr. DOWNING presented a petition from the Guild of the Guildery of Stirling, against the Scotch Gaol Bill. Mr. HUSKISSON presented a petitien from the Shoemakers of Ashton-under-Lyne, against ex cessive taxation; from the Anti-Bread Tax Asso- ciation of Kidderminster, against the Corn Laws ; and from certain Quakers of a Parish in Middlesex, stating that they flad discovered an improved mode for preparing flax, and praying the countenance of the House thereto. Mr. HUSKISSON presented a petition from the Burgesses of Liverpool relative to the admission of Fori:ign Sugar into this country. The petition was ordered to lie on the table. METROPOLIS POLICE BILL. Mr. BRIGHT presented a petition from the Parish of Hackney, praying that it might be ex empted from the operation of the Metropolis Police Bill. The Hon. Member complained of the enor mous power given by the Metropolis Police Bill to the Secretary for the Home Department ; and ob served that though willing to place every confidence in the Right Hon. Gent. now filling that office, it was impossible to anticipate who might be his suc cessor, and to what purpose that successor might not pervert the power thus- conferred. Under the new system, many parishes would be called to con tiibute a larger sum than they at present paid, while no greater security would be afforded. On the question that the petition be brought up, Mr. Secretary PEEL said, I remember that when the Right Hon. Member opposite (Sir J. Mackintosh) made an attempt to mitigate the se verity of some of our laws, and in particular cases to abolish the punishment of death for offences of a Ytt= riotis chat acter in point , of aggravation, one of NI resolutions was, that it was our bounden diiiy tb consider the state of the Police, that we might be enabled to mitigate our Penal Code. He urged— and with great force--that the Legislature could no be justified in inflicting the punishment of death, until it had used all other means, and those means had failed, The experience of the office I have the honour to hold convinces me of the necessity of di recting the public attention to the subject; but as I was determined to do nothing from myself alone, at an early peried of the last Session I proposed the appointment of a Committee to consider the state of the Police of the Metropolis. It might be said, that such a renewed inquiry was scarcely necessary, because for seven or eight yews the House of Com mons has persevered in similar investigations. The Committees have uniformly made the same report —that nothing effectual could be done while the pa rochial police continued in a state so defective. A conclusion was, therefore, arrived at, that it was ne cessary to regulate the whole by one system, and to carry the plan into effect by one eontroulling power. It was proposed by the Committee of last year that an attempt should be made to improve in this man ner the parochial police—that for this purpose the division and distinction of parishes should be abo lished ; and that parishes, in cases which referred to the commission of crime, should not be left to their own direction and discretion. This was thought the more reasonable, because Government is already intrusted with the power of watching the roads at night by horse-patrol, of guarding the envi rons of the metropolis by foot-patrol, and of pro tecting the streets by the day-patrol. The local laws were therefore fo be reviewed and consolidated, and this in accordance with the unanimous report of the Committee. Due notice was given in the course of the Session of What would be proposed'; and so soon as the proceedings on the Roman Catholic Relief Bill lied concluded, I brought in this Bill, founded exactly and literally upon the report - made by the Committee on the 15th April. The Chair man did, what is not very usual, communicate a copy of the Bill to all the parishes interested ; and the result is, that we are now arrived at the third reading of the Metropolis Police Bill, with only,one petition a g ainst it. I cannot help thinking that this is a tolerably strong proof that there is a pre valent impression in favour of the measure -among the parishes—that the public interest will be ad vanced, and the commission of crime prevented, to the additional security of private property. For tunately, this one petition from this one parish affords the most conclusive evidence in favour of the Bill. It is from Sr. John, Hackney ; and the sub scribers do not pray that the Metropolis Police Bill may not pass into a law, but that their parish may be exempted from its provisions : they add, that however expedient it may be to apply them to a large portion of the vicinity of the Inet t irp o lis, to which opinion they are very willing to subscribe, yet that the system established in their parish was so good that the inhabitants were adequately pro tected, and it was not necessary therefore that the parish"of St. John should be included. lam per fectly ready to admit that the parish of Hackney is extremely well regulated ; by good segulutiojs they have repressed crime in their district, and they com plain that by the Bill I have proposed they shall be subjected to considerably increased expellee. Now tho Hose will be good enough to observe my answer to thatthat;-_The annual expellee to which the parish of Hackney is at present expos e d for m a intaining its watch, is three thousand two hull- dred and sixty pound' ; and taking th e utm ost limit of the maximum fixed by the Bill—viz. eight pene6 in the pound —it is impossible that it can be called upon to c ontribute more than 3,4001. or only two hundred pounds beyond the amount now ex pended. I will however, undertake to assure the parish of Hackney, that when this Bill shall have passed, and it is consolidated with other parishes, its security from crime will be preserved at a less expellee than is at present defrayed. But since it is admitted on all hands that Hackney is so well re gulated, the question for the House is, what are the effects of these excellent regulations on the adjoin larishee, and what security have we, that the • yo--e- • At- example - set by Hackney wilt. be followed else where ? For my purpose it happens most fortu nately that one parish adjoining Hackney, and re garding the state of. which some special inquiries were made--I mean the parish of Tottenham—is in a very different condition. Let us . takesthe autho rity of the officers -of 'the parish of Hackney upon this point. The Gentleman who is. Clerk to the Trustees for watching Hackney, was asked whe ther the parochial watch there did not answer per fectly, and he answered in the affirmative ; and then the question was put, what effect the system hag' upon the adjoining parishes ; and I entreat the House to remember that this is not a parochial but a general question, and he admits that the moment the improved nightly watch was established in Hackney, crime within the parish rapidly diminis ed : he said, " One system we adopted imme diately was this—that whenever an attempt at bur glary took place at a particular station, these men were suspended until the next meeting, to account for their conduct, when the circumstances were in- vestigated. We put out one Bill which had a very desirable effect on some measure, authorising our officers to stop all persons who were moving about at night under tolerably suspicious circumstances. The moment that went • out, it appeared to have driven all the thieves out of the parish; immediately they went away, they appeared to go to Tottenham." After this evidence, we proceeded to inquire into the state of Tottenham, and the accounts we re ceived as to the state of the nightly watch and the commission of crime, confirmed the opinion before entertained. Mr. Matthew was examined as to the state of Tottenham, and he told the Committee thut depredations were frequent, and especially within the last month or six weeks; arid when asked: regarding the nightly watch, his answer was, " There are private watchmen, but we have no re gular watchmen, except what are appointed by the trustees tif the road ; but they leave their duty at twelve o'clock, which we consider no protection against housebreaking, though it may to persons who are travelling on the King's highway; but it is no protection to the inhabitants, generally speak ing, except to those travelling on the road, for we are our own guardians until twelve or one o'clock, when we retire to rest." Then he is asked if he thought it would he acceptable to his parish, if there were to be a uniformity of a police establishment in his parish, and those adjoining, to which he replied at once, " I think so." This was followed by the question, " What has been the nature of the depre dations committed in your parish ?" And the re ply was., " I have taken the liberty to sketch out a list." Which list the witness handed in ; and by that paper it appeared that there had been sixteen burglaries effected, and three attempted—in how long a time does the House imagine ? Within less than six weeks. This, let us recollect, in a parish contiguous -to Hackney; and there, in six weeks, there had been nineteen attempts at burglary, six teen of which had been successful. With such evidence before it, it was incumbent on Govern- merit, not merely for the protection of the inha bitants and of their property, but for higher ob jects—for repressing the growth of crime, and for preventing the necessity for the infliction of those severe punishments with which our criminal law is chargeable. This diversity is the in evitable •consequence of having a good police estab lishnient in one parish—it drives all the evil-disposed into an adjoining parish, which is not equally well protected. The Hon. Member has complained that I propose to establish an arbitrary and oppressive system. So far from its being arbitrary and oppres sive, let us recollect that our police is now defective, that in cases of sudden emergency, we have no other remedy than the employment of military•force to repress disorder. I give no powers to the new police but those of ordinary watchmen; I do not propose to extend their authority in any way—the only difference being, that the whole is to be under the controul of Government, under one general system nlregulation. lam desirous of abolishing that state of things according to which a watchman on one. side - of Oxford-street has no authority on the other. Some remedy must be devised for the system with out system by which London is divided, as it were, into a number of independent kingdoms, in a great majority of which there is no watch at all. Some remedy ought to be devised, and until it is devised, we must witness and lament the growth of crime, without being able effectually to check it. I have before mentioned, that in 1822 the number of com mittals for Middlesex was 2,500; and by 1828 they ha'i increased to 3,500, being an increase of 1,000 committals in the course of only eight years. That the evils will be entirely remedied by the Bill before the House, I do not pretend to say; but this I know, that no man charged with the responsibility of providing for the protection of the metropolis, can longer delay taking the sense of the Legislature on the fitness of endeavouring to discover a more effectual system. Sir J. MACKINTOSH—There is no part of the plan of the Right lion. Gent. which I more heartily approve than the abolition of die fantastic and inconvenient divisions of this capital, by the concentration of a police force, applicable to all, for the prevention of crime and the protection of pro perty. Upon that point I shall say no more : but I hope I shall be excused for saying, without expect ing an immediate answer, that it would give me great pleasure to be allowed to believe that I con strue some of the expressions of the Right Hon. Gent. rightly, when I remark, that I am by them to suppose that he is not altogether without inten tion of reducing the number of capital punishments for which all his operations on the criminal law have laid the foundation, and to which they naturally lead. Mr. LENNARD looked with great jealousy or any measure which went to place so much power in the hands of a Secretary of State. It savoured a great deal too much of arbitrary power, and tended, in his opinion, to place the whole civil power under the controul of a force more objectionable even than the army. The Hon. Gentleman concluded by ex pressing his conviction that, at all events, the City of London ought to have been - included in a general measure of this kind; and repeated his opinion, that the Bill ought to be watched with great consti tutional jealousy, as there was some fear of the same system being extended to Manchester, mingham, and other great towns in the kingdom. Mr. ESTCOUItT defended the Bill. Mr. Secretary PEEL, referring to what had fallen from an Hon. Member on the subject of Man chester and Birmingham,. really could not help smiling when he heard the Hon. 'Gentleman express his fears on that subject ; for the extension of the system to Manchester and those towns was of all others the thing of which he was most desirous. On the motion that the petition be brought up, Mr. BRIG in repeated his objections to the Bill. Mr, Alderman WAITLIMAN begged leave to say one word on the suliject of the complaint that the City of London was not included in the opera tion of the Bill. It ought to be recollected that the City of London possessed a very peculiar juri,die tion,— was a county in it-elf :he thought, there fore? unless some very particular case of negligence or mistnauagement Was made out, that it would be unwise to disturb a system winch produced such good results. Mr. PEEL again expressed his opinion that would be desirable to eXterd the system to the great towns. Manchester, indeed, had at the present moment a stipendiary Magistracy; and Glasgow, if lie was twit misinformed, was placed under the same eont ronl. Mr. BROUGHAg moved for a Return of all the Causes standing for Hearing or Judgment, when the Great Seal W4S put into Commission in 1783; and for an Account of the Number remaining at the time of the Appointment of Lord Chancellor Thur low, together %vial a similar Rettne from May, 1791, to February, 1792, when the Seal was also in Com mission. The Hon, and Learned Gent. having ob seived that he did not anticipate any objection to this motion. On its being read from;the Chair, Mr. M. A. TAY LOR begged to know whether • - • the Right Hon. Client . , (Mr. Peel.)hacl.any objection to postpone, until some other, day:, the discussion on the Suits,of Equity - Bill ? Mr. Secretary PEEL said, that if his Hon. Friend had not put that question, it was his intention to have stated in the course of the evening, that he did not intend to press 4ie further consideration of the Bill during the present Session. On Friday, which was the next regular day for orders, the House did not sit, and he could have therefore had no alternative to postpone it until Monday, that day week. In that week, however, the Members were not in the habit of giving a very regular attendance, unless the business to be transacted was of extra ordinary importance; and as he knew well that con• siderable difference of opinion existed on these questions—a difference which had made itself very perceptible when a question connected with an ad ditional expenditure, on account of the administra tion of justice, had been before the House, during the past week—he thought it would be better not to press the discussion on the subject. .At the very earliest period of the next Session it was the in tention of the Government to bring the Bill again under the consideration of the House. Mr. BROUGHAM expressed his entire satis faction in the course which the Right Hon. Gent. had adopted with respect to the Bill. Mr. M. A. TAYLOR begged the Right Hon. Gentleman to bring forword his propositions at the earliest possible period of the next Session, be cause lie was satisfied the state of the Court of Chancery was ten-fold worse than when he first originated the discussions respecting it. That state amounted, indeed, to a plain denial of justice_ As to the measure contained in the Bill before the House, he must say, that if intended for effect, it would produce no good whatever. While on the subject he might add, that the state of the appeals in the House of Lords was by no means creditable to that jurisdiction. Dr. LUSHINGTON expressed a hope that no thing would be - done without the fullest inquiry. He was satisfied that the measure recommended by the Noble Lord (Lord Lyndhurst) would have very little effect unless as a portion of that general sys tem of reform which must take in a thorough revi sion of the laws connected with bankruptcy. Mr. Secretary PEEL said, one of his objections— the greatest, and that which induced him the must readily to postpone the consideration of this Bill to the next Session —was, that the other measures of which it formed a part were not sufficiently matured to enable the Noble Lord to submit them to the House in a printed form at the present period. The returns were then ordered. SLAVE EVIDENCE. Mr. F. BUXTON having moved for an account of the Increase of the whole Slave Population of the West Indies since the year 1825, distinguishing the males from the females, Mr. BROUGHAM gave notice of his intention, in an early period of the next Session, to bring for ward a measure for the purpose of making the Evi dence of Slaves admissible in all cases, subject only to those objections to which other evidence is always liable. While he gave this notice, he begged at the same time to ask the Right Hon. Gentleman oppo site (Sir G. Murray), whether his Majesty's Go vernment had or had it not in contemplation to originate themselves some measure on the same im• portant subject ? Sir GEORGE MURRAY concurred with the Hon. and Learned Gentleman in the importance of the subject ; and also in his views of the propriety of and safety of making Slave Evidence admissible in the form which he mentioned. He was not, ho wever, prepared on the part of his Majesty's Go. verument, to bring forward any measure for that purpose. Mr. BERNAL wished to know whether it was the intention of his Majesty's Government to pro pose any other measures respecting the administra tion of justice in the Colonies, except that which related to the admishion of slave evidence ? Sir G. MURRAY replied, that a general mea sure had been for some time in the contemplation of his Majesty's Government, fer the improvement of the administration of justice in the Colonies, of which the subject alluded to by the Hon. Gentle man would form a part. Mr. HUSKISSON expressed his gratification at what had fallen from his Right Hon. Friend, and his conviction that the general measure which would be proposed by Government for revision of the Courts of Justice in the Colonies would be of a satisfactory nature. There was one subject on which he wished to say a few words. By the pre sent colonial laws, Roman Catholics were incapable of holding any situations either under the Govern ment Gr in the Legislatures of the Colonies. He hoped, however, that recommendations would be sent out by his Majesty's Government to the dif ferent local authorities of the Colonies, strongly urging them to follow the wise and liberal example of the mother country on the subject; and he trusted, that when Parliament met again, his Right Hon. Friend would be enabled to make a satisfac tory communication to the Douse with respect to the result of those recommendations. Sir J. MACKINTOSH quite agreed in the opi nion, that the measure for the admission of slave evidence in the Courts of Justice in the West In dies, would most conveniently and advantageously form a part of the general plan for the amelioration of the various judicatures of the Colonies. Sir R. WILSON expressed his hope that the Commission of Inquiry into the State of the Judi cature in the Colonies would be renewed. Lord NUGENT also urged the great importance of continuing that Commission for another year. Adverting to a statement made by the Right Hon. Gentleman about three weeks ago, that he hoped to present another Report from the Commission in the course of the present Session, he wished to know whether or not the Right Hon. Gentleman still entertained that expectation ? Sir G. MURRAY was quite aware of the im portance and value of the labours of the Commission to which his Gallant Fr i end and 'the Noble Lord had alluded. At the same time, looking at the heavy expence attendant on such a Commission, he was certainly desirous to terminate the Commis ' sion as soon as the Commissioners could close their labours. _ _ _ Mr. BROUGHAM agreed with all who had spoken on the subject, that it was most desirable that the admissibility of slave evidence in Courts of Justice should form a part of the general plan for reforming the colonial judicature. Yet, thinking that the admission of slave evidence would, of itself, be one of the most important steps that could be taken to improve the condition of the slaves, and to lead to their ultimate, and not very prolonged eman cipation whenever they might become tit to receive such a benefit, he should certainly have supported it, if it had not been so connected. The Motion was then agreed to. Mr. F. BUXTON gave notice, that on the 2d of June, he would move for the production of the Order in Council respecting the admission of the evidence of slaves. Mr. BROUGHAM presented a petition from Joseph Ashley, a chemist, at Edinburgh, praying for the revision of the Patent Laws, Mr. GREEN presented a petition from the im porters of wines in the ports of Lancashire, subject to butlerage o❑ wine; which, after a few words from the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, was ordered to lie on the table. BARONS OF THE EXCHEQUER. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER having moved the order of the day for the House to resolve itself into a Committee of Supply, Mr. HUME adverted to a rumour in Edinburgh, that it was in the contemplation of Government to superannuate one of the Barons of the Exchequer, who was as capable of discharging his judicial functions as any Judge in England or Scotlamj, and theieby to entail on the country an unnecessary ex pence, and witheti to know whether any such pro ceeding was really intended ? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER • replied, that he had not heard any- intimatioa kind. • •:• USURY LAWS. • • The order of the day for the House to resolve - • reiolf self into - a Committee of Supply having been The CHANCELLOR of the . EXCHE.Qtjr" moved, that the House should on Wednesday res oloe:, itself into the said Committee. • Mr. P. THOMSON was exceedingly arixiotts'W relieve at least u portion of the community frotn ate operation of laws which pressed upon them nabs:,,.heavily, and this was a disposition in which he be' off lieved the great majority of the House concurred... However, it was too late to do any thing in tt e. ' present Session ; and all he was now anxious was to hear from the Right Hon. Gentleman, ties at the earliest possible period of the next Session.ii':; would either introduce some measure himself, or b e '' prepared to assent to the introduction of sets e " measure by another. After a few words from the CHANCELLOR O. f E m x r. c H H E E Q A U T E H R, colriur: the T tso motion was agreed gree l ti n t V o l . l4tit . 1111 . SUGAR DUTIES' BILL. On the motion of the CHANCELLOR. of EXCHEQUER, the House resolved itself Committee on the Sugar Duties' Bill. • - The House having accordingly resolved itself int" • att to C eisp o ißrr m o.ipg m coh i s. t te t o e Ha e ßo , reduction d N uG T c et n r o o tn : e ot , yne i n thr p ee t gr ir d s eu t t i t a i . t n eo c s to be labouring under severe IndispOes te, appeacp; i n: i together with the position in which he stood,- quently rendered him nearly inaudible. As welt' , we could collect what fell from him he begsaa ' adverting to the manner in which the subject 7 . „ . 1 been treated in the House during the last Se se ti , and by maintaining that a general impression at t' time existed that some reduction in the dull sugar would be made in the present Session. 17i: variety of circumstances rendered it highly imports's' that such should be the case; although into the ces, sideration of many of those circumstances hevrque,. not then enter, as in his opinion they might be PO: advantageously reserved for a future opportusLAKl.:- The interests of both the East and the West IA were HO doubt deeply involved in the decisiotio this question. But the simple grounds on which he : rested his proposition to reduce the duty, was cis, interest of the great body of the people of tide try. With respect to them, the question must 10 ; r4 ; garded in a twofold point of view ; first,with to its effects on the consumption of sugar; and seceav,ke,'' with reference to its effects on the revenue; :`",-)i existing duty of course greatly enhanced the Price. of, sugar to the consumer, and narrowed the ritgli e p o the consumption ; both of which were great On Wrest India sugar, the price of which' thirty shillings the cwt., the duty was sesee'7 o - twenty shillings. In the attempts to preser". _ hat er 13 monopoly of sugar to the planters, and to 111:"..ed' between the East and the West Indies, it to be forgotten that there was a third party interested in the question—namely, the puttnP--.01; The natural consequence, however, of the eice s tol efforts to preserve the monopoly in questioot - 1 11: been to enable the foreign dealer to interpose no, advantage to himself ; and from that morneet,r 4 t monopoly ceased, and the price of the foreign 7;4 ket governed the price of the colonial produce, deviation from sound principles always led te other. The imposition' of large duties le d t ri v" something like a bounty. He would abstain ii;Oto entering into unnecessary details o n - this intl .; 10 subject ; but he was not going ,too far . w heiv o stated that the difference in the price of 'sugarin 4 Colonies and in the home Market was the egeir,let some proceeding tantamount to bountyi' Th Was to enhance the evil which he • wairdesiroiliti... remove. It was, he conceived, perfectlielel l Or o - 0 a reduction of price must increase the Consualtio of the article; although •some persons - P"T io ti terous enough to hold the lioctrineithaF,:eheuP of price did not increase the amount of cothsun'P" The slow progress - of the consumption of: geg al ;l o this country was a proof of theirdurious Ofect or s t o , duty. 111 1802, the quantity of sugar imptiole tt L ;ro .. 2,473,000 cwt. In 1823, the quantity of Sug s '''',,t ported was 3,234,000 cwt. Looking,: however, the great increase of population in the United .l ‘ l 2, dom during the period to which he had alluded an increase from fifteen to twenty-foer 01i107,,bt the difference in the importation of sufter4ner to have been much greater. And much t it no doubt would have' been; ha d. Reiss been for the duty. What had been' the ca se , respect to coffee? In 1825, the duty had be ol :x.d. - : duced on coffee. In 1824, the consumption ot 05; ( 1 was 8,455,0001b5.; in 1827, the 'consump ti ° ° ,.... r e increased to 17,000,0001b5.2 The effect -of t'jti duction of duty on a great number of ar ticles' been to increase the consumption of these artiel e t o t so great a degree, that the revenue had not 0 1;00 been injured, but, on the contrary, benefittedi had been particularly the case in the instance 01; reduction of the duties on foreign wine. tar creased consumption of French wines in' P a ':4l o , had greatly benefitted the revenue, a nd-te,'" .ot hei show the policy of a reduction of duties 'u gi n t j ," articles. In the year 1820, the arnoullt ° , f " U ' i tittf ceived on French wines imported into tiPsivve°-t was 65,0001.; in 1824 the duty was 64, 4) wv - ' o . tl 1825 there was no material alteration in the tar r iei but in the year 1826 (which was after the had been lowered) the amount was 119,0001.;•1117.00 1827 the duty received was also 119,000 h. sh e reduction of the duty on Portuguese wines he led to an increased consumption. In 1823 the on Portuguese wines amounted to 433, 00( W fr' 1824 about 490,0004; in 1826 (after t hen aa4 tions), the amount ofrevenue received was 62 7 tv: int io?i and in 1827, 728,0001. This increase -of revrwer it was clear then, had resulted from a reduct'°oo, co duty, which had produced an increased osaniPol-01 This result had not only followed in the instaecbrea the French and Portuguese wines, but had ais°: b igil the 'case in ail other sorts of wine. The re • ha % ol a great increase in the quantity of Rhenisil, A ,"tial imported, as well as in Spanish wineu, i rc i ite ( year 1823, the duty paid on all wines of tb a . e; . 4 4 : 07 ; class imported amounted to 216,0001.; in l'"', o -.0 1 230,0001.; in 1825 (the year of the -redact:lV the duties), to 345,0001.; in 1826, to 3 43 ; in der; arid in 1827, to 410,000/. He could'h° 7 - 00 1 " stand, therefore, en what grounds any to ie ; o 4 -gi d assert that the reduction of the duties -o)...dit •IF would not also tend to an increased ccinsumeA.the that article. Tea and wine were luxuries Wh i ef great body of the people could not enjoy,. __l ‘ 47 l were far above their means of purchase; to a very great extent might almost be cov - eo el as one of the necessaries of life to the EngliettetO r (Hear.) —The consumption of sugar by W 14 0 4 ,11 annually, might, on the average, be calcti, bow about 221bs. But in Ireland, where the gre s ","al le e ; of the people did not consider these artickl i , lo ,•l 7 lo cessaries, the consumption was not above ' 7 ' 40 1 ' annum for each person. The produceof t, ; , be t batji on sugar at various times tended to show .401 was an article the demand for which wa tro affected by the variation of prices. He had that in 1827 (although the previous year'N!4e r o f very good year) the consumption we? Qti'ff: ii ie j e but in the Tear 1828 (although the fireo, J d eri was not very productive) there had beetre" .i iiril consumption. He would refer the House for . 00 1 0 of the statement he had just made to a letle r in the report of the Finance ' ir writer of it, Mr. Irving, was a gentleman ' uses, peculiarly peculiarly well versed in all subjects C ° l .ol o ' e l with the West Indies and the sugar tcres:‘, This letter tended to show that the - fel l et consumption of sugar greatly depended 00 . a g o . I' o l tion of prices. Prices advanced 15 'or d ati ° lo cent. a short time ago, and it then bec ame itb 'od that the purchasers decreased considerably v : O 3, 'de increased 'nice of this article. When this cea`bali. prices fell again, there was an increased 10 0.'„oc This often appeared to occur, and might s no lii;bio taken as a general rule. He (Mr. Grant),-e;4o,'„eti see what answer could be made in opposi t ' ° .,ior ya case. He had heard several persons wh om that the demand for luxuries-would no