The Sun. — London, England, 1824-04-09 00:00:00

Wesehad *tot been Attended. to, and under such circumstances 11 - t thought he was justified in looking with some degree of 'elernbt as to-the.benefit which the labours of the Commissions 1 - 1:;w about to commence would bestow. lie wished far that ularse to be taken which would tend to anniltil4:e the distinc tions which at present unhappily prevailed, ant as the Noble Lard opposite had lately exerted himself to ensure harmony woong Irishmen after death, he wished to see as much done to promote harmony anion;; Irishmen while they were yet alive. Ministers ought to be especially careful that no reli.jous differ c;:,::es'should be encouraged in the school now esttblishing, et to he established under their auspices. If the Catholic _ . hierarchy objected to the entire- Seiiptures being put into the hands of the scholars, he thought it would be advisable vo Allow selections frorn - the Scriptures to be nialle which they could approve. It had been often said that the Catholic Clergy Ireland were)in willing to allow these ••ender their guidance -so receive the benefits of education. Mr felt called upon; as in this he could-speak from his own experience, to say such was Lot the feet ; but if it were, he contended, it would he well to -Jut their principles to the ti-st, by taking the course which he had proposed. He was confident that there existed an ardent wish to procure information through•every gap--through every -slink from which it could•be-obtained; .acid if, when it were made clear that in giving education no attempt was to be made • -so subvert iheir religion, the Clergy should still oppose it by Luting this be seen a great blow would be struck at the autho rity of that Church. He, however,-did nut believe, for the ref. •um which-he had already given, that thy' would afford an op. portunity for Such a blow being aimed at diem. Under all the c•rctitustances, he thought the•inquiry called for by his Noble Iriend highly desirable, and he therefore heartily concurred in - the motion. Lord LIMERICK admitted Ireland to have been cruelly . oppressed from the time of henry the Seinnd to that of Creorge •. tle Third, , Since the accession of the last-named Monarch, a series of benefits had been conf erre d on Ireland, andthough e_ ev • ils might -remain to be remedied, ha saw no occasion .for the general inquiry now called for. II e.maintained the Noble Earl • (the Eritl of Liverpool) had been misinformed with sespect to the rents in Ireland, as he believed them m be higher in proportion . Celan in Englund. The introduction of Poor Rates into Ire . land, which the same Noble Earl seemed to think would be a benefit, would, in his opinion, amount toe confiscation of pro perty in -Ireland, as froM the moment when the poor there found they could be' maintained in idlenciis, as many were here„no labour would be done. The middle men he delieribed to be nearly exterminated by the changes consequent on t-e close of • the war, and landlords absent or present were careful that the :middlemen should not grind their tenants to powder, that they xalght make large profits for themselves. • ,The Marquis of DONVIIIRE set . forth the importance of adoptin g measures t o re li eve an d conciliate the people . of Ireland, and h o p e d means wou ld b e f oun d o f employme the superfluous capital of England there in a manner that would prove beneficial to both countries. • Lord CARBERRY defended the measures taken for more e , generally diffusing the blessings of education among the poor • ‘ef Ireland, and maintained th a t ever y care was taken not to • alarm their religious prejudices. 31ost of the schoolmasters were Roman .o,tholics. The Scriptures were used without note.or . conuent, and he hoped Parliament would never sanc tion 'any plan for the education of the poor under which the scriptures were to be excluded. The.• - Earl of fIODEN considered it to be the misfortune of legend to be the tool of party and the dupe of designing it:- - inagognes, who wished to set them against English juriapru , 2 :4ence arid English connection. Till that superstition were era diteae which new enslaved her, no permanent good could be • effected.•:_ileirore testimony to the general anxiety for education .-which prevailed in Ireland. He praised in the weraieot terms • that noble institution, so he must take the liberty to call it, the • Sunday School Society in Ireland. Thar Society had now csra -relished 1640 schools, in which there ware 12,578 gratuitous teachers, who had weekly to perform the pleasing taek of teaching 157,184 children.. But it was not the Sunday S.-hool (. - xiety alone which thus exerted itself in the cause of edeca , llon. The London Hibernian Soriety instructed 90,000 chil edren daily, of whom 65,000 were Roman Catholics; the hit dare-street Society educated 70,000 children, of whom 45,000 • were Roman Catholics; the Capel-street Society educated . 19,216, of whom 9,246 were Roman Catholics. The Ana . baptist's Society educated 9,000 children, of whom 7,500 were Roman Catholics. The Irish Society educated 3,900 children, of whom 3,001) were Roman Catholics. The sum total was, these schools educated 349,30 G Irish children, of which number - 141;748 were Roman Catholics. The Marquis of Lalkisoowg explained. Lord CLIFDEN supported the motion, and contended that Ireland could never be pacified till the 'Protestants and the eatholics'were placed on a perfect footing of equality. . The. Earl of CARNARV ON described the evils under which „Iteiand : groaried, and which were peculiar to herself, and the - Narious..measures.proposed for their remedy. The changes at present, countenanced by Ministers, he did not think ealculat‘d to el:l:arm:A, but he thought the Government would find it. 7a-if compelled to go further. He thought no beneficial chenge eculd he looked for while Ireland retained a Hierarchy of the same persuasion as a small portion of the people, which was re .,:wted if not execratittl by a great majority. Under such cir -camstane::s he thought it must be felt that in that country a Church establishment was useless. The evils which affected ';eland, grew out of the violation of the treaty of Limerick. Ile adverted to the persecutions which Ireland had sustained t..^:rough centuries,and strongly set forth the importance of seiz ;Lig the present moment to conciliate her, that in the day of ' danger she might b e f oun d t h e s i ncere Friend of England. 7 1 he Earl of -DARN I:EY replied. . After which the House divided, when the numbers were as Contents - . _ Not Contents - - _ . - . Majority agatnit tne INlotiora Adjourned at TWELVE o'CLacx. ' - 457 - --40 HOUSE OF COMMON S% Mr. C. WILSON brought in a bill for amending the Pau. pez Laws relative to litmatics.—Read a first time, SE(IRO SLAVERY. Air. SEYMOUR presented a petition; praying for the AboLi tiun of Negro Slaccry. similar petitions were presented by Lord STANLEY, from Worington, in th - : County of Lancaster; by Mr. Kutwax, from the inhabitants of Stanmer, in the County of Cumberland ; and by Sir T. BARING from Chippenwiehec, in Devonshire.-- The petitions were ordt-red to lie on the table and be printed. COM 131 NA TION LA WS Wr.. P. MOORE presented petitions from II ythe and other places, praying fora repeal of the Combination Laws, petitions were presented hY Mr. T. ELLIS, from the wor:;irg bricklayers of the city anublin ; and by 31r. /I frsira the incorperated trades of the town of Aberdeen ; another --fmril the %iieaverN of Manchester; and anoater from the flax dressers of the town of Aberdeen. Referred to the Artisans' Committee. • COUNTY COURTS BILL. • Mr. LA Al the merchant of Darlington, in favour of the County Courts Bill.—Laid on the table. - . General GASCOYNE presented a petition from Liverpool, against the County Courts hill. Lord A LTI-1011 P said, that the petition was signed princi pally by persons connected with the law. The petition was laid on the table. On the motion of Lord .ALTHORP, the House resolved itseirinto a Committee on the County- Courts bill. The bill was read, the. House resu;ned, and the report was ordered to be taken into consideration on Iklwlday next. ST. CATHERINE'S DOCKS. Mr. PENISON presented a petition fiom the Trustees of tile Smithfield Iloads against the building of the St. Catherine's mocks.--Laid on the SHEPHERDS' DOGS. Mr. COURTENAY presented a petition from g.ruiers and oth ,, rs in the county of Dumfries, praying for a repeal of the tax on shepherds' dogs.—laid on the table. TM.; PRESS IN INDIA. Mr. LAMBTON gave notice, that on Tue3day,the 25th of May, he should bring forward his motion relative to the pnblic press in India NEW CH URCUES, Mr.' G. BENNET-presented a petition from the inhabitants of Newtown and liailesworth, against. the building of new churches. Mr. PHILLIPS presented similar petitions from the town of Reddish and another place in the county of Lancaster.—Laid on the table. LONG WOOL. Mr. LEGH KECK presented a petition from the Carpet me.nufacturers of Market Harborotigh, against the exportation of Long Wool —Laid on the table. r. PO YNTZ presented a petition from Occupiers of Land in Chichester, against the repeal of the duties on foreign wool. The petitioners stated that agriculture was by no means in a I:Curt-thing 'condition ; and that if the tax was continued on foreign wool, and a relief from some of the assessed taxes, it would add greatly to the comforts of the country, and be Ines; • gratefully received.—Laid on the table. ASSESSED TAXES. PYAI presented a. petition from Leighton-Buzzard, praying for a repeal of the W inflow Tax.—Laid on the table. • MANCHESTER. GAS lifLl2. On the motion of. Mr. CIJIMIS, the standing order was feat !, directing that- all petitions should be signed by the neti, tioncrs, and that the contrary was a breach of privilege. tie then, in pursuanee of the notice he had given, moved f or the I%lrod ction (0 the minutes of evident. taken before the Man., chester Gas Committee, Which were taken befcra the Committee appointed by that House. Lord STANLEY said he was unable to gather from the Hon. Member what was the ulterior object of his motion. Ile, as Chairman of the CoMinittee, could have no objection, to the production of the evidence; but he thought that some - ground ought to be laid in the first instance to Justify any further in traision of this topic upon the attention of the House. Mr. BOOTLE 7 WILBRA HAM admitted the necessity of discontinuing the improper insertion of signatures to a petition, although in populous manufacturing districts it was unavoid able. Still it ditlnot follow, from the irregularity complained of, that such a petition was at variance with the opinion enter tained by those whose names were so subscribed. His opinion was, that some better mode of remedying the evil complained of might be devised than the present. Mr. UR ENFELL complained of the application of the term " . job" to the St. Catherine's Dock, a measure which was soon to be brought under the re-consideration of the House. Mr. HOWIE SUMNER declared that he should vote for the production of these ihinn tea. Mr. W. Pm., Mr. PEL14.4.51, and 11r. PUMPS declared that they should vote against their production. Thequestion was then put upon Mr.CußTEn's motion,which was negatived without a diviston. - IRISH PETTY SESSIONS' COURTS. Mr. SPRING RICE observed, that in Ireland Petty Sessions had been recently introduced, to the great service of the country, and the credit of the Magistrates. The bill he was about to present was for the purijase of giving greater facility to their endeavours. His object was to ascertain - what were the fees, and for the better arrangement of them. He also wished that a court-housu should be procured for the purpose, which wrtthl powerfully aB•4iSt their objects; and also that a register of their pro eedings should be r gnlsrly k. pt. He concluded by asking leave to bring in a Bill for regulating the bolding of Petty S t s. sions, and the recovery of small debts. After a few words from Mr. Et'. is, leave was granted. Mr. S. RICE moved for the a ppointment of a Special Com mittee on the local Taxation of 1)0AM, and to report their ob setvations thereon- to the House. The several petitions on the subject of Local Taxation of Dublin were referred to ibis Committee, which was then.ap- Pointed, tansis.ing of nearly-the same Members as served the fanner Committee on the same subject. WEST INDIES. Mr. HOME moved for a return of the number of slaves in our West India Colonies ; distinguishing' tiros,' who were over from those under .1).O years of age; and also those slaves who, by escheat or otherwise, had been sold. Mr. HUME made a similar motion relative to the Island of Bcrbice. The object of this latter motion was, that if it should appear that the slaves of this island at present were a burden to the public, they should have their freedom rather than con tinue so any longer, provided that freedom was not incon sistent with the peace and safety of the other inhabitants of the island. The .ATTORNE V . -GENERAL asked permiwirM. to bring in a Bill to amend the Act relative to the British` useum.— Leave granted. GOLILTICTRN asked for leave to bring in 'a Bill for draining and'improving the bogs of Ireland. He also obtained leave to amend a Bill of hat Session, relative to the holding of Sessions' Courts in Ireland. The Hon. Member also obtained permission to bring in two other Bills; one to amend the Civil Bill Act, the other for certain regulations and reduction, in the Police establishments .of Ireland. USURY LAWS. Mr. Serjeant Order of the Day for the House going into a Committee on the Usury Laws Bill. .'dr. 13. CO( FER opposed the motion. lie had paid every attention to all heloud heard and read on the subject, but we; not satisfied that the repeal of the Laws would be beoeticial.— Laws of this nature had been adopted, and were continued by • tnost civilized countries. The Hon. Member here referred, in support of his argument, to the practice of the ancient Romans, and other nations, and to the author of Cato, in condemnation of Usury. lie should not enter into a long argument of reason ing to peeve the efficacy of these laws. He relied principally upon the authority they had acquired by established custom. He moved, as an amendment, That the Bill be committed that day six months. Mr. D .1 VE N FORT seconded the amendment. He consi dered that the repeal of the laws would be most destructive to the landed interest. Ile denied too that the repeal would lower the rate of interest in the Market. %Ir. 1. FOSTER said it by no means followed, that because these laws were injudiciously made it would be judicious stud. denlyto repeal them. H: thought money ought to be free like any other commodiTy, but the sudden repeal of these laws, even though they were injudicious in themselves, might considerable mischief to particular interests. He a p r r,hended this would be the case in Ireland to a very alarming extent. Capital Ca e pit p a r l es d e i n d t n i o n t cu l.x m is b t ra t n b e e e r s o there tonanlayncdonWsoiudletrlabtlhee amount ; reftre be very much affected. Mortgage money would • be called in that it might be laid out in speculation, and fresh borrowing would lead to heavier terms of interest, and the unpleasant discoveries of many defects in titles. The Court of Chancery in Ireland had set aside many contracts affecting land because they were tainted with usurious considerations. There were still many such contracts in existence which might yet he called in question, and theretbre wished to know how such cases were to be dealt with. If the Bill was not to be retrospective, it would of course be necessary to declare that all past usurious transactions should be punishable; but all future transactions of that nature were to be carried on with impunity. lle should, on the whole, oppose the Bill, not because he approved of the Usury Laws on principle, but because lie thoaglit their present sudden repeal was not a Iristable. Mr. ROBERTSON opposed the Bill, contending that the evidence taken before the Committee, on whose report the Bill was founded, was of a superficial nature. He denied that money ought to be considered as a saleable commodity. It' could not be bought and sold like a bale of goods, though ft was the standard by which goods were bought. The Ho nourable Member here, at some length, referred to the ancient laws against usury (beginning with the reign of H e nry the Eighth), in order to chew that they were made in consequence of the actual oppression exercised by usurers, and therefore to disprove the argument that their reveal would have no effect upon the rate of interest to the benefit of usurers. These, he contended, were facts drawn from historical experience ; and were not therefore to be lightly considered. He referred also to the practice of ancient countries, and' that at present ob served in China, in all of which the regulation of interest had been considered a proper object of legislative interference.— ' neturning to the Bill before the House, he observed that it proceeded on the Report of a Committee ; and it was not a little remarkable that, although die ancient laws against usury stated die exactions - which were practised by lawyers -in nut - ley transactions, and decreed punishment upon them in certain cases ; yet the House had entrusted this impor tant subject almost entirely to lawyers, who were the chief Members of the Committee.—(floor, hear ! and a laugh from Mr. Sergeant Onslow.)—He warned the landed interest against the consequences which would inevitably follow this till:— They would be exposed to a knot of Usurers of the game kind as those against whom our ameesters had made these protect ing and regulating laws. The arguments against the Bill were supported by experience, but those in favour of it were founded only on theory. The history of all Countries shelved a proper interference on the rate of interest. He should cer tainly oppose the Bill. Sir H. PARNELL supported the Bill. The opposers of it he thought had misunderstood the nature of the interest of money. He had himself, as well as the Hon. Member oppo site, read the evidence before the Committee ; and he came to the conclusion that the interest of money always would be re gulated by the rate of profit. The present laws were worse than useless ; and he thought that, instead of admiring them tor their antiquity, the House ought to consider whether these laws had been founded on right or wrong principles. He thought that the leaving money, like all other commodities, to its own course, would be the best mode of proceNling. He did not think that this Bill would produce any mischief to Ireland in any way whatever, as was feared by his lion. Friend (Mr. L. Foster.) So far from being mischievous, he thought it would be beneficial, by drawing capital to that quarter ; and he had no doubt that the rate of profit there would hear a high rate • of interest, in order to attract capital. He should cordially support the bill. Mr. CURWEN opposed the bill, which he though would fill the country with money.jobbers. He did not approve of the principle of the usury laws, but his disapprobation et' them did not necessarily - call for an approbation of this bill. - - Mr. SYKES said lie was glad to find that no one Member of that House, but the Hon. Member for Grarnpound (Mr. hertson) had defended the principle of these laws. For his own part, - he prefered taking the opinion of the late Mr. Ri cardo to that of the lion. Member. Hon. Members talked of restraining lenders, but they said nothing at all about dealers. Dealers were to be allowed to demand and receive what they pleased ; but the. man who might lend them money to enable them to deal, was to be tied down to five per cent. Ile (Mr. Sykes) was satisfied that these laws were -impolitic - and unjust; and particularly unjust to the borrower. They led to contrivances and shifts (annuities among the rest) which brought many borrowers to actual ruin. He had himself seen many instances of the ruin of country gentlemen by this system of borrowing; and he roust be permitted to say, that he really thought the country gentlemen who were adverse to the Bill did not see their own interest They might make laws as many and as strong as they pleased, and might impose as many penalties as they - pleased, but they newer could carry such laws into the effect they desired ; they only effect t o heypro duced was the distress of the borrower. In short, n legisla tion was able to restrain the interest of money. Arid as for the assertion of the Hon. Member for Crampound that money could not he bought, he (Mr. S.) would tell that Hon. Member that money was_bought every day, in every dealing for commodity. The Honourable Member had referred to ancient times ; had travelled, in his instances, from one part of the world to the ct:ier, and had even taken them to the celestial empire. But instead of these • learned references, it might have been as well if the Honourable Alember had endeavoured to draw souse assistance from the present times, from our neighbour ing country, Holland, for instance, a trading country, in which there were no effectual Usury Laws. But if Him. Members would contend for legal right of regulating inte rest, at what rate, he begged to ask, would they fix it, or what means would they devise for fixing it ? He had a right to ask this question, even of the Hon. Member for Gram pound ' • because, although the Honourable Member had con tended for the right to contest the rate of interest, he had not even attempted to shew that five per cent. was the exact standard to be fixedupon. On this part of the subject, and this alone, he would imitate the example of the Honoura- Me .3lember for Grampou T l, and re f er to anc i ent t i mes.— In the reign o f Eli za beth, when one of the present Acts was under discus:ion, there was a Mr. Wilson (lie understood he too, was a Member for (Irampounci,) though be chewed more consistency than his successor. This Mr. Wilson, when the rate of interest was under discussion, said he would not sanc tion any meddling at all with the rate of interest. He thought the taking of any interest at all was a damnable heresy, and ought to be punished. NOW, however - erroneous might be the opinions of the Lion. Member for Grampound, they were at Last more consistent than those of the present Hon. Member; for he clainied to right to interfere with the rate of interest, but gave no means for fixing it, W i t h . any priligllCC to reason, At any given sum. Some of the arguments against the Bill con sisted in appe a ls t o the fears of country Gentlemen of the ex tortion of I.Tsurers. But if these arguments were well founded, how did it happen that these moneylenders did not exact now what they could by law Why did they not insist upon Fire percent. ? The law allifweil of interest to this extent : it rvas not or i ous that money could be o b ta i ned at three an d f our per cent.; and y e t Hon. Members were sinned that this Bill wOuld.set the usurers loose•upon them. Th e a nswer to this was obvious : it was f oun ded upon coininon se nse. The repeal of the laws would enc ourag e competition among a ll capitalists, and the borrower would re a p the advantag e o f this c ompetition. Ile could not here ref ra in from noticin g t h e a buse which had, on the discussions of this measure been th ro wn out against monied ' people, as if they were any worse than any other capitalists. It was an abuse which did not deserve any great degree of at tention, though it was highly unbecoming. It was vulgar and unmeaning, and was put forth only by those who were ignorant of the subject. la conclusion lie repeated his conviction that money, left to itself, would be regulated like every other COTII. modity, and that the repeal of the present restraining laws would he beneficial to commerce. For these reasonshe should support the Bill. Mr. LOCKHART opposed the Bill, contending that its sup-. porters were hound to shew, by incontrovertible evidence, that the repeal of the present laws would be beneficial, as well as that they , had been originally founded on bad policy. Ile dis- approved of the manner in which the argument of the Hon. Member for Urampound had been treated. That Hon. Member had properly referred to experience and history as safe guides ; and this, his reference, had been ridiculed as if it were merely pedantic. All history proved that where money became con centrated in the hands of a few, an evil use had been made of :•This e report itself did not impute inconvenience to the laws for the restraint of usury from the time of Henry the Eighth up to almost the period of the lion. Member's making his motion. The report said inconvenience had been felt of late years. But if it were so, that was not to be a rule for le gislation; for it was to be remembered that this inconvenience w a s the result of the direct necessity for a certain number of years. During those years a greater number of loans were made, and more money was borrowed than could ever be ex tracted from the bowels of the earth, or brought up from the bottom of the ocean • and men were •prohibited purchasing guineas, whilst the dovernment were the first to go into the ' market. Ile must allude also to the currency measure of 1018, which, although it had done a great deal of good, had yet been obliged first to trample upon the prostrate fortunes of a great part of the landowners of the country. Under these circum stances, consideiing that this was a measure calculated to do great injury to the landed interest, he must give it his most stre nuous opposition. Mr. PHILLIPS supported the measure. All the evidence ' they had had upon the subject proved that the landed interest would be the greatest gainers by the repeal of the Usury haws, observed,tiflicu of fty justice, heard i notn which, in fact, loaded with increased interest all loans what soever. Mr. sarrwoora spoke in favour of the r e p ea l , b ut in so tone o h ti s v w oi a c s e a tl q ta u t es I t ic ion w , a l s ie mwithi ltoiwrilla tone of voice that he was with difficulty heard in the uaflery. policy, and all considerations of justice decided in favour of thu repeal of the Usury Laws. Hon. Meinbers seemed to think that the spirit of revolution was kept down in this coun try by the landed men in virtue of these laws. Now, what ever landed men gained by these laws, it was clear that the monied men lost, and ay so much the laws were laws of injus tice. Upon no ground of justice could legislation interfere between two individuals, one being the lmder, and the other the borrower ;—between two parties, in short, for the benefit or the one to the cost of the other, who was not better entitled to the protection of the laws. Another ground upon which the Usury Laws were defended was, that Government were enabled by them to obtain easier terms in the money market than otherwise they could ; but he was at a loss to know upon what principle it could be contended that Government were entitled to assume that preference in the money market. Was it just or fair, that in order to the Crown borrowing at a low rate of interest,, the interest of every other man in the kingdom should he reduced ? But, let the question be taken on the ground of policy, and it would be folind that these laws wei'e evaded ; and why were they evaded ? Because it was necessary to the existence of commerce that they should be evaded. The meaning of the Usury Laws was, that no man should grant a loan of money at a greater rate of interest than per cent. But the merchant would never risk his money in any transaction uless he got more than 5 per cent. He had bet , ter withdraw his money from business than run any hazard fer so small a stake. Such indeed was the nature of these laws, that great mercantile transactions were daily carried on by houses of business of the first character which were not known to be • usurious ; nor could any lawye r tell whether they came within ' the penalties of the laws o r not. It was obvious therefore that the commerce of the country could' not be tarried on without an open invasion and defiance of these laws. Every species of legal trick and quibble was resorted to for the I purpose of escaping their operation. The laws were so atro cious, that they could not be executed. When it was in tended to give a needy man protection against the wealthy, that should be given him which it would be possible to put in operation. Whereas, such was the nature of these laws that the man who availed himself of them against his lender would make himself infamous. No Jury would convict on them, for they would rather violate the most sacred oath than commit the greater crime of enforcing the laws placed at their mercy, anti strip their neighbour of his property. The man ners of the people, therefore, arrested the vice of the laws, which were tolerated only because they were contemned. They were told that these laws were framed by the wisdom of their accestors. Their ancestors framed laws according to the cir cuinstances which existed to require them. They were passed by landed men who thought they were benefiting themselves by them, and ensuring . a reduced rate of interest. No doubt they would have taken all the money out of the pockets of the .pews had they been able. He, •therefore, called upon the House to imitate the wisdom of their ancestors in this respect, by making laws conformable to the circumstances of the times. Mr. JOHN SMITH spoke in favour of the repeal. lie said it was a great misaake to ,suppose that the merchants of the. City were the only friends of this measure. He had not spoken to one person who was not favourable to it. Mr. Alderman HEYGAT P; contended that the repeal of the Usury Laws would be totally inconsistent with the present state of society. So long as there were such things as entails, mortgages, and marriage settlements, a restraint upon usury was absolutely necessary. It was admitted that without the Usury Laws the National Debt would have been twelve or 1,400,000,000/. Now he should like to know how the country would like to pay taxes to a greater proportionate extent.—The principal effect of the speech of the Honourable Member for Gallington (Mr. Atwood) was derived from the picture he drew of the penalties of these laws. But this ought to take no effect upon the House, for if no One else would do so, he (Mr. Alder man Heygate) would introduce a Bill to moderate the rigour of those penalties.' ' Mr. T. 11'11480'N thought the House ought not to make this or any other alteration in the laws in behalf of the landed interest, unless the landed interest called upon it to do so. He confessed he heard nothing since he last expressed his opinion to alter it. In time of war it would be absolutely necessary to have the operation of these laws to keep down the rate of inte. rest. He should certainly vote for tire amendment. Mr. JOHN MARTIN slid that the very admission of the Hon. Alderman (Mr. Alderman Heygate), that the penalties of these laws ought to be modified, was an argument in favour of their going into a Committee. Sir. J. WikOTTESLEY observed upon the 'consequences to those who were in the hands of money lenders, if this mea sure were not made retrospective. Their rate of interest would be immediately raised, as that there would be no protection in cases of improvident bargains. Mr. Sergeant ONSI) NV said that the Bill was for the repeal of the I aws generally. Ile did not think it necessary for him to trouble the House with any observations, as every argument used against the Bill had been alr.•ady satisfactorily refuted. Mr. CA LCILI F'f denied that the arguments against the re peal of those laws which touched upon the landed. int.n.est, had been successively answered. The observations of the Hon. Member for Callington, were very ingenious, and if his repre sentation respecting their efiect upon commerce were true, he would admit that the laws, so far as they affected commerce, ought to be repealed. It had not been shown that the landed interest would not suffer by the proposed repeal, and that it would not have the effect of unfix:ng tie minds of all persons engaged in money contracts. This had ot been refuted, notwi di stending the assertions of the Hon. and. Learned Gent. oppo site. It had been asserted that there were no Usury Laws in France and Holland, but this he denied. In France it had been tried to do without them, and the most mischievous effects had resulted. If he thought these laws, as was contended, were unjust, he should be the first to vote for their repeal; but he really did view them as a wholesome restraint upon the passion of avarice, which was proved by history, and experience to have been requisite in every age and country.--The House then d; vided— For the Amendment 58 Against it - 74 . Majority for going into the Committee —l6 Upon our return to the Gallery, we found the House in Com mittee ; and, Mr. Serjeant ONSLOW moving that the bank in the clause (the only one we believe in the Bill) be filled up by the date of January, 1825, which would bring the Bill into operation at that period. Mr. CA LCRAFT contended for a longer period prior to the Bill coming into operation than January 1825. This would be coming upon the country with a measure which should overset all existing money contracts before they were at all aware of it. Even the silk trade was more leniently treated, and if the Hon. and Learned Gentleman did not propose a shorter time, he should propose that it be on the very same day. Mr. Sergeant ONSLOW said it was not material to him what day should be fixed for this Bill coming into opera; ion.— It might be the Ist of January 1826, if the House wished. Mr. ROBKRTSON assured the House that the Code Napo leon, which was in favour in France, restricted the interest of money to five per cent. Mr. LOCKH ART wished to know whether there was any penalty imposed by this Bill on the pawnbroker, should he ex ceed the rate of interest which he was now entitled to take ? Mr. Serjeant ONSLOW said, that this Bill affected the Acts relating to Usury only, and had nothing to do with the Pawnbrokers' Act. Mr. Alderman lIEVGATE renewed his opposition to the Bill. Mr. L. FOSTEB anticipated the greatest evils from this measure, should war ever take place. Mr. HUME assured the Hon. Member, that when the last war broke out, the landed interest would have been able to borrow money at 7 or 8 per cent., but for the laws which ob liged them to pay much higher. Mr. DAVENPORT said, if the Bill passed, the landed in terest would be sacrificed. He expressed a hope, if it was to pass, that Ministers would repeal the Duty on Mortgages, which he had no doubt would be shuffled about the country like cards. Mr. PHILLIPS thought it would be justice to say the bor rower should not pay less than five per cent. on mortgage. Sir J. WI(OTTESLEY wished the country might have time to consider the Bill. It should not come into operation for at least 12 months, in order that they might retrace their steps in case it became necessary. The Hon. Member con cluded by moving to till up the blank with the 13th of January 1823, instead of 1025. The House then divided.—Whilst strangers were excluded, we understand the division took place on the question fur leaving the Chair and reporting progress. The numbers were=- Ayes - . - - .57 Noes - - - We were then in A fo i r a rn jo e r d ity that Sir J. . WRO: fi t TTE -4 SL EY with. drew his Amendment, and the House divided on the original question : For the question - - GO Against it - - - 59 Majority - - —1 The cruse, with the blank filled up by Mr. Sergeant Om- SLOW, was accordingly agreed to. Another division took place on the question for reporting progress :.-:- . _ Ayes - - - - 6.5 Noes - - - - 61 I'llsjority - —.4 The next division was on leaving the Chair Ayes - - - 72 Noes - - - - 59 - - —l3 The Chairman consequently left left the Chair. • The House having resumed, an appeal was made by Mr. H. SUMNER to the Speaker, on some irrgularity stated to have occurred on the Chairman of the Conirriutec leaving the Chair. The SPEAKER decided that the ChairrUan had been regu lar, and the question was rut, that leave be given to sit in the Committee again on Tuesday next. 11Ir. LITTLETON then moved to insert, instead of Tues day next, this day six months. The House accordingly divided. For the Amendment - 67 Against it - - 63 Majority - The Bill was accordingly lost for the Session. The House went into a Committee on the Sugar Bounties Bill. After some conversation the Resolutions were agreed to, and the Report ordered to be received to-morrow. RUM DUTIES. , In Committee on the Rum Act, the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER proposed resolutions to take off the duty of one shilling and one penny halfpenny on the gallon of rum in England and Ireland. The duty of two shillings and two pence on rum above proof was also to cease and determine. A fter'a com - ersation between the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr. Gordon, Mr. Hume, Mr. F. Lewis, Mr. W. Smith, and Mr. Bright, the Resolutions. were agreed to. Mr. GORDON wished the discussion on the Report to take place to-morrow. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER reminded the House that the question respecting Churches was fixed fur to morrow. The House then resumed, and the report was ordered to be received this day. The Beer Duties was reported, the resolutions agreed to, and a Bill ordered to be brought in. The other Orders wet*/ disp:.sed of, and the House adjourned at HALF-PAST ONE O'CLOCK. LORD BYaoN. —Lord Bvitom, who for some months had his head-quarters at Argostolo, in Cephalonia, repaired at the end of December, with a pretty numerous suite of adventurers of all nations, to Zante, where he stopped but a few 'days, and on the Ist of January sailed for Misso longhi ; himself and a few persons in a small row-boat, his other companions, his horses, equip age, money, and a considerable quantity of am munition, in a large vessel under English colours, with simulated papers, for the little island of Sa lamo. Near Cape Papas, he was ;met by five vessels of the Captain Bey, which had come out of the Gulf of Lepanto. Lord Byron's little vessel escaped by the exertion of the rowers The transport was taken and carried into Patras. The very next day an English brigantine saile;l from Zante, and proceeded to Patras, to demand the restitution of the ship, which was covered by the English flag. To the astonishment of every body, the Captain Bey, deceived, it is said, by a Greek, who pretended to have saved the life o' the Tuikish - Vice-Admirai, consented to rele; a the vessel for a trifliug ransom. When the news of this event reached the capita!, every body ex pected that it would go hard with the Captain Bey. Instead of that, the Porte signified to the Dragoman of the British Embassy, " that it fully approved the conduct of the Captain Bey, though it was well aware of the nature and des inram of Lord Byron's expedition, and that it with pleasure took this opportunity to convince Eng law! that it willingly postponed every other con sideration to the wish of maintaining its frieudly relations with Foreign Courts."—(dustrian Ob server, March 26.) During the present month, steam-packets will begin to ply between Naples, Palermo, and Marseilles. That intended for Marseilles will perform the voyage in five days; the other will perform its voyage to Palermo in 24 hours.— Prince Bute:a is at the-head of, this undertaking. • PARLIAMENTARY PROCEEDINGS. - - ITO USE OF COMMONS. • Jovis, 8° die Ap:llis, 1821. GAS LIGHTS—Dublin Oil—Bill read a third time. anal Pawed' London and Westminster Oil—Bill read a first time; to be read a second time on Monday. Roans—Stafford and Sandon, Stone and S . afford, Cambridge and Ely, Sutrtho and Louth, Trent Bridge, Faversham, and Greenwich-13ills reported, to be ingrossed. Whiteparish and Southampton—Re-committed Report on Petition for additional provision read ; Instruction to Committee on the Bill to make provision accordingly. Brighton and Newha ven—Petition for additional provision reported, Report to lie on the table. INC nos uit Es —Pamber and Inhurst (Ilants)—Bill reported, and re-committed to former Committee. Tarrant Hinton (Dorset)—Bill reported, to be ingrossed. latrnovENENT-31anchester—Petitian fir Bill reported, *- port to lie on th e t a bl e . H u l tne —P et i t i on of Inha bi t i e t Householders, against, referred to the Committee on the Bill.. lslington—Several Petitions, against. CATIIEDRAL—D rry—Bill ordered to be brought in. CHAFE ns—Bright,,n—Bill reported, to be ingrossed. Maidens head—Bill read a third time, and passed. Poo a—South Lynn t Bills reported, to- be ilk- KELSO Two PENNIES SCOTS i grossed. PAVlNG—Ashford an t i Iludlow j Blunt; x s—Lary (Act Antendmen o—Petition from Plymouth. against, to lie on the table. Southwark—Petition for ,Bill reported, Report to lie on the table. Co te PA N 1 Australian—Petition for leave to present a Pv,ti tion for Bill reported, and leave given ; Petition referred ta - a Committee. DRAINAGE OF Boos SOCIETT (Ireland)—Recommitted Be port on Petition for Bill reported, Report to lie on the table. Asecsscn TaxEs—Petition from Alton, for the repeal there of ; to lie on the table. PAUPER LUNATics—Bill read a first time Woos.—Petition from Market Harbourough, against exporta - • tion of British Wool; and from Chiehenter, against redac tion of Duty on importation of Foreign ,Wool ; to lie on tlia table. COUNTY COURTS BlLL—Three Petitions from Lancashire, against, and one from Darlington, in favour; to lie on the table. Bill considered in Committee and reported ; farther consideration of Report on Monday ; Bill; as amended, to be printed. NO TA It I Es Punuc —Several Petition for repeal of the Daties on Licences to act as Notaries Public, to lie on the table.- MILE-END OLD TOWN RATES—Petition front Inhabitants, &c. against, referred to the Committee on the Bill. Dock—St. Katherine's—PetitiOn o f 'l7lustees of Tower nig and East Smithfield-street, against, referred to the Commit. tee on the Bill. COMBINATION OFWORXMEN Laws—Four Petitions against, to lie on the table ; and three others, referred to the Select. Committee on Artizans and Machinery. SMALL DEBTS—Petition from Aberdeen, in favour of an Act; to lie on the table. WiNnowTAX—Petition from Leighton Buzzard, for the me pear thereof; to lie on the table. MESSAGE -FROAI TIIE LORDS—That they have agreed to Board of Works (Ireland) Bill—Nnitchurch, Kingsbrieige , Carne Abbas, and Worceste r an d Brornsgrove Roads Bina- - Wenden Lofts and Elmdon (Essex) In c l osure Bill— a nd to Keighley Improvement Bill—without amendment ; and to Chester and Istantwich Roads Bill—with an amendment. PETTY SESSIONS—BiII to regulate Courts of Petty Session in Ireland, ordered to be brought in. MAGISTRATES 01' INVERNESS— Address for Statement " of all Fees demanded, or claims made, by the Magisteates of the Burgh of Inverness, or by the Town Clerk;- on the .libe ration of any Prisoner from Jail, under 'the Act o f G rac e , showing the amount of each Fee or demand, the authority by which the same is made, and the purposes to which it is applied." LOCAL TAXATlON—Dublin—Select Committee appointed. BEER DUTIES ACTS—The following Resolutions reported and agreed to, and Bill ordered to be brought in :- 1. " That the seeeril and respective Duties and Drawbacks following shall heleaid'and allowed on Beer and Malt, and ua Beer, Spirit, and Foreign Wine Licences, that is to say, That fur every barrel of Beer, containing 36 gallons, of 282 cubic inches each, which shall, from and after the 10th day of October, 1824, be brewed by any Brewer of Beer in Great Britain for sale, after a rate ()flees than two such b arre l s o f B eer for each and every quarter of Malt used in such brewing, anti so in proportion tier any less quantity of Malt, there shall be charged, levied, and paid, an Excise Duty of - - - - 1.1 4 0 And after a rate of two endless than than three barrels, an Excise Duty o f , - _ - • 012 0 And after a rate of three and less than four barrels, an Excise Duty of 0 a 0 - - And after a rate of four and less than five barrels, an Excise Duty of - - - - 96 0 Anti after a rate of five and less than six barrels, an Excise Duty of - - - . 0 4 0 ! And after a rate of six and less titan seven barrels, an • Excise Duty of - - - - 0 4 0 And after a rate of seven and less than eight barrels, an Excise Duty of - - . - 0 3 g And after a rate of 8 barrels o r u p war d s , an E xc i se - Duty of - - - - - 0 0 0 And so in proportion in each case for any less quantity than one barrel of Beer. And that for every quarter of Malt which shall, from and after the 10th day of October, 1824; he consum ed or used by any Brewer of Beer in Great Britain for sale, in brewing Beer, or which shall, be found missing or decreased in the malt-steck of any such Brewer, and for or in respect whereof the Duty above-mentioned shall not be charged and paid on she.shall, barrel , of o il. or Beer,i any a n ta e i :a s dft oefr quantity the Beer therewith or therefrom brewed, there shall be charged, levied, and paid, an Excise Duty of 1 4 0 Malt. That an An d 'O A i r d u e " v m e r, in ywsuch proportioniiic i Spruceth e ll , d Beer,ae - of October, 1824, be imported from parts beyond the Seas into Great Britain (not being Irish Beer or Mum imported directly from Ireland), there shall be charged and levied an Excise Duty of - 3 0 ° To be paid by the Importer befor e th e l an di ng thereof. That for every such barrel of Irish Beer or Mum whic tz shall, from and after the 10th day of October 1824, be bras"'" in Ireland, and imported directly from Ireland into Greet Rritain, there shall be charged and levied an Excise )July' after7the rate to be charged, levied, and paid as aforesaid, ° I. Beer brewed in Great Britai n , accor di ng to the certificate t ,'" the strength or quality, as afor esa id , o f suc h B eer when b re wed, produced on the importation of such Beer to the proper Offic' es in Great Britain, to be paid by the Importer of 'such Beer or Mum before landing thereof: That for every such barrel of Beer brewed in Great Britaiu:. not being, in any case, of-less strength than after the rate 0 ' fur suet. oarrcls vi leeer ror cacti and every quarter of IV/al‘ used in the brewing thereof, which shall, from and after the 10th day of October 11324, be duly exported from G reat Britt' to Foreign Parts as merchandize, and for which the Duty .5 Law imposed in respect thereof shall have . been charged at' paid, there shall be allowed a nd p a id an Ex c i se D raw b ac k 0f eleven shillings : That for every such barrel of Beer which shall, from and after the 10th day of October 1824, be brewed in Great li r ;teane . and exported from Great Britain to Ireland, and for which Duty by Law impo ses i n respect thereof shall have b ee n c hu' r ~.. - and paid, there shall be allowed and paid tin Excise Draw:).''` of the whole of such Duty." . 2. " That from and after the 10th day of October, 1821, every Brewer of Beer in Great Britain fur sale, shall annually take out an Excise Licence foe that purpose, and shall, for every such Licence, if the quantity of Beer brewed by such Brewer within the year ending 10th October previous to taking out such Licence, shall not exceed 20 barrels, pay the ,t et of- - - - _ e ee) 10 ° If the elm- shell exceed 20 barrels, And shall not ex ceed 50 barrels - - _ . 1 0t) If the same shall exceed 50 barrels, and shall not ex ceed 100 barrels 1 10 0 If the saute shall exceed 100 barrels, and shall not ex ceed 1,000 barrels - - - .. 0 0 0 If the same shall exceed 1,000 barrels, and shall not exceed 2,000 barrels - - . - - 3 0 0 If the same shall exceed 2,000 barrels, and shall not exceed 5,000 barrels - . - - If the same shall exceed 5.000 barrels, and shall not exceed 7,500 barrels - - - - 11 5 ° If the same shall exceed 7 ; 500 barrels, and shall not exceed 10 4 -000 barrels - - - - 15 0 ° If the same shall exceed 10,000 barrels, and shall not exceed 20,000 barrels - - - - '3O 0 i) , if the same shall exceed 20,000 barrels, and shall not exceed 30,000 barrels - - . - 45 0 ° If the same shall exceed 39,000 barrels, and shall net exceed 40,0(0 barrels - - _ . 60 0 Or if the same shall exceed 40,000 barrels 7' . 3 0 u That ever y person who shall, from and after the 10th October, 1824, first become a Brewer cf Beer in Great Britain for sale, on taking out such Licence 0 is aforesaid for that purpose, shall pay the „urn of 010 And within ten days after the 10:h day of Oitob e r P e ,‘ 7 10 '