The Sun. — London, England, 1824-02-12 00:00:00

EAST INDIA HOUSE. HAYLEYBURY COLLEGE. This i<•'leetiug took place yesterday, in conse quence of a requisition signed by several Pro prietors for holding a General Court on Wanes (ley th© 11th inst. to take into consideration— " That application be made to Parliament in the ensuing Seesion for the Repeal of the 46th clause of the Act of the e3d of George 111. cap. 15b, by which the Court of Directors is pro hibited from sending to India, in the capacity of a Writer, any Person who shall not have resided during lour terms at the I layeeybury College ; and for introducing into the said Act a ekohes, appointing a Public Examination at such times and lattice elven regulations as the Court of Directors, with the ap erebetiosisof the Board of Controul, may direct, to which exami nation all persons shall submit their acquirements and qualifi_ (-mesh"+ for approval, previous to their being permitted to pro ceed in the cepacity of Writers to either of the Presidencies of Fort William, Fort St. George, or Bombay." Immediately on J. WIGRAM, Esq. the President, taking the Chair, at twelve o'clock, he acquainted the Court that this was a Special Court. THE MARQUIS OF HASTINGS. General Sir JOHN DOYLE begged permission of the Court, previonely to entering on the business of the day, to put a question to the Chairman of the Court of Directors. The ()Haut MAN rose to order, and acquainted him this was a Meeting for a special purpose. Mr. DOUGLAS KINNAIIID observed, that it had been customary in courtesy to put a question with the permission of the Court, and receive an answer to it if the party was so dis poked, when such a question was put prior to the commence ment of the special business, as in the present case. The Chou new; again repeated that such a proceeding was irregular. JOSEPH Muss, Esq. M.P. espresesed his surprise that what had beeen customary on other occations should be objected to , en this occasion. He would now for instance state a case where e great public officer might have been charged in a public paper. with having embezzled a sum of three or four hundred thou seed pounds ; that such officer had been threatened with im peachment ; and he would ask, would it not be extraordinary if the pereons best acquainted with the truth or falsehood of such an accusation were not asked to say whether it was, as stated in such a publication, aye or no. The public, in such a case, had a right to have a direct denial or affirmation from a compe tent person ; and any proprietor had a right to put it. Mr. S. DIXON agreed that it was customary to put such in terrogatories, and receive an answer by the courtesy et* their proceedings. Sir J. DOYLE said, that had he been allowed to go on, he would have appealed to the feelings of the lion. Chairman and to the justice of the Court, which would have possibly pre vented that interruption. The fact was so stated hypo thetically by Mr. Hume, that the Court of Directors had been said, by a newspaper called The Sunday Tinier, to have discovered a deficiency -in the accounts of the !east India Company, since the administration of 'the Noble Mar quis, to the amount stated. He came now for the pur pose of putting these questions to the Chairman of the Court of Directors, and challenging investigation or disclosure for and on behalf of the Noble Marquis. The first question was, to ask whether the Court of Directors had discovered any such embezzlement to have taken place during the Noble Marquis's government ? Tile second, to ask if there had been, in conse quence of such a discoveryoa Resolution of the Court of Di rectors to refuge the Noble Marquis the usual allowance on re tirement of 5,000/. a year? The third, to ascertain whether it had been resolved or threatened to bring any impeachment teunded on that discovery ? In the face of the Court and of the country, so much interested in the subject, he now called on the Court, as a duty in justice to the Noble Individual concern ed to answer these plain questions. Mr. Lowernhs—l have also to canvass the whole of that question, although I know nothing about it. The CHAIRMAN rose to state, that with the fulleet disposi tion to answer such a question and generally to afford any in lormation for the guidance of " the Court, he must be allowed uaier the present circumstances to state that he had no instnic tions from the Court of Directors to give any answer to the qaextions now proposed. General Sir JOIIN DOYLE said, that had he called on the non. Chairman to give the Court any opinion, personally, he could have understood why he should have perhaps declined to give an answer. But here was a question of fact to which he thought it impossible to object, and he therefore called on the Chairman, as a man of integrity, of feeling, and of honour, to give him an answer to each question—aye or no.—(Hear,!)—if :;*.tch an embezzlement or eeficieney . had been discovered, it ought openly to be avowed, and not insinu ated b y the p anders .of the day ; who, whilst they calumniated the character of ho nourable and distinguishethpublie men, and sought to ruin them in public opinion, pretended they merely were disclosing facts. A corollary would he.dra.vin from the silcice. of the Chairman, which he was anxious should be shewn to be ground lees. That corollary would necessarily be, that the refusal was an evident proof of the truth of the anonymous statement al lusled to ; and this corollary could only be destroyed by a direct answer. As the answer of the Chairman would . at once, he hoped, refute the calumny, he again called on him as a n ho. nourabie man, to shake on' the possibility of that injurious in ference to the character of their highly meritorious late Chief Governor in India. Mr. D. IthiNAIRD could not be silent when such a libel had been uttered against so distinguished a personae, and a refusal haft been given to set the matter right one way or other in the public estimation, by answers to the questions propounded by the Hon. Baronet. The Chair had not been asked for its opinion, but for its confirmation of a statement of fact or -its denial. If not answered, it would have the effect of laying the basest calumny at the door. of their late Chief Governor—an officer whom, though not rewarded by the Court of Directors see he ought to have been, proportioned to his merits, the pub lic voice would yet compel them to recognize by something more than their silence when calumniated. Good God ! were they in England, or would it be possible to suppose that the English, who were so accustomed to fair dealings, would tolerate or, sanetion such a line of conduct with respect to so distinguished and unimpeached a character? Were the Court of Directors to be allowed to sit silent under such circumstances, when a single word from the Chairman might repel the charge in the most effectual manner? He would tell them the result ,would be, if no answer were given, that he,would support a motion for ad journment over and over again, to prove to-the Court of Di rectors that no tricks should succeed in defeating public opinion. --(Cheering.)—They dared not hold their tongues. After this, lie would again ask diem in the face of the country, if they dare refuse to answer, and, what was more, he would fortel that the Court of Directors would not—dare not, answer those questions by saying Yes.—( Loud cheers.)—Were they then of opinion that the character of so high an officer as the Marquis was no part of the property of the country ? • If it were possible this should be slurred over, he would ask, what future (lover ner.General would be found, if he were obliged to, trust his character in the hands of the Court of Directors? ELPHINSTONE (Director) rose to order. He would take upon him if the Chairman continued to refuse to answer the queenon, to answer it himself. .After a pause he proceeded to assure the Court and the Gallant Baronet, that the Court had heard of no such imputation, thought of .no such imputa tion against the Noble Marquis, nor had ever indulged for a moment any disposition to make hint the aubject of impesteh ment. It had never been suspected for a moment that the Noble Marquis could have been aspartaker in .any embezzle. meat of the c ompan y's - resources or property. le felt that it was not possible he could sit still and he silent to !leer such a charge alluded to without as far as lay in his power repelling it.—(Loud cheers.) Sir Joust Doyor said, that having now olytaieed a plain answer to the calumny which had been circulated, he was per fectly satisfied with the explanation given by that most respect able individual in so ,handsome and gallant a manner who had just sat down. Why, he would ask, had not the organ of the Court of Directors, the Chairman, done that which Others had found it their duty to do ?-- He had ever thought the character of a British merchant stood confessedly and pre-eminently high in the estimation of the world; but if such were the maxims generally of official persons in high situations connected with the trade of the country, he would hereafter, when he found them sheltering their acquiescence in calumny by studied silence, and defending that silence by a reference to technica lities of proceeding, agree with a great judge of human cha racter, Buonaparte, and say that we had descended from our high standing, and dwindled into a nation of shopkeepers. The CHAIRMAN begged to remind-the Gallant 'General that he had not been appeaed to merely personally, which might have placed him at liberty to give an answer, but he bad been appealed to ea the organ of the Court of Directors, in which case he could only give a collective opinion, which he had not any right to do, never having been authorised by the Court. Sir J. Pot-i,E said be must have been misunderstood. as he put the questions to the Hon. Chairman to him merely in his individual capacity. Mr. LOWNDES.—Can any one say any thing about the de ficiency of 300,000/. ?—(A laugh.) The DEPUTY CliAtit MAN stated, that he certainly felt the Chairman had strictly performed his duty by the line of con duct which he felt it incumbent on him to pursue. Mr. PAT . !' ISON said, that as an honest man he would not have withheld the answer required had the question been put to hint. He was no party to the silence of the Chair. He cou ld assert safely that the several questions might be answered by a directs No to each. He could not sit silently under the circumstances of the attack which had been thus made anony. mously on the Noble Marquis. Mr. TRANT agreed, that the questions ought not to have answers from the Chairman, who was placed there as the organ of the Court of Directors collectively. In fact, he felt the ques tiont ought never. to have been asked ; although he was as anxious to preserve from calumny the character of the late Go vernor-General as any man. Mr:I). KT NNAIRD congratulated the lion. Gentleman on the sentiments he had avowed, just at the-time he was engaged in an active canvass for a seat in the Court of Directors. No doubt those whose interests he was to represent and the country would sympathise with the success of the canvass of a Gentle man who had already admitted, that if he sat in that Chair, and a public officer of high responsibility had been accused of rob bing the. Company, he would wrap himself up in the forms of proceeding, and maintain silence in case of any proprietor ap plying to him to state whether the charge was well founded or calumnious.—(Hear, hear!)—The more important part of their consideration was the charge, which had been met with the monosyllable and concise answer, No. Here the Speaker was interrupted by Mr. Low.spEs, who pronounced an high eulogy on the Noble Marquis. He was glad the momentary cloud had passed over. It was not likely to rest on a man for forty years of public life, remarkable as his countrymen generally were for that open, noble, and gene rous conduct which was ever the strongest testimonia of honourable dispositions. After a few words in explanation from Mr. TRANT, Mr. litsx SART) resumed : it bad been said that those ques tions were only now put for the first time ; now it would appear that they had been put in a letter addressed to the Chairman of the Court of Directors on the 31st of January. These qUestions were then put—First, whother the Court of Directors had rea son to suspect that the Marquis of Hastings was privy to or partaker in a deficiency said to have been discovered in the accounts of the Company, to. the amount of 300,0001. or any other deficiency—Secondly, v;hether the Court of Directors was disposed or had signified its intention to impeach for such rea sons the Marquis of Hastings ?—Thirdly, whether the Court ,had already refused the application for the annuity of 5,0001. a year, usual under the circumstances of the Noble Marquis's retirement from office? Now it would appear that this letter was written by a gentleman, who, having the greatest Tegard for that distinguished Nobleman, had expressed a correspondent anxiety for an opportunity of clearing up tl!is extraordinary charge against his character. The letter was as follows : " Montague-square, Jan. 30. " Sts—l beg leave to call your attention to a paragraph which appeared in The Sunday Times of the 25th instant, a copy of which I enclose: You will perceive that it contains in substance a direct charge against` Led Hastings, of having embezzled 300,0001. ? of jlie moneys of the Honourable e. Com pany, or of having been party to an embezzlement, by which a deficit to this amount has been incurred. " It further states, that in consequence of such malversation, which had been recently discovered, the Court of Directors had negatived a proposal to grant to him a pension of 5,0001. per annum ; and finally, that it is in the contemplation of that Body to effect his impeachment. The general slanders of an anonymous libeller it may be well to treat with contempt ; but a particular charge, deeply affecting the public character of an individual, however distinguished, must be specifically repelled. Under this impression I have the honour of addressing myself to you as Chairman of the Court of Directors, in the full con fidence that you will enable . me at once to give that distinct and authoritative contradiction to these falsehoods which the form they have assumed demands, and which it is so important to the honour of the Noble Lord should no longer be delayed. 1 With this view, as every question .that arises in the Court of Directors must be officially known to you . in your capacity of Chairman, 1 have to request that you would be good enough to give me answers to the following queries :-- " Ist. I'Vhether the Court 'of Directors have made any dis covery, or have received any information, or have reason to suspect, that the Marquis of Hastings has embezzled, or been party or privy to the embezzlement of any moneys, or to the creation of any deficit, to the amount of 300,0001. or any other sum ? " 2d. Whether the Court of Directors have threatened, or in. tended to impeach, the Marquis of Hastings for embezzlement, eafivcei,t,m already consequence n eg a or for any supposed deficit of money, or otherwise ? " 3d. Whether thedCoeurnrbt embezzlement n c To r3 r deficit, of any such suppose tived a motion to grant a pension of VOW. per annum to the M arquis of Hastings ? " I am persuaded that your own high sense of what is due to the honour and character of a public man will sufficiently account to you for the anxiety of the Noble Lord's friends to lose no time in vindicating him from these foul charges, which have already attained extraordinary circulation, and be my apology. at the same time, for pressing the subject upon you as a rn.e.er of immediate importance, as it is by you alone, from your official. situation, that, without injurious delay, the means of effective contradiction can be furnished. In preferring, therefore, the above request, - I feel assur e d th a t I shall be only meeting your desire of clOing the earliest justice to the char.ic ter of the Marquis of Hastings, w hi c h , in the paragraph in .question ' has been so wantonly as sa il e d ; an d th a t I shall be favoured with an answer to the queries at your earliest con venience. ' 5 " I have the honour to be, Sir, your obedient humble Servant, " W. Wigram, Esq." " F. HASTINGS DOYLF." On the sth of Feb. this letter was, with the subject to which it related, brought before the Court of Directors, in conse nuance of which the following answer was addressed to Colone Doyle : " East India House, Feb. 5, 1824. " SIR—I am commanded by the Court of Directors of the East India Company to acquaint you, that the Chairman has laid before them your letter of the WI of January, address ed to him upon the subject of a paragraph of which you en closes. copy, which is stated to have appeared on the 25th of that month in a •Newspaper called The Sunday Times, assail ing the character of the Marquis of Hastings, and with refer ence to which you have framed certain interrogations which you request the Chairman, as the organ of the Court of Directors, to answer. " The Court deeply regret the attack which has been thus made upon the character of that distinguished Nobleman ; they cannot, however, but feel that it would be highly inexpedient for them to engage in any correspondence arising out of the vague charges of anonymous writers ; and they are persuaded that you will yourself perceive, on a review of your letter, the inconvenience of putting to a collective Body, and the impos sibility of their answering, questioni of the nature proposed by you. " I have the honour to be, Sir, " Your most obedient humble servant, " J. DART, Secretary. " Colonel Francis Hastings Doyle, Cite." However, under the circumstances the Court of Directors were content to disgrace itself by passing by or holding its tongue on such a subject, he and the Court of Proprietors called for justice on their servant. The Court of Directors too were but their servants, and if even there were a shameful specimen I of • that description of crimination of a man by preserving silence, or, as the French term it, reticence, it was exempli fied in the conduct of the Court of Directors on this occasion, After this he should not value their opinion at a fig's end. The Proprietors, of the Noble Marquis was in the hands of the Court of Proprietors, and they would see that the challenge the Noble Marquis had given them should be attended to, and tardy justice :should at length be done him. They were now by their conduct in the situation of accused calumniators. He had felt it neces sary on, this occasion to speak his mind freely, and threw him ' self into the breach boldly • but he was most anxious to be un derstood that he had generally the highest respect for the Court of Directors, and the arduous responsibilities imposed on them by their office. Mr. HOME said that after the feelings which he perceived had been excited by the short discussion on a topic of great in- . terest, and which had created a high state of feeling in the Court, it would not be proper to proceed with the motion, for which they had been convened. He had the greatest respect for the several Professors of the College, and others connected with it, and he wished the discussion on that Seminary should be commenced and conducted with the best possible temper. He should therefore propose that the business should be adjourned to this day fortnight. After a few words from General Taortr4 TON, who supported the adjournment, and Mr. CARRUTHERS, the adjournment was agreed to. The Order of the day was postponed to that day fortnight. The case of Ssirrit, the Missionary, has been laid before the Privy Council by the Ministers, who wish to relieso themselves from individual responsibility, and to give the decision taken on it (whatever it may be) a judicial and solemn character.--(Morning Paper.) Yesterday about one o'clock in the afternoon, a bricklayer, who was at work on the top of a house in St. John-street, Smithfield, missed his footing, and was precipitated into the street, and was instantly killed. He has left a wife and large family to lament his untimely end. DUTY ON COALS• A Public Meeting of the Inhabitants of Lon don and places adjacent, interested, in the high duty on Coals, was convened yesterday at the City of London Tavern, Bishops gate-street, to take into consideration the very heavy tax' of 14s. 4d. per chaldron on coals entering the port of London, and to petition Parliament for its repeal. The hand-billii and ad vertisements announced the meeting for one; but added, that the chair would be taken precisely at two o'clock. At the latter hour, however, there were not (except the re . porters from the Morning Papers) more than a dozen persons in the room. At about a quarter past two, the number had increased to 50 or 60. At this time Sir Charles Price, Baronet, entered the room, followed by Aldermen Wood and Brydges ; Mr. W. Williams, M.P. ; Mr. T. Wilson, M.P. ; Mr. Perkins; Mr. Blanchard; Mr. Smith; and.a few other Gentlemen. On the motion of Mr. Alderman Woos, Sir CIIAS. PRICE was called to the Chair. . The Hon. Baronet having taken the Chair, stated, that in consequence of a mistake in the bills, announcing the meeting, lie had to regret the absence of very many respectable indi- Viduals of Westm;nster and the places adjoining, who would otherwise have attended. However, notwithstanding the thin ness of the present assemblage, it was thought proper, as public notice had been given, to oo on with the business of the day. The Committee which had' been appointed at the general meeting last year, had not been inattentive to the duty which had devolved on them. They had again commu nicated to his Majesty's Ministers their intention of once more presenting a petition to Parliament for a repeal of the very partial and oppressive duties which were imposed on coals imported into London and its vicinity ; and considering the present flourishing state of the country, and the intima tion made from the throne that some taxes would be re mitted, they entertained a hope that their application to the Le gislature in this instance would not be without effect. Indeed, it was impossible to anticipate any fair objection to their claim on the present occasion. The_ ground upon which they went was, the very partial and oppressive nature of a tax which fell so heavily upon the citizens of London and Westminster, and the neighbouring counties, from which all the other counties were free. The inhabitants of those places he had named had already paid some millions in this way towards the general ex pences of the country, and he thought it was but fair that if itl was , found necessary that such a sum should continue to be raised, the burden of it should be equally borne by all parts of the country for whose common benefit it was imposed. In the year 17.92, an application similar to that which this meeting was now called upon to sanction had boen made to his Majesty's Mi nisters. They were then requested to relieve London and the parts adjoining from the exclusive duty. In reply to that appli- , cation,Ministers had expressed themselves not unwilling, to re move the tax, but unfortunately circumstances soon after occur red which for years prevented their carrying their intentions into effect. In 1818, another application, of a similar nature, was made to Ministers. 'They slid not refuse to attend to it, but they were so circumstanced (with applications for the re peal of other taxes), that this could not have been removed without a tax to supply its place, and they did not know where to place a tax fir its substitute. Now, however, the ease was different. Some taxes had been removed, and a hope was held Out, at the Opening of the present Session, that others would be repealed in the course of it. Under these circumstances he hoped that Ministers would consider the Situation in which the citizens of London were placed, and not act upon the principle, that because they were already bound by the Act of Parliament, they ought to continue to. bear BO oppressive and unequal a burden. The meeting had now every reason to look forward for aid from the Legislature, and to hope that at last it would do that which was only an act of justice in their favour. A series of resolutions would now be submitted to the Meeting, and a petition to the House of Commons founded upon them. The petition was couched in strong but temperate language, such as was thought proper to assert what was considered to be their right to at least equal taxation ; and he trusted ,the justice of its prayer would procure it many supporters in Parliament._ Thaillouse of Commons had already received several petitions froth other quarters in favour of the same object. He would now only add, that this was a new petition , a nd wo uld require fresh signatures. It would, he trusted, be ve r y numerously signed, before its presentation. He would not delay the meet ing by any other remarks, as there were other gentlemen who would enter more fully into the business of the day. the Hon. Baronet r. Sm in tr th it e sa ci i i c a l, ir t , ba i t t after what not be le h e ad ne t c .a e l s l s e a h ry fr f o h m r him to oc cupy the attention of the m eeting at any length. They were not met there for the first time on this subject. They might be said to be a continuation of the meeting of the last year, assem bled for • the purpose of carrying.into effect the resoluti ons en tered into at the time. They were not successful in th e i r en deavours last year, but it Appeared that Ministers were waiting to ascertain what were the feelings of all the parties concerned. Since then 'there had been Petitions presented - from most of the places whose inhabitants were affected by the tax, from which it was manifest that the feeling against it was very general. It was a most unjust principle that one part of the community soultl be burdened , an oppr es sive tax, from which all the eothera were aoxe with exempt. .It appeared from calculations made at the time, that in the year 1818, London paid upwards of .500,000/. duties on coals, from which other places were exempt. It further appeared, that by a• population of about 4 millions in London, and several counties adjoining, there was paid in the same year the sum of 2,461,0001. in poor-rates, and a sum of 1 , 049,000 e coal-duties,. while a population of between • 5 and 6 millions.in several other counties, paid only 1,700,0001. poor-rates, and no coal-duties whatever. • There were nearly 500,0001. duties paid by the agricultural counties of Middlesex, Hants, and Wilts. The injus- K tic e e n o t, f s S u u c r r h e a y n , t S I n u e s euxa,l Ddivision of taxation must be apparent at first sight. He would notl however, dwell upon this topic farther at present, but would call the attention of the meeting to the resolutions agreed to at the meeting last year. then read the following resolutions. " 1. That fuel being not. e m y a necessary of life, but a powerful trade, and most useful in agriculture, al addition to the misfortunes of poverty, iytax thereo instrument is a o of and a burden upon industry. "2. That any tax which falls exclusively upon some mem bers of a community, and to which the other members of the way contribute; is unjust in its principle. econminnity do not i n any London, and of 6s. per chaldron upon coalsin `p` imported d.n T p h ion a r t t toe t a h t heocpo into o a r s at t nodyfu tyother e 9 s . 4d. per c h a ld ron u pon co a ls i port, adds most heavily to the burdens of those .who can only obtain sea-borne coal; whilst those who can obtain coals without having been sea-borne, are wholly exempt from any Such burden, and therefore it is part of th e p resent d u ty u p on co a l s partial and unequal. car"ri4ed" 'that t tw t i h s e e ltaorgaelrl ports in England, was originally im posed for temporary purposes; and a large portion of the pre sent duty upon coals, brought coastwise into the port of Lon don, was imposed for purposes of a local nature, which having long since been answered, is now applied to the general service of the nation. " 5. That having .borne this unequal burden whilst our country was engaged in struggles in which its existence as an independent state was at stake, we hope, in this period of peace, when we have been informed. by a Royal Speech, that his Ma jesty trusted that the House of Commons would he able , after ff providing for the service * of the yea r, and without affecting public credit, to make a further con s i d e rable reduction in the burdens of his people, that we may be relieved from the coast duty on coal. " 6. That the tax tern fuel is so impolitic in its nature, that we will 'not seek -rebefetioni its—injustice by attempting to transfer any part of its burden upon any class of our fellow countrymen who are not now subject to it ; and we deprecate every plan of equalization of the present ditty, or the imposi tion of duty on coals which are now exempt from it, and we will seek only for an unqualified, repeal of the existing partial tax. 7. That small coal exported to foreign parts is now subject to an export duty, equal to 3s. par London chaldron, whilst the coast duty on the same coal, if brought to London, is 9s. 4d. per chaldron, and if carried to any other port is (is. per cbaldron ; whereby the manufacturers at Hamburgh, and other places on the Continent, purchase such coals at a cheaper rate than the manufacturers in this city." He (Mr. Smith) would now beg to propose that these reso lutions should be taken as the basis of their proceedings onthis occasion. The miners and smelters of copper in Cornwall were allowed a drawback on the coals they consumed in such works. This was not done with a view of any particular favour to Corn wall, but because it was considered that the articles they manu factured could not be produced without such an allowance. Now he could see no reason why the ironsmiths should not be exempted as well ; or why a coppersmith in one place should not be entitled to the same indulgence as a coppersmith in another. The effect of this tax was not only felt by one or two trades, but every species of manufacture in this part of the country which required culinary preparation. The effect was, that the price of such articles as well as the price of labour had been considerably increased. The Scotch people, about 30 years ago, had obtained, and very justly, a relief from the coast duty, and in lieu of it a more general tax had been im posed. Why should not the same principle be applied here ? Mr. Alderman Bittpc-sia a conled the motion, and he did so, he observed, purely from a teeing of justice towards his fellow-citizens. Considering the great number of poor in Lon don who consumed coals, and the great pressure with which the high duties fell upon them, he thought it was very hard that such a pressure should be allowed to continue. Indeed, he did believe that it was not the wish of his Majesty's Mini sters that such a tax should be continued. They had taken off, some taxes of which the public had already felt the benefit, and they were disposed to take off others, if circumstances per mitted; but he knew of no tax, for the removal of which there were so many just claims, as that on coals. He trusted that all present would enter into the spirit of the resolutions read to them, and that Parliament would at an early period take the subject into their serious consideration. On the motion being put, Mr. HUNT (Henry Hunt) here begged, that as he had not distinctly heard the resolutions of the last mesting, which had been just read, they might he read from the chair. They were read accordingly. Mr. HUNT then observed,. that he would take the liberty of saying that one of the propositions contained an inaccuracy, and the meeting would commit themselves by adopting it. It• was stated that the original duty was laid on fOr a temporary purpose ; but if he understood it correctly, one part of the duty was granted by one of the Charles's for the support of one of his bastards, and that another was for the support of the Orphan Fund. The CHAIRMAN here remarked, that Mr. Hunt was mis taken—the duty ,for the ,Orrhan Fund was paid in London, besides the other duties of 9s. 4d. per chaldron. Mr. PERIZII.79 said that the grant to which the gentleman (Mr. Hunt) alluded was called the Richmond shilling, and paid at Newcastle, upon every chaldron of coals (equal to two Lon don chaldrons) shipped filim thence. Some years ago that duty was purchased by Government from the Duke of Richmond, and the purchase-money was laid out in buying for him the estate of Goodwoodpark, in Sussex. !Besides the duty of 6s. per chaldron paid in London in common with other places, London had to pay three shillings and four pence exclusively. In this heavy pressure upon the trade in coals from Newcastle to London, the interests of the navy, for which so great a nur sery of able seamen was found in the colliers, were neglected ; for if the duty was less, it was clear that the trade would be increased. Mr. BLANCHARD said, that besides the increased duty on coals brought to London, there was another inconvenience to which the citizens were put, in being prevented from bringing their coils from any part of the kingdom they pleased. They were obliged to bring them by 'sea, and to resort Only to two rivers, the Tyne and the Wear. The collieries in that quarter being in a few hands, our supply . came he believed, from not more than 7or 8 persons. Ile might he wrong in the numbers he had mentioned, but certainly they were but few. The con sequence of this was, that they met every month, to determine what quantity should be sent up to the London market. The Camila:are asked what this had to do with the object for which the meeting had assembled ? Mr. H UNT.—I think it is extremely important. Mr. BLANCXARD said he had intended to found a resolu tion upon it; for in consequence of it, we were now obliged to pay the same price for coals as we did in the height of the war, and he thought it was for the committee to inquire from what other sources we might be supplied, in case the present law respecting duties on coals should be repealed. The resolution was put, and carried unanimously. Mr. &KITH then moved that a petition, founded upon the resolution, should be agreed to. The petition having been read from the Chair, 31r. HUNT said, that he did not mean to object to the pe tition, but he regretted that it did not go farther. He regretted that it did not allude to another class which was not less heavily pressed by the coal tax than those already mentioned. It was said, that the manufacturers and the aristocracy were af fected by it, but it was silent on the subject of the poorer classes, who were most severely. ppressed by the operation of the tax. This, if properly set forth in the petition, might have an effect on the Chancellor of ..the Exchequer • for as to the Members of the House of Commons, as they cal led themselves, it was nothing. If the Chancellor of the Exchequer thought proper to repeal the tax, it would be repealed ; and if not, it would continue. He felt that a relief had been given by taking off half the window-tax, but then that was made up by a surchage on houses. That w as the way Ministers re e contend e d this was to this very small meeting (there were at this p l t ihee the e t ee l . question. from — r i t a e s x a lo t nf i o n „ . ( 2 T o l e s i e t y i o ,t n oo ., k , )I ff il a penny, and laid on two time about 150 persons in the room), and he was surprised that where the interests of so many hundreds of thousands, he might say of so many millions were concerned, there should be so small an attendance. He should have thought that if proper means had been resorted to on this occasion, they would have found nearly the half of London endeavouring to cram them selves into that room to su pp ort a p ro p o sition for the abo unequal and oppressive tax. Wh y h a d there c i e s mmon Halls and W a rdmotes assem bl e d t o pe titionon this occasion ? Perhaps the Worthy Alderman (Wood) would explain to the meeting why some such steps had not been taken. Perhaps it was that some men in Pewee , who were not so great out of the city as in, did not wish for such interference. Perhaps some of those had near relations chief coal -meters—(Cries of " Chair, chair," — which Mr. Hunt appe ared to mist a k e for" Shame, shame.") Why cry " shame ? He was not in the habit of saying any thing that he would be afraid to speak out in a much larger meeting titan that which he now addressed. He would speak out : the chief coal -meter was the brother-in-law of the Lord Mayor. He (Mr. IL) was not to be intimidated from speaking his mind. He had spoken it in that room when he was threa tened with assassination, and the public had seen how the indi vidual to whom he had alluded had been since rewarded with a consulship. There was a general complaint of the want of coal meters, and the respectable coal-merchants, Messrs. Davey and Sawyer, with whom he dealt for the coals he consumed, often told him that a ship with the particular kind of coal he wanted, was in the pool, but that they waited to have a meter appointed to it. In conclusion, he said he had no doubt, that if a resolution was passed by the Committee to that effect, this important question would be generally taken up, with a zeal proportioned to the magnitude of the interests which it affected. Mr. Alderman WOOD said, that being personally called upon, he begged to state t'- the meeting that there had been ward-meetings on the present subject, at which petitions against the tax were agreed to. This was the case with his two wards, and be had no doubt it was the same with some others. As to the thinness of the meeting, he believed it arose from a mistake in the placards and notices which had been posted up, and which mentioned that it was to be held " to morrow, without putting the day o f th e mon th i n su ffi c i en tly large characters to be equally distinguished with the " to-mor row." The fact was, the subject was generally felt to be of great impertance, and he had no doubt that the petition would be very numerously signed. As the name of their worthy Chief Magis trate had been mentioned connected with the coal meters, it was but justice to him to state, that the duty of Mr. Reeve, a very respectable individual, who was at the head of the land coal meter's-office, was to see that the consumers had their proper measure from the venders. He (Mr. Reeve) had nothing to do with the sea-coal-meters' department. His duty was more important to the public than that of the sea-coal-meters, for they had only to superintend the measure from the ships to the coal-merchants, and they always took care to see that they had their proper measure. But with respect to the present Lord Mayor, he (Alderman Wood) could assure the meeting, that when in the Common Council he proposed the appointment of twelve additional meters, the Lord Mayor was anxious that forty or fifty should be appointed ; for he stated, that he had received many complaints of the incon venience arising from the want of a sufficient number to work the ships at market.—( Hear, hear ! )—.As to the 3s. duty, he had stated, in the presence of Lord Liverpool and the Chancellor of 1 the Exchequer, that the city had been robbed of it. It was im posed in the year 1710, for the purpose of erecting 50 churches, of which only 11 were built. Soon after Government took 500,0001. from the money raised by it to pay lottery.tickets. At length, being unwilling to bring an annual account of this trans action before Parliament, they carried the whole amount over to the consolidated fund, to which if had since been paid. He now repeated what he had before mentioned - upon the grant of 150,0001. for the building of London Bridge—that if the whole of the sums paid by the City . on account of this duty were calculated, and compound interest allowed, the sum would not be less than ten millions of money at the pre sent day. The grievance of the whole duty was felt, not only in London, but in the western countries, where lime was so dear in consequence of the scarcity and high price of coals, that it cost about Bs. peracre in many places to lime ground which was not worth more than that sum. Another effect of these duties was, that large quantities of small coal were burnt at the pits mouth, which, if there was no duty, would be sent to Lon don and other ports, and would be purchased as useful for many purposes. The Honourable Alerman, after adverting to the inconvenience of the Citizens of London not being al lowed to bring coal from Staffordshire and other places, con eluded by observing, that unless the representatives of those places which were affxted by the high duties on coals went privately to the Chancellor of the Exchequer (foe that would be Just as effectual as stating their sentiments to him publicly), and declared, that they wished for the repeal of those duties, petitions would be ineffectual. For his own part he would do every thing in his power to support the prayer of the petition, but he knew that what he shouhl say . on the subject would have no effect unless supported as he had just stated. Mr. HUNT said, he admitted he was in the wrong in what he stated about the land coal-meters. The petition was then put, and adopted. The other resole dons were then put, and agreed to. Mr. T. WILSON, M.P,. expressed his willingness to sup port the prayer of the petition whenever it should be presented. On the motion of Mr. WILLIAMS, M.P., thanks were voted to the Chairman. Sir CHARLES PRICE in returning thanks said, that it was not his intention, as the Gentleman before him (.111r. Hunt) seemed to think, to have omitted the oppression of the tax on the poor. He had condemned it as unjust to all classes, but he considered it peculiarly so as applying to the poorer classes. The meeting then adjourned. MR. OWEN. TO TIIE EDITOR OF THE GLASGOW CHRONICLE. Sitt,---As the following Address his been pre sented by the inhabitants of New Lanark to Mr. Owen, and some of the London Proprietors, while these Gentlemen were lately on a visit to the Establishment, by your inserting it into your independent paper you will much oblige, . Sir, your most obedient Servants, JOHN DOUGLAS. WILLIAM FORREST. ALEX. 111‘I VER. . WILLIAM FORBES. Robert Owen, William Allen, Joseph Foster, Michael Gibbs, and Charles Walker, Esqrs. We the undersi2, - ned i—L4bitants. at. Naar Lanark beg to 3.1.- dress ourselves to you as part proprietors of this establishment. Whatever appearance of very partial dissatisfaction may have lately shewn itself, we can truly say that we believe the measures which have been, and still continue to be adopted in the management of this Village, have uniformly been, to the well disposed part of the population, a source of the greatest' satisfaction and confidence. We believe that we speak the general sentiments of the in habitants, when we express to you and to the other partners our warmest thanks for the interest you have always taken, and which we still see you take in our happiness—an interest which dictated those improvements in the former state of the village, which procured to us the comforts we now enjoy ; and which still continues to dictate, as at last night's meeting you in formed us, farther plans for our convenience, comfort, and improvement. lire trust that your exertions on behalf of our children will not have been in vain, but that their conduct i n after life will exhibit the beneficial results anticipated from an education as unusual, as it is superior to that generally given to children of operative cotton-spinners, and in which various branches of useful knowledge have been connected with the more import tint point of religious instruction, and that the real advance ment of all the inhabitants of this establishment, both old and young, in whatevr is good and virtuous, will keep pace with your benevolent and philanthropic exertions in promoting it. Time of Residence in New Lanark. Years. 36 Time of Residence in New Lanark. Years. John Harrison - 26 William Sinclair -35 i John Davie - - 28 Peter Gold ' - - 31 Alexander Innes - 27 John Gilfillan . - 26 James Anson - - 30 James Thompson - 22 Alexander Johnston - 29 George Thompson - 19 William Richmond - 12 Daniel Monroe - 19 William Muir - 22 George Ellis - - 25 James Aitken - - 23 John-Ingles - 30 Thomas Cunningham 15 George Kilpatrick - 20 Alex. Henderson Thorns Mair Thomas Cassels David Brown John Dewar Thomas M`Millin David Simpson 'William Lyon - John Douglas Donald More John Weir - John Brown - John Walker David Mair James Sadler James Calderiyno4 - William lirnod - William Kerr William Wat,son - Thomas Adamson - George Brown - George Manson George Smith John Reid - 'Jebel Miller William - Kay Alexander Marcus - James Davidson - John Ingles Hector 111‘ B eth Peter Gold - William Phillips - Alexander Web John Black - Alexander Deds Robert Forrest William Winning - John Attken ftobt. Shirley Daniel M`Dougald - James Ellis George Carlaw David Ingles Robert Scott - - Angus M'Leod James Scott - Andrew 111‘Nish - Andrew Brown Duncan Stewart Duncan 11PLarin - Alexander Brown - Alex. Stevenson - James Pinkerton - John M'Callum William Weir John Whitefield William Forbes James APKay John Williamson - Charles Thompson - Robert•lll`Kay Samuel Shaw George fil`Donald - John Murray James Shaw _ John Smellie William .Gilfillan - Peter Robertson James M`Nabb James Robertson - Alex. APKay Thomas Davidson John Davidson David Budge James Malcome Daniel Bogle George Malcom - Robert Dyert John Dons • John Hamilton John Pettigrew William Semple - William Shirley - John Thompson - William Gilroy David Ramage John Lewis . James ieewis - HRoubgehrt.sßpirortyre Hugh Gold . - 20 Robert Dewar . - 20 Alexander Hamilton 23 Stewart Shaw - - 25' Daniel M'Donald . 20 John Young - 27 John Baird - - 18 Andrew Lithgow . 10 John Carruthers - 21 Alexander Donaldson 10 James Gold - - 24 John Murphy - 10 Alexander M'lver - William Affieck _ 28 David Sutherland - 27 Gavin Falkoner - 18 James Wilson - 18 William Ingles - 25 William Davie - 26 Gavin Pettigrew - 22 David Campbell - 33 I John Lourie - 8 Robert Wood - 28 Robert Laidlaw - 30 John Cook - - 30' William M'Donald - 16 Robert WAlister - 15 Henry Bell - . 21 Alexander S u th er l an d 10 JohnlllTall - 'lO Angus Campbell - 21 Thomas Lowrie - 8 William Dale - 20 John Morrison - 10 James M'Larin - 18 Angus Ross - - 15' John 'Walker - 19 James Wood - - 19 Walter Thompson - 32 John M'Leod - - 24 Richard Young - 18 Thomas Stewart . 18 James Davie . - 20 William Lithgow - 27 Archibald Monroe - 25 Dav'd Ballantyne - 25 William Forrest - 30 Thomas Laidlaw - 30 James Clark - - 12 Hugh Duncan - 12 John Harknes - 18 Alexander Milne - 20 Archibald Turner - 22 James Scott - 10 John M'Kay - - 20 Andrew Kirkhope - g. John Miller' - - John Safley - 11 Daniel Liddle - 10 Thomas Milross - IO George M 4 Nish - 23 Thomas Harkness . - 14 David Campbell - 28 Thomas Alexander - 13 Alexander Miller - 31 George Rick ie - 16 Robert Hepburn - 12 William Young - 25 William Graham - 18 John Thompson - 19 Robert Whitefield - 10 Andrew SommerVille 24 Robert Scott -_ - 27 Committee :—Aleiander Douglas, William Forrest, Th Alexander Mclver, and Willi nnes, David Simpson, Jnlll comas 111 4 111illan, James Amor , . am Forbes. DUEL PREVENTED.—(DubIin, Feb. 9.)—Yes terday morning, about eight o'clock, Mr. Goodi son, chief peace-officer of College-street Divisional Police-office, dispatched a party of peace-officers . to the neighbourhood of Bali's-bridge, with di rections to disperse a number of persons who it was understood were to assemble there for the purpose of fighting dogs and hunting badgers When the peace-officers arrived at the place, their attention was drawn to another scene, which more imperatively called for their inter ference. They perceived a party of gentlemen in an adjoining field, some of whom were evi' dently about to fight a duel. The officers lame: . diately took the gentlemen whom they saw wit h pistols (which were cocked) in their hands, into custody. The principals, Thomas Spring Rice' Esq. and Waller O'Grady, Esq., to whom the seconds were about to hand the pistols, effected their escape. The seconds, namely Henry Bar° ll Robeck and James Franks, Esq. were brought to College-street Police-office, where they we re each held to bail to keep the peace, themselves in 5001. each, and two sureties in 2501. each.' (Dublin Morning Post of Monday.) 38 35 lg '2O 20 .~