The Sun. — London, England, 1825-03-16 00:00:00

'MOUSE OF COMMONS,-MARen 15. Lir. CALVERT presented a petition from certain Merchants of the City of London., against the St. Catherine Docks Bill. Mr. S. WHITBREAD presented three petitions from thEerent Parishes in Middlesex, against the Equitable Loan Bill. Mr. P. MORE presented a petition from the inhabitants of Whitechapel, in favour of the Equitable Loan Bill. The second reading of the Isle - of Dogs Coal Dock Bill was proposed. S.'n- J. - YORKE thought that unless the Bill contained a clause to compel the colliers to go into the Dock, the pool would remain as much crowded as at present. Mr. .W. , lvlooltE said, that the Bill contained no such clause. - The Bill was then read a second time. SIT E. K.IsIATCHBIJI.I. presented a petition from Rams gate against the Metropolitan Fish Company ; and also a isuilar one from persons ccncerned in Fishing Vessels at c;reenwich. Mr. CA LCRAFT took this opportunity of explaining that his observations on a former night applied, not to the prospec tus :ssued by the Metropolitan Company, but by another,• for there were three Fish Companies. He still, however, objected to the principle of the Companies altogether. He observed that Lord 43eorge Seymour was at the head of the Metropolitan- Fish Company. If that Noble Lord chose. to set up the busi ness of 'a -fishmonger, he would not object to it, but he thought be had no right to come to Parliament to obtain privileges which ether tradesmen did not possess.--(Hear Sir J: YORKE also objected to the Companies, which w 591,1 interfere with the callings of honourable men, which was extremely ancient, as the Apostles themselves could testify: Sir E. HARVEY disapproved of the Company. ZIr.4"URTEIS opposed the Company. i.-111 ,- ;RNALL-said, that the prospectus of the Company iczs a delusion. Nlr. T. WILSON said, that the Company was formed for -the benefit of the public, and would counteract the efforts of fish-salesmen to keep up the price of fish. Mr. Alderman WOOD said, that the Company was esta blished, not for the purpose of catching, hut of buying fish. A retired fish-monger was to be paid 2,00 0 /. a-year to go to Bil lingsgate to buy fish. The effect of such competition must be to raise the price of fish. Mr. J. SMITH thought that much good would arise from the - establishment of the Company. THAMES QUAY. • Colonel TRENCH moved for leave to bring in a Bill to build a quay and terrace on the north bank of the Thames. Mr. CALCRAFT was sorry to show any disposition to oppose a project which many persons considered an improve ment; but he was of opinion that it could not be carried into effect without material injury being done to the property of a large number of individuals. He interfered in this stage of the Bill, because the standing orders of the House had not been complied with, and the Bill was not, therefore, in a situation to go farther.. His objections, in point of form were, first, that a sufficient-schedule, descriptive of the alteration proposed, had • not-been deposited in the proper offices; in the next place, the list furnished of assents and dissents•(among persons interested) - was not complete. He held a petition in his hand (as we under stood from the Duke of Norfolk), complaining of the insuffi ciency of - this list. The petitioner was a very large possessor on 'the Ene proposed to be cut up and altered ; and yet no 'applica tion whatever had been made either to him or his tenants upon the subject. The injury which this quay, if ever erected, must produce to the water-side property, was obvious. Independeni -of the balustrade the foot-path was to be 22 feet above the level af.the carriage way in Arundel-street or Surrey-street; so that the inhabitants of those streets would lose the light as high as their first-floor windows. But his chief reason for opposing the Bill at present was, the total impossibility which he saw of its ever succeeding. The cost alone put it out of all question. -One prospectus had stated the probable expense at 400,0001. Another afterwards raised it to f 109,000/. A third said some - thing about the Chancellor of the Exchequer giving 200,000/. towards the plan.—(Hear, hear !)--But it was not five times 40,0001, nor much less than 5,000,000/., in his opinion, that would complete it. The Hon. Member sat down by declaring that h o saw no reason why that alteration and injury should be thrust upon the Duke of Norfolk, to which both Lord Liver- Tool and the Duke of Northumberland had refused to submit. iIor,HOUSE was compelled to confirm every thing which had been stated by the Hon. Member for Wareham. -Ll..apposed the measure upon a petition from two individuals who held half the Thames bank between them, from Craven street to Temple-bar; (Dr. Kitchner, as we understood• the Honourable Member, being one.) The mud-dock contem plated v:ould he a great nuisance, and quite certain to create miasmata. Ile opposed the Bill in the present stage, to save the enormous expense of going into a Committee above-stairs to no purpose.. Colonel TRENCH said that the conductors of the scheme had aeted advisedly in not making the applications to which toe Hon. Member adverted. He admitted that some injury, for the preent, would accrue to the houses in Surrey street, and others in the same direction ; but, in the end, all that property would be materially benefitted, As they stood, the banks of the Themes were a disgrace to the metropolis. The iMprove ment proposed, persons of the highest qualification would un tie:take to execute for fifi3,ooo/. The original estimate had been for a plain erection, at 403,000/. ; and it was thought possible that Parliament might perhaps give the difference, for -the sake of malting the whole thing an ornament to the city. Per the objection to • the mud-dock, he did not think the in -convenience suggested would arise ; but that dock had form- • ed no part of his original project, and had beet added since, at tile request of numerous parties interested in water-side property. Mr. CROKE a opposed the project, especially pending the . alteration now making at London-bridge. When that bridge was removed, there would be, at low tides, five feet less of wa ter at Sonaerset-house.—nearly the whole present depth—than .there was now. It was impossible to calculate what might be the effect of the new currents which would be created by the r:,inoval of London -bridge; and he decidedly opposed the en tering into any new project touching the banks of the rivet un --til that edifice should be completed. Sir JOSEPH YORKE opposed the measure. Mr. AGAR ELLIS thought it fair to have the bill' read a first time. • Sir FRANCIS 03131 A NEY expressed his sentiments, but was ciente inaudible from the cries of " question" which pre- Lord PALMERSTON said, that the qOestion at present was really no more than whether the House would entertain a proposal for building a quay on the banks of the Thames. Hon. Members would scarcely go so far as to say that such a• plan could not be listened to ? With respect to. London - bridge, if the removal of that had been likely to increase 'the volatile of water in the river, it might have been some reason for refusing to narrow the bed ;- but surely the. fact that it would lessen it was all in favour of the plan: It was impossible not to see that a new thoroughfare, uniting the - two ends of the town, was much wanted. And, for the mere • effect of the thing, a quay would be the sort of communica - • don peculiarly desirable. Every body, as they went in boats up and down the river, constantly exclaimed, " What a pity - it is that there is not a quay !" The Noble Lord concluded by - declaring that he should at least support the reading the Bill a first tame, and sending it to a Committee. - Sir R. WI LSON supported the motion, in the hope that if the measure were found practicable, something might here= after be done for, the improvement of the suburbs; but in giving it his support in the present stage, he begged to be understood, that if in its progress he found it likely to be injurious to individual interests, he would oppose it.. As to what his Hon. Friend (Mr. Croker) had said about the quays AC the Seine and the Liffey, and of those rivers being but small compared with the Thames, he begged to remark, that if .lUs lion. Friend had been in St. Petersburgii, he would have seen-one of one noblest rivers in the world adorned - with quays which-would be an ornament to any metropolis in • the world.. . . • Mr. PEEL said he was sorry that, as representing the sister University, he should differ from his Noble Friend ( Lord Pal.. • nierstorr) on the matter of taste, bet he certainly did differ from tint on this occasion. He did not think the proposed plan was at all necessery as an ornament to the city—particularly when it ' was to lie effected at the expense of particular interests.. At all , events, he would defer the plan until he saw what might be the - effects of the removal of London Bridge on the north side of the ' Thames. lf, as was said, foreigners,' on coming to London, complained of site Thames being hid by the surrounding build ings, what would they say when they found their view obstruct • •ed from the Strand side by a great-brick wall, 30 feet high s and '3O feet wide ? He would adviae -kis Gallant Friend to defer the project for four or five years, and then, if it were found that • that the removal of Louden-bridge had created no obstacles to it, it should hove his support. . Mr. A. BARlNG''supported the motion. Very great incon venience had'already beer) experienced by the- immense con , Course of carriages and vehicles of all descriptions. On some days the great line of communication by the Strand, from the - west end of the town, was literally impassable for hours to - gethein by the throng of waggen/ -and carts. He thought ago-. ther advantage from the proposed plan *mild be, that of,filling -up the waste space near Ilungerford-stairs ' and thus affording a facility of forming a market in that neighbourhood, which was so much wanted to the west end. On the whole, his thorough conviction was, that this would be found not only useful, hut .absolutely indispensable to the convenience cf the metropolis. At all events, it would be only an act of usual courtesy to the Honourable and Gallant Member who introduced it, - to ex- . amine all the bearings of the question, and then to aive their opinion. The House then divided, when there appeared - For bringing in the Bill • - - 85 Against it - 45 Majority - -40 Sir R. SHAW brought in a Bill for allowing the Imperial Mining Company in Ireland to sue and be sued in the name of their Secretary. The Bill was read a first time. MANCHESTER AND LIVERPOOL RAIL-ROA D. - General GASCOYNE presented a petition from the 51ayor and Corporation of Liverpool, praying to be heard by them selves, Counsel, or Agents, against certain parts of the above Bill. The Hon. Member observed, that the road was to be carried about 480 yards beyond the line laid down in the ori ginal plan, which would be found injurious to the interests of the petitioners. . Lord STANLEY objected that the petition did not state the precise parts of the Bill to which it was intended to object. General GASCOYNE thought, that what he. said was suf ficiently specific of the objectionable parts. The:petition was then referred to the Committee on the Bill, and leave given to the petitioners to be heard, by their Counsel against any parts to which they objected. MARINE ALLIANCE INSURANCE BILL. On the motion of Mr. F. BUXTON this Bill was read a third time and passed. 011 i GAS COMPANY. Mr. Alderman BRIDGRS presented a-petition from the City of London Gas-light and Coke Company against the Oil Gas Company Bill. • The petition was referred to the Committee. Dr. LUSH INGTON presented a petition from 309 Me chanics and Artificers of Limehouse in favour of the Equitable Loan Bill. Mr. VESEY FITZGERALD presented a petition from .the Grand Jury of the County Clare, and Mr DAwsox a petition froth certain Noblemen and Gentlemen of Ireland, in favour of the Provincial Banks in Ireland Bill. • Mr. S. RICE brought up the Report of the Committee on the petition for the above Bill, and obtained leave to-bring - in a Bill upon it. Mr. DAWSON presented a petition from all the respectable Merchants in Ireland, prayini; for a removal of all restrictions on trade between England and ireland respectively. He stated that the petitioners particularly prayed for a repeal of the duries on Coals, as they were convinced that the manufacturers of Ire land would be undersold in every market if they were allowed to continue.—Ordered to be printed. Sir JAS. INVIKENZIE presented two petitions from the county of Ross, one praying for an extension of the jurisdic tion of Justices . of Peace in-the recovery of Small Debts, and the other for the amendment of the scotch Judicature Bill.. Mr. HART DAVIS presented a petition from the parish of All Saints, Bristol, praying for the repeal of the House and Window Tax. CATHOLIC CL A ISIS. Lord PALMERSTON presented a petition from the Chan cellor, Masters, and Scholars, of the University of Cambridge, against the concession of any further claims to the Catholics. — The petitioners declared, that though their apprehensions on this subject had been often previously stated to the House, they had recently been much strengthened by the violent lan guage used by. the Catholics in this country. Tile petitioners discovered, both in that language and in the language used by the Catholics elsewhere, proofii of their entertaining principles hostile to religious liberty. They were convinced that if the concessions which the Catholics now asked were granted, they would lead to fresh demands. They also thought that the mea sures which they sought to carry could only be devised with the intention of producing a great change in the church establish ment of England. They therefore prayed the House not to en tertain the question, and more especially not to entertain that part of it which went to admit Roman Catholics into the great council of the nation. The Noble Lord, without any further observation, moved that the petition be brought up. It was brought up accordingly. On the motion that it be laid on the table, Mr. BA NKES, jun., rose to say a sew words in support of this petition. lie should be sorry if it were laid upon the table in perfect silence, and without obtaining some portion of that • attention to which it was entitled,on account of the quarter from which it came. On a former night, when the absence of all pc- - ' titions against these claims was alluded to, as a proof that a great change had taken place in die public mind upon this question, he had taken the liberty of warning Honourable. Gentlemen net to lay too great stress open that circumstance, as he believed that many petitions were at that moment in preparation. In that be lief he had not been disappointed ; indeed, he had at the time in formation on which he thou;;lit he could rely, that the University which he had the lionoiir to represent intended to petition against. He would mention a fact connected with this petition, which might, perhaps, give it a stronger recommendation to the notice of Gentlemen on the opposition benches, than it wnuld other wise possess. Those who were at all acquainted with the in stitutions of our universities, were aware - that it was but seldom • that a layman filled the office of Vice-Chancellor. A layman, however (Dr. Le Blanc, Master of Trinity Hail), now filled it, and fully concurred in the prayer of the petition. It was con sequenny a petition which expressed the sentiments, not merely of the clerical, but also of the.. lay members of the University, and thereforemight be received without exciting the sneers anti laughters which had been excited by some petitions on the same subject, from no ocher cause that he could learn, except they came from clergymen. He protested against the scoffs and scorns which were cast upon the petitions of the clergy : consi dering their education, their rank in life, and their importance in the country, they were entitled at any rate to attention and respect. As they were the only class of men who had no per sons is represent their interests in that Hcuse, it was unfair, impolitic, and unjust, to treat them with ridicule when they presented to its consideration a humble- but honest declaration of their opinions. They were, besides, the only class of men who were so treated ; for if a word were said against the army. the navy, the law, or the commerce of the country, there would be numbers of Members belonging to those different occupations ready enough to start up, and retort with interest the sarcasm on the offender. The clergyman, however, was obliged to si lence, ann could not defend himself by the eloquence of any of his brethren. He ought, therefore, to be defended by the gene rosity of the House against sneers and sarcasms, which, if they meant any thing, could only mean that he ought no: to come there as a petitioner. He, contrasted the different modes in which the petitions of the Catholic Clergy and those of the' Established Church were received by the House. The former were heard with kindness and attention, and were made the subject of lofty encomiums : the latter were flouted and tits countenanced, and all but laughed out of the House. He thought that lion. Gentlemen would perform their duty in a fair and candid. manner by listening to the arguments which the clergy urged against these claims, than by denouncing them without examination as absurd and ridiculous, and by assailing them with laughter as soon as they were brought into the House. Mr. HUME protested against the language of the lion. Mem ber who had just sat down as utterly unealled for by any thing which had occurred in that House. No language had been used by any Gentleman • on his side of the House which could warrant thal on. Memberin asserting that there was a wish on their part to denounce and get rid. of the pe - titions of the clergy. It would he preposterous indeed for men who professed liberal principles to adopt such an illiberal mode of proceeding. (Hear!) The Hon. Gentleman had raised a phantom, which had no ex istence but in his own mind, for the scile purpose of demolish • ing it after it had been raised.—(H ear !)—What he (Mr.H,urne) had said regarding the clergy on a former night, he was ready to say again. lie had explv..'ssed.his regret, and he would again repeat it, that the clergymen of England,. who were so superior to the generality of the people, in education and rank in life, should be a century behind them in mildness and liberality of feeling. With Christian charity always in Their mouths, they - ought to exhibit a little more of Christian charity in their prat- , tice. Enjoying civil rights themselves, they ought not to seek to debar others front full participation in them. If there was any difference in the attention which the House bestowed on the petitions received from the Catholic and established clergy, it was owing to this circumstance---4hat the for former petitioned for justice, whilst the latter sought to perpetuate injustice.— (Hear, hear !) • Mr. BANKES, jumsaid in explanation, that the.remarks he had just made were not so much intended to apply e to what had been said as to what had been done by. Gentleman on the..other side. He recollected that when an Hon. Member presented petitions from the. Clergy of. Essex and from the Clergy of Ely against those claims, they were received with a sneering laugh, instead of the fair attention to which they. were entitled. Sir ELIA B HARVEY begged to observe, - in corroboration of what had just fallen from the Hon. Member for the Univer sity of Cambridge, that when he presented the petition from Archdeaconry of Essex, which did equal honour to time hearts ,and heads of those who signed it, it was received with an up- • roar and clamour which was more worthy of a bear-garden than of the House of Commons.—(Hear,. hear !) Mr. CA RUS .WILSON said ; that as a member of the Uni versity of Cambridge, he felt himself called upon to support the prayer of this petition. He contended that the ridicule thrown upon the petitions of the clergy was most undeserved, as they had always been the guardians .of our religious rights. Mr. SPRING RICE said that he also belonged.tO the Uni versity. of Cambridge, and was most anxious not to ,speak of it in a-disrespectful or. disparaging manner. .He allowed that the petition was entitled to every attention; but at the same time, it ought not to be taken as speaking the unanimous opinion of the University. He knew that there were a great many of the resident members who dissented from its prayer; and he be lieved he might say, that among them were some of the most enlightened and vopular members of the Senate., fti With regard what had fallen from the last speaker, about the clergy be in g the guardians of our religious rights, he thought it was more 'of a Popish than a Protestant doctrine,—( Hear !)—Every man ought to be the judge of his own opinions; and the best de fenders of our religious rights had always been found in the lay members of the coromunity,—(llear !) Mr. BANKES, 3un. admitted that there were many respect ble members of the University, who differed from the senti ments expressed in the petition. Mr. C. WILSON, in explanation, observed, that he had never said that the clergy were the guardians of our religious rights.—He was contending that any thing which tended to lessen the influence of the clergy would be dangerous to the wel -1 fare of the State, when he was stopped by loud cries of " spoke" and " question." The petition was then laid on the table. It was not ordered to be printed. Mr.W. SMITH presented a petition froin a parish in Nor folk, praying for the repeal of the duties on coals carried coast wise. Mr. GRATTAN postponed till Tuesday next his Bill for the Relief - of the Poor in Ireland. A BOLITION ok"rriE SLAVE TRADE. Mr. iVILMOT-HORTON said that he rose in pursuance I of his notice to ask for leave to bring in a Bill to amend the Act of last Session for the Abolition of the Slave Trade. He' understood that the lion. and Learned Gentleman intended to oppose the introduction of the Bill, unless certain clauses were Inserted in• it to prevent the refugee slaves being returned f:sm one of our colonies to another. He wished to know whet:ler the Hon. and Learned Gentleman would postpone his opposi tion to the Bill to the second reading ? Dr. LUSH IN{4TON said that he could by no means con sent to give up refugee Slaves, who had once established them selves in any of our Vest India Colonies. Such a power could not be justified either by any law of nations, or by any law of man. If the Bill created such a povier, he could make no con cession upon it. A t the same time, he must regret that he was obliged to refuse a facility to the Hon. Gentleman. Mr. WIL}IOT-HORTON said, that if such were the Ho nourable Member's resolution, he naust postpone-his motion to a future day, in consequence of the absence of his Right Hon. Friend, the Secretary for Foreign Affairs.—Motion postpcned. WASTE LANDS IN CANADA. Mr. WILMOT HORTON rose to move for leave to bring in a Bill for the incorporation and sale of Waste bands in the province of Upper Canada. Ile said that - when the Bill was presented to the House in due form, they would be better in possession of the details of the measure, than he could presume to put them in the present stage. It would, he thought, be universally ad►aitted, that nothing could be more dqrable than to faci'itate, by a proper application of capital, the colonizt- tion of their waste lands in Canada; and for the particular purpose now reconmiended, it was intended that certain grants should he made to an incorporated company upon a valuation of the particular lands required by thenk in the development of their local plans. The anangements were to be carried into effect by two Commissioners appointed by the Crown, and two by the Company, with conjoint power to decide in such doubtful cases as came before them respecting the purchase of the lands ; and the basis of the general value was to be taken from that recog -. •- nized in the purchase of the other adjacent 'waste lands. The Company were to agree to pay the Government 20,0001. a-year . upon being put in possession of particular lands.; and the amount so paid was, in the first instance, to be applied to the local expenditure of the colony, which had hitherto been de frayed by the Treasury at home. These details would, how ever, be rendered more explicit when the Bill was printed. Mr. W. SMITH did not rise to oppose the application for leave to bring in the Bill, but merely to. sug i r,est that proper pains should be taken to prevent the Indian tribes on the bor ders of the new incorporation from being prejudiced .by the new settlers. Pains-were taken in New Brunswick and Nova., Scotia for a'similar purpose, and he hoped it would not be, lost sight of here. Mr. WILMOT-HORTON had the most perfect confidence that no danger of the kind alluded to would be incurred on the present occasion. Mr.IIU,NII.;: expressed his regret that five years ago when he. bad strongly 'recommended a change in the colonial system. seine preposition of this kind had not been made. He bad said then, ani the result verified his pr o ed ul i d et b il e n. Clefeal that tec by the the SystenLd of f emigration held out at the tiro! w system of the colonial authorities, the inordinate demand of profit-- . -a system so different from augmented fees for indiVidual that pursued by the United States in their sale of waste lands— and the other abuses which, prevailed in - British Colonies. He could now support the'arguments which he had used five years ago by_ the offieial returns since received f r om Canada,• which eneWed that of 39,600 emigrants who had gone out, only 100 families had been able to obtain a footing on the waste lands : 50 that the • great bulk were actually deprived of the intended benefit held out to them in the first instance. If the present Bill, then, were calculated to amend the vices and errors which wire the repro.e,'h of the Honourable Gentleman'S predecessor in office, it ehould have his (Mr. Hume's) approbation. He H would repeat, that fir the la->t 12 or 14 years tlee colonial system had been a disgrace to the Government; so much so, that if theta were a reformed House of CoMmons, he would impeaeli Lord Bathurst for a breach of duty, and move an addrees to the King for his dismissal from the colonial office. His reasons for such impeachment would not be confined to the mat-administration of Upper 'Canada, but to the general abuses of the'Noble Lords system in the lonian Islands, the Cape of Good Ilhpe, and the other settlements. That was his honest conviction of - Lord Bathurst's system, and that it ought to have led to a general colonial inquiry, to see if a more efficient check could not be put upon local abuses. Look, for instance, at the Cape, where the grossest and most glaring injustice was daily suffering-.-wheie Britieli subjects were transporting from thence to Botany Bay, under circumstances of the most aggravated oppression, and where complaints were daily-made which called for redress from any man who had a heart for human feeling. lie wished it was in his power to do more than utter the lan guag,eof complaint with reference to those abuses, and at least to remove the inefficient head of the department, who had ap plied no corrective to them. Respecting the present Bill, he was anxious to know whether it was intended to cede 07 grant to the new company all the Crown reserves a nd church returns without qualification ? Did. they mean to sell the land, and leave the new purchaSers to retail at their own prices ? If they did, they were likely -to create a private monopoly, as injurious as the previousesystem. In fairness, all this ought to be ex plained in the first instance. Mr. BARING wished to know if this Bill were intended merely to admit the principle of the proposed change of system, or to enable the Crown at once to execute it in all its details ? mA UR ICE I'l TZGE RA LD said that he could not concur in what his Hon. Friend-( Air. Ilume) had said respect ing the abuses under. the late system of emigration e for he knew that many of those whO had emigrated from that part of the country (tlie south of Ireland) with which he was acquaint ed, had written home, speaking in the highest terms of their treatment, as well as of the conduct of the Government agent to them; and, as a member of a Committee, he could further speak from official documents of the gratitude and improved condition of the new-settlers within the last 2 or 3 years. Mr. GORDON defended- the character of Lord Bathurst from the Hon. Member's severe and harsh attack. Why - did he attack that Noble Lord, at the. same moment that he ap proved of this bill ? His great complaint appeared to be, that thiS bill had not been brought forward five years ago, without knowing whether there was at the time he spoke of, either capital or private enterprise to promote such an undertaking.— ( Hear !)—The appointment of official heads of colonies be longed to the Government generally, and Lord Bathurst had no right to be rendered particularly responsible for individual. errors, if they had arisen in such appointments; at all events, he was sure the Noble Lord carefully attended to all the details of colonial business. Mr. BRIGHT heartily approved of the proposed plan, which was absolutely necessary to increase and rourish - the co lonial population.- He thought, - however, that the measure ought to receive the previous sanction of the local authorities, .before it was finally decided upon by Parliament. 31r. BARING said, that upon the general ques tion he was of opinion that they could not look upon these colonies as likely to remain permanently in their present relative situation to this country—they had no separate interest which could promote the continuance of that relative connection —they - were agrict tural, and as such identified with the chief produce of could northern European countries in the home marke t—the y not, therefore, in tile nature of things, remain permanently co lonies to this country : The question then arose, and it very important one, how far it might he wise and dignified for a country like Gre a t Britain to do ea rl y and liberally of doing vas a that which she mi g ht b e un der the absolute n ecessit y a quStiori which he thought the time had arm • hy of the Canadas n e n d er f : or th d a is t euss in a few years h ence , i n a very different manner. was discuss ing. Any person acqua i nte d with the geograp m cc u u s n t tr k y no to w b t e hel s r h r e el h a a t d i v d e es c c o r ig e n d e commercial n o t t o o w th h e ic m h, o t t i he y r r had, however, an ot h er important impul se not tro g ni.mely, the pre va ili ng feeling of Al i:aliosiottuhautti to lose sight o l the new Governments to got rid of European domination.—(Hear!)—lt was time then for Government to consider at what period of maturity they would be fairly and honourably ready to allow the colonies the benefit of a separate system. He admitted that this was a bold but a pressing consideration, which in the nature of things ought to govern the principle. of the projected new arrangements.--. If he understood the object of the pre,ent Bill, it went to en courage colonization by locating emigrants upon those waste lands. . Mr. WII4MOT HORTON said that colonization and emi gration were only incidental to the new system : there were other beneficial measures in progress. Mr. BA RING said, that still the Crown was to invest cer tain privileges in the hand of a particular company, who were to pay a large sum for these wastelands ; to indemnify them selves at a profit, the company would raise the price necessarily upon the emigrants : how, then, would this encourage coloni -zation in the way held out? lie would rather, he confessed, have the whole put under the management and discretion of the local legislature, who would be best prepared to Meet and ex pect all attendant contingencies: The best security for the con duct of the new company, to prevent them from holding their monopoly without making any attempt to clear and cultivate it, would be to provide that all the lands which should remain un- settled after a certain number of years, should again revert to the Crown. Mr. ROBERTSON said a few words. Mr. WILMOT HORTON replied. In Upper Canada there was an indefinite extent of lands, capable, under culti vatiozz, of absorbing the largest population contemplated by any gentleman in the House. The object was to bring considerable portions of this land into immediate cultivation by the capital of a company, under regulations dictated by this Government. As to the security proposed for bringing the lands into cultiva tion within a certain time, the Hon. Gentleman who urged that must have a low opinion of Goverament to think such advice necessary. That was already and had been long been a condi tion of granting land. This was no measure of monopoly. There were abundant allotments of the lands in the possession of private individuals. Government was not to be charged with indueing emigration. The States. of Canada were not in want of population. Labour could not Command a price as in the United States ; but capital was most materially necessary, and this measure would facilitate the transfer of it.. He promised any information upon the details which might be required of him. He must revert for a minute to the general charge made against the Colonial Department by an Honourable Gen tleman opposite ; he could not separate the parties im plicated—the charge was against the whole establishment. Why did not the Honourable Gentleman make it More spe cifically against some one member of administration, as he was bound to do, rather than indulge in vague clamour and idle declamation ? He claimed, on the contrary, for the Colonial Department, and the Noble Lord at the head of it, a • full proportion of that approbation with which the, anxious labours of all departments in the Government were rewarded, in their zeal to remove shackles and embarrassments laid upon the colonial and mercantile interests by the. supposed wisdom of our ancestors. At any rate, he wished that the Hon. Gentle man would give him, by a specific charge, a specific opportu nity for justification. Mr. HETME explained. It was hard to charge him with being indefinite, who had taken up so much time in each of ' the -last five Sessions with complaints against the conduct of the Colonial Governors, and the neglect of the Colonial office.—Leave was given to bring in the Bill. VAN DIENIAN'S LAND. . . Mr. IVILNIOI`2I - ibidON obtained leave to bring in a Bill similar to the foregoing, for the enclosure and cultivation of waste lands is Van Dieman's Land. • BANKING COMPANIES IN IRELAND. •Sir GEORGE HILL moved for leave to bring in a Bill for the regulation of Copartnerships of certain Banters in Ireland. His object was to amend and enlarge the Act of last year on this subject, without, however, interfering with the Charter of the Bank of Ireland. Mr. DAWSON supported the motion. He presented no fewer than six petitions from different parts of Ireland, calling for the improvement and 'extension of banking establishments. There was but one opinion as to the utility of provincial banks. Those Companies were - Calculated to unite all parties—Ca tholics and Protestants. It was for the want of such banking phrtneraltips that the south-west of Ireland fell into such mi sery some few years ago, when all but ten of the private bankers failed. He wished to assimilate the law of Ireland to the law of Scotland . in Banking Companies. Neither he, nor, be believed, any person connected with the Company, wished to trench on the privileges of the Bank of Ireland. He could not hut perceive that it was through fear that establishment be- Came lately so liberal. It was only "list year, after his own notice of motion to repeal the restrictions on Banking in Ire. ' land, that the Bank of Ireland . reduced their rate of discount. For the same reason the Bank of Ireland was now establishing branch Banks through the country. He thought that these ' large copartnerships would be the means of introducing capital into Ireland, and would give to that co u nt r y a ll the benefit of the Union. H e hoped that the Chancellor of the Exchequer would see the advantage of these Companies to Ireland, and that, by the diffusion of capital, • the revenue, as well as the wealth of the country, would be increased. Increased revenue, and the general prosperity, - would enable the Right Hon. Gen tleman to made a farther reduction of taxation. - Sir HENRY PARNELL said that the conduct of the Com pany of the Bank of Ireland was improper and inconsistent - with what was expected from it. It was to that Company was owing the failure of the private banks. of Ireland a few years ago. Such conduct, on the part of that bank, should induce the House to be sparing of giving monopolies for the future.— lie asked the Right Hon. Gentleman, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, how far useful .it was to keep the law of England and Ireland different on that subject? Why was there one system in Ireland and another its this country ? He hoped that this whole. question would be taken into consideration, and that the laws in both countries would be equalised, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER assured his Hon. Friend near him and the Hon. Baronet, that he was as anxious as any Mentber that the country should profit by the Banking system, and he would" give his best assist ance to the improvement of the laws. He was not tohe in fluenced by any partiality in favour of -the .Bank of Ireland, farther than , that they had a Charter, and it was the duty of Government to see that that agreement was not violated. It was easy to say that it would be advantageous if they were not hampered with the consequences of the Charter to the Bank in Ireland ; but they were hampered with them, and that was not any reason for violating such Charter. Before he could consent to the measure now proposed, he must ascertain all the circum stances of the case, and know whether as to the equity of the contract, the Bank had not done all that they had any right to expect. He should feel it his duty to look 'after the interests of the Bank ; not because it was a Bank, but because it was a body with whom the Government had entered into compact. The Bank might, like every body else, have looked after profit ; but if the House meant to interfere with existing contracts as a ground for doing so, it must first be ascertained whether any undertaking had been violated. Mr. Alderman WOOD said, that if the measure which he proposed last year were renewed, it would he more beneficial to Ireland in causing money to flow to that country than the measure now proposed. This measure would only cause a greater circalation of paper. - Mr. S. • RICE approved of the Bill now proposed to be brought in: Discounts could only be had in Dublin ; and the bills must be accepted by some individual in Dublin; so that , the agency of 1 per cent., with the d i s count of 5 per cent., pa nndr,expensesprovinces in o a f l P itr Yta per r ' cent. The introduction o f P rov i nc i a l Banks would be most beneficial, by introducing E ng li s h punc tuality in buSiness as well as E n g lis h capital. • Mt. TRANT supported the m otion ; provincial accommo dationes jte' &c. made the discount to th ose i n t h e was much wanted. Mr. 111. FITZGERALD spoke to the like effect. The Irish Bank had refused to discount provincial paper, except there were acceptances obtained in Dublin.. That was most inju rious to provincial interest. Mr. SNEYD said be was a Director of the Bank of Ireland, and he denied the charges brought against the Bank. The distresses of the South of Ireland had been ma i n l y re li eve d b y ass i s tance from the Bank. Mr. A TTWOOD supported the measure. - SI r. M. FITZGERALD and Mr. SNE VD mutually explained. —The motion was then put and carried. IRISH BUTTER TRADE. Sir 11. PARNELL said that the subject was one of great importance, both with respect to its amount, and the number of the persons who were employed in the butter trade. The trade was perfectly, free until 1812, when it was placed under several vexatious regulations. The principal regulation required that every cask of butter must be sold, tasted, and marked in open marked. The taster had the power to mark the butter, Ist, 2d, or .-3d quality, and so ma terially affect the sale. The taster was always a person of no tasting took place e ach cask k r s e 2 A d. c t; but ts scarcely very g r respectability of station, and was liable to abuse his power. The extent of oppression and corruption which ca fi s t e r where 20d. anti 25d. was pot charged. The taster was gene rally a creature of the Merchant. As the abuse was no older than the year 1812, he hoped the Ilouse would consent to its correction. There was a t' s there The any case . no case more deserving of its atten tion. lie.moved for copies of all Memorials presented to the Treasury relating to the butter trade of Ireland. Mr. C. GRANT said, that the argument dwelt upon by the Hon. Baronet were equally good against the linen trade. He would not originat e any measure himself on the subject of the butter trade, but would leave it entirely in the hands of the lion. Mover. Air. HUME wished all restrictions should be removed from the butter .trade in Ireland, as they were from that of Scot land. Mr. S. RICE thought, after all that had been said upon the subject, the Government should remedy. the grievance complained of, especially as they admitted its existence. Mr. DAWSON said the measure would have his warm sup port. He wished these restrictions should be taken elf the butter trade; but he' trusted the House would not meddle with the linen trade, which was at present most prosperous in the North of Ireland. Mr. GRArrAN„ thought every thing should be done to advance the butter trade, as it was next in importance to that in linen. Mr. 'l'. WILSON concurred with the Honourable Member. in the importance of this trade, and thought it a fit subject for inquiry. Mr. NV. FITZGERALD .said the subject was most im portant to Ireland, and the prosperity of many cities in that country may be traced-to those regulations now condemned. He was inclined to think the restrictions imposed on the trade, when considered in the abstract, to he grievances, but he wished for the opinions of those interested. If any Bill did pass upon the subject, he trusted such a clause would not be . . smuggled into it as into the last Bill, which, for the purpose of serving the cooperinf , trade of Cork, compelled persons to send for their casks to that city, from a distance of 150 miles. After a tew words front Sir G. HILL, Sir H. PARNELL said, he thought it the duty of the Go vernment to bring in a Bill. He brought the grievances of the system before the House, and the responsibility rested with Mi nisters.—The Papers were ordered at cordingly. The Bill for impounding Distress in Ireland, was read a second time. The Bill for the Recovery of Small Debts in Scotland, was ordered to be read a second time on Friday. , - The Caledonian Canal Bill, and the Jury Consolidation Bill, were ordered to be read a second time to-morrow. ASSESSED TAXES. - - On the motion for the third readbg of the Assessed Taxes Bill, the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, he had three clauses to propose ir, additiom The first was, to exempt poor people, who were now exempted, from paying a tax for one dog, but the condition of whose exemption was not paying the Assessed Taxes, and which condition would cease by the present bill, from paying any tax for their single dog. On the clause being proposetl, Air. HUAI E asked the reason • for it, and inquired of the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he meant to take the tax off shepherds' dogs in Scotland, which was a sort of vexation without yielding any revenue ? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCIJEQUER explained that the criterion of poverty, on which the - eXeroption was before . founded, was done away, and this clause was to continue the exemption. He understood ail the persons keeping shepherds' dogs were at present practically relieved, and exempted from paying duty. Mr. HUME thought this tax should be done away. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER then present— ed another clause, to exempt interior windows of houses from all duties; or such as derive their light from other windows. Mr. HUAIE again pressed on the Chancell64 - attention the Shepherds' dogs._ The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, every dog would be a shepherd's dog, if Mr. flume's principle were. adopted, and the tax on dogs was, in his opinion, a proper one.. 111 r. Alderman WOOD pressed on the Chanc e ll or ' s a tt en ti on the propriety of removing the tax . on windows altogther, rather than have these different clauses and this constant legislation. He hoped the tax would . be - removed altogether. lle com plained of the trouble of appeals, and thought if the Right Honourable Gentleman knew all of it, if he Were a CoMmts sioner, he would certaiely give up these taxes. The measupes„ of relief granted by the Right Hon. Gentleman had given_no sa tisfaction out of do ors . Mr. HOME SU3INER . and Mr. DRUMMOND said a few words on the Shepherds' Dogs. The clause was then . agreed to. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER proposed an other clause, granting allowance to the Clerks of the Coikra_isr sioners for Assessed Taxes. Mr. HUME stated, that he had lately received a letter from • the Mayor of Yarmouth, informing hint that, at the last Court of Appeals held in that borough, upwirds of 700 cases under the Assessed Taxes had been gone into. - He thought ,this wag , e good reason why these taxes should be repealed.. There wss a bounty for the surveyors to make surcharges by the pre' sent regulations, as they obtained something whenever they i CHANCELLORe o l r a tie, every. exempting surchargeempting pot-boys under 15 y ea rs of a, e.— were successful, an d were never pun i shed when they failed.-- • He suggested th at t h e surveyors should be subjected to soros mulct of the e EXCHEQUER, ydid'Dotniakegd. i proposed his fourth Bill, with these clauses, w as t h en ' read ' a third time and passe d. Upon the Wine Duty Bill being read a second time, Mr. HUME complained that the present measure ailbrded no relief to the importer of (34e xVioe. The Colonists at the Cape had been induced to extend their Plantations on the faith of an Act of Parliament; teclaring that their diities should be only bee-third of the duties imposed upon ether wines: NOW the duties had been reduced upon every species of wine, excePl that from the Cape, which was allowed to remain as Lavit. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER denied that the former low rate of duties had been held out to the Colonist of the Cape, as perpetual. On the contrary they had been duly warned. that thg low rate of duty upon their wines would no!, be continued. He was not prepared to say that the case a the growers and importers of Cape wines might not deserve some consideration in the Committee. Mr. Alderman WOOD stated, that many retail dealers iii wine were now taking . oil;' 12s. a-doien• from their stock, but they were apprehensive that this reduction might not be allow ed to them by Goveenment. • o Mr. HERR lES stated,. that the wine duty bad :3 een laid ? at so much per ton, and although the allowance now to b! made by Government would extend much lower tan to that quantity, it certainly could not e be carried so low as ten 01. twenty. gallons. The other Orders of the Day were then disposed of, and at $ quarter past Twelve the House adjourned. From the LONDON GAZETTE, March Ot BANKRUPTS. - G. Graham, Sunderland near the Sea, master-mariner, to surrender April 5, (1, 26, at the Bridge Inn, Bisliop-M'ear' mouth. Solicitor, 51r. Blakiston, Symond's Inn. l T. Taylor, Ashton-under-Line, draper, March 30, 31, APT 26, at the Coach and Horses, Manchester. Solicitors, MessrS , Willis, Watson, Bower, and Willis, Tokenhouse.yard, Lod i ' bury. J. Ashton,. jun. , Fenn cy-Ben tley, Derbyshire, cheese-facto r f March 29, 30, April 26, at the Green Man Inn, Ashborn e • Solicitors, Messrs-Holme, Frampton, and Loftus, N e w-inn% ) Drant, Kingston-upon-Hull, perfumer, March 18, I Y' April 26, at the Angel Inn, Sheffield. Solicitor, Mr. Wilsol%, Greville-street, Hatton-garden. - J. Hirst, York, cloth-merchant, March 19, April 3, 26, a` the Bankrupts' Court, Basingball-street. Solicitor, Mr. Rusly bury, Darth usian. street, Charterhouse-squ are.: ' R. B. Hawes, Horsley-street, Walworth, carpenter, Marc!! 19, 26, April 26, at the Bankrupts' Court, Basingliall-stre cT Solicitors, Messrs. Watson and Son, Bouveric-street, fle et ' street. DIVIDENDS. • April 6, J. Moore, I. Tennant, and J. Foster, Monkton, Yorkshire, flax-spinners—April 12, S. and k• Nichols, New Woodstock, - Oxfordshire, spinsters—April •," W. Phillips, Bristol, linen-draper—April 7, G. Rees, Hal e r fordwest, linen-draper—April- 7, E. L. Edwards, Cardig 3 `"? linen-draper—April 16, W. Rooke, Noble-street, silk-manuf 3 '' turer—April 19, B. Wainwright, Hereford, maltster—Ap rill) ; 'l'. Fox, Great Surrey-street, Elackfriars-road, woollen-d ro n e —Aprils, P. Murphy, Charlotte-street, Bloomsbury-squaere: wine-merchant—May 7, N. Gilibee, .Denton, Kent, coal-riled chant--April 6, W. Robinson, Liverpool,• upholsterer--APr" 5, T. Gray, March, Cambridgeshire, common-brewer. • CETITIFICATES, Antic. 5. re, J. Williams, Kentish-town, coaeli-master—E. Caroline-street, Bedford-square, tail,,r—T. It. Dixon, G eor ge, Spital-fields, 'sugar-refiner—T. Wragg, Maiden 7 lane, Islington, and Ave Maria-lane, brewer. PARTNERSHIPS DISSOLVED. af' T. Penny and J. Willis, Bristol, painters—H. Carter tal ic y, A. Brown, Newcastle-upon-Tyne—R. Kitchen and J. Salford, Lancashire, house and furniture-paintel:l;—B. 3 0 ,", i rst Bagshaw, Little Ilubklow, Derbyshire, farmers—G. Bro d "' and T. Smith, Derby, .briziers--,W. Marsh and R. Good w oo , Glocester, pin -makers—N. - Nicholson and H. T. ThomPl ot t, Cockermouth, Cumberland, attornies -7 H. Holbrook, H. Val b 9, H. Spencer, and J. Johnson, Spondon, Heanor, and P e ' bobber or twist net lace-machine-makers. • • nO t SLEEP AND SUPPER-F.ATING.— Some L'B l a 1 ~/ 1 1 sleep if they eat.any supper, and certainly the lighter this 11)11-ot is the better. Others need notput on thair nightcaps, if they (I° t it9 first bribe their' stomachs to good behaviour by a certain qua"or of bread and cheese and beer, &c. and go to bed almos t p er mediately after. As to the wholesomeness of a solid suPPP• a I se., we do not think it advisable, but habit may have mad e " w ee dispensable, and we know it is often the most comfortabl e bo re among the middle classes of ,society, who have as large 11 9 t hef of health as any. We caution bad sleepers to beware bow a el indulge in the habit of exciting sleep, by taking any of til e a pd paratlons of opium, they are all injurious to the stoma i " often inconvenient in their effects upon the bowels.