The Sun. — London, England, 1825-02-25 00:00:00

"neve y because it enabled him to gate his full concurrence .in the sentiments it contained, but because he could declare that the very words of it were such as he would have wished to have written himself, if he had been called upon to do so. He b id always felt that the question was not a theological question, or even a Catholic question, but that it was an Irish question. It was not so muca what the Catholic felt on the subject, or ho.v anxious he was to be admitted to the same, privileges as his Protestant neighbours, but the real question was—how long should the religious tranqui ll ity which now reig ned among all countries on the face of the globe, he withheld from Ireland ? This was a question in which every Protestant, as well as every t,..atholie, Was interested. It formed the elements out of The Bi ll which the prosperity and tranquillity of Ireland had grown. wl-ieh would give the C a tholics of Ireland and Engsomland that far which they so earn es tly pray or ed, he knew must, e other,,inevitably pass—it was his fervent hope that it might be carried. soon. ,He prayed to God that the prosperity of the country might be the consequences that would, as he was sure they would, naturally follow the measure when it was passe d., and t h a i itroight, pass with the full and perfect ass ent and con e3rrenea-of a - large portion of the Protestant population. He trusted that when the Bill passed, there would be found multi t,.i.les-of Protestants to hold forth the hand of peace to those r.t,o had entitled themselves to the lasting gratitude of a united people ,from.having been a divided nation. He ho p ed that we shoul4.l',all live to see the time when, though religious differences might remain, for those he could never expect to see removed, all the animosities of religion should for ever cease. The Marquis of DOWNSUIRE said, that it would be of the utmost advantage to this conntry, as well as to Ireland, to grant those concessions which the Roman Catholics had for so many years sought from their Lordships and the legislature of the country, in order to place them o n a footin g with the Prat. teatant 'portion of the community. In signing the petition now before the House, he had only done . his duty to a very large portiOn of the population of Ireland. He would say, that the cause had his best wishes, and he most sincerely prayed for its success.—The petition was then laid on the table. Lord GORT said, that he had to present a petition of a very different nature from that just presented by the Noble Marquis kLansdown) • it was from the Lord Mayor, Sheriffs, and Com mon Council of the City of DeWitt, against Catholic Emancipa tion.--Laid on the table. Lord GO,RT then presented a petition from the Guild of 31crelants of the City of Dublin against Catholic Emancipa tion. The Noble Lord observed, that it was signed by 1,200 persons of the highest respectablity in the city of Dublin, many whom were Noblemen. lord HOLLAND said, that he understood the Noble 'Lord (Dort) to say, that the petition included the names of many Noblemen and Gentlemen. He (Lord H.) felt at a loss to con nect th is assertion with the title of the petition, " fr om the Ou hi of Merchants of the City of Dublin." Lo:d.GORT—The Merchants are a large body of the city ‘f Dublin, and they have the power of electing any person, avid they frequently do, who has in any way si g nalised himself. The election of a member of their body also elects a freeman of Dublin. Many Noblemen are therefore members of the Cluild of Merchants. To go no farther than myself, lam one. The Duke of LEINST Elt said that he was a Member of the Guild of Merchants, but he had never heard of the Pe tition. Earl GROSVENOR said, that it had been necessary for the Noble Lord (Gort) to give the explanation he had given. The Petition was then laid on the table. GLEBE LANDS. Several Members from the House of Commons brought up - the Glebe Lands Bill, which was read a first time. The House then adjourned at ELEVEN O'CLOCK. HOUSE OF COMMONS. The House was engaged at its sitting in forming a Com mittee to try the contested election for Huntingdon. The ballot took till half-past four o'clock, at which time the Gallery was opined. 3lr. SCOTT presented a Petition from Bridport, praying for -the repeal of the Duty on Coals. Mr. LESTER presented a Petition from Poole, praying the repeal of the Assessed Taxes. Mr. W. DUNDAS presented a Petition from Edinburgh, pra , ying a repeal of the 'Duties on Fire Assuranzes. nir J. NEWPORT presented a Petition from the city and county of Waterford, most respectably signed by those of the most considerable landed property, and passed at a meeting dis tinguished for the dispassionate propriety of the proceedings, against the impending Rill to put down the Catholic Associa tion passing into a law. Tile first signature was that of a person who had since died at 103 years of age, in possession of great landed property. Mr. GEORGE LAMB supported the Petition. Mr. D. GILBERT presented a petition from Penzance, - praying the repeal of the duty on 'coals. Also a petition in taveur of the County Courts Bill. A similar Petition from Truro. Sir W. GUISE presented a similar Petition from Chelten ham. • Sir N. COLBORNE presented a Petition from Magistrates sad freeholders of Norfolk-against removing the Assizes from lltietford. Mr. DYSON attended with the list of names appointed for the Election CoMmittee, which were declared as follows : Sir D. J. Astley ; F. Hodgson, Esq. ; W. Holmes, Esq.; Jornes Philliinore, Esq. ; lion. Henry B. Lygon ; W. H. 'Plant, Esq.; John Bai ; R. 13. Cooper, Esq. ; C.. Ross, Esq. ; Hon. T. Knox ; .1. Mr. Clements, Esq. ; iii. Cjrbett, Esq. ; T. Whitmore, Esq. ; Lord Nugent ; and Si: George Warrender. • Mr. RENFE LI, moved for an account of 'the uumber of prsons confined for offences against the game laWs during the last year, distinguishing those who were sentenced to the treadmill.—Ordered. Air. G. LA;'IB presented a Petition from the Roman Ca- th:):ics of the town of Dungarvan, against the Bill for sup prr.ssing the Catholic Association.—Ordered to be printed. WORTLEY presented a Petition from the mer chants and traders of Whitby, praying for the repeal of the stamps on receipts for money. lie also presented a Petition Iron; tne same place in favour of the County Courts Bill ; and a Petition from Doncas,er, praying that no alteration shall be inale in the Corn laaws.—Laid on the table. IIONYWOOI) presented a petition from the inhabi tant.; of Deptford, praying for the repeal of the Assessed Taxes. Ordered to be printed. The Hon. Member also presented a petition.frorn Aylesford, praying for the repeal of the Duties on Coals carried Coast-wise. Laid on the table. Ar. ASTELL presented a petition from Bridgewater, for the repeal of the house and Window Tax.—Laid on the able. _ _ . Mr. C. HUTCHINSON rose to present a petition from the Roman Catholic Inhabitants of the city of Cork, against the i for the suppression of the Catholic Association. The peti boners stated, that " the House had no right to interfere with a vuluntary contribution, the objects of which had been already avowed. Those objects were to afford education to the poor, and to defend the character of the vilified and oppressed pea santry of Ireland, who were exposed to many local injuries and hardships. The prayer of the petition was, that counsel should be heard at the bar in support of the Catholic Association. The :pe.t.tiou (observed the lion. Member) came from the county of CCork and the city of Cork—the former, the largest county in Ireland, and the latter the largest city after Dublin in that country. It was most numerously signed, and the meeting at which it was proposed was, he understood, enost respectably at tended. The Roman Catholics in that county, and he might _ add, throughout Ireland, were indignant at the attack made on the Association, and they bad but one opinion as to the advan tagss which had been derived from it. He conceived that the way in which the Association had been spoken of in that House was most unjust and most unwarrantable. He spoke warmly 00 this subject, because it excited in his breast feelings of the warmest description. The measure against which the petition was directed was not more disliked by the Roman Catholics tiata it was by all liberal Protestants. It was asserted that the Roman Catholics hated the Protestants, because, forsooth, the Protestants were a ll O rangemen . Thi s was a gross misrepre sentation. The Orange party formed a very small portion of the Protestant body. When it was stated that the Catholics, when they declared against the ()range party, declared also ,v:air.st the Protestant body, the statement was entirely errone ow:. If time were given, the petitions against this measure fry , eve ry part of Ireland would be most numerous. The table wou ld be so crowed with petitions, that the Speaker would not only be prevented from seein g the mace or the sergeant, but the clock would be hidden from his view.—(A laugh.)-41 ten days or a fortnight were given to collect the sense of the people in different parts of Ireland, they would be enabled, from the petitions of Catholics and Protestants, to see what the real Ca uiclic and Protestant feeling was. The petition was then brought up, lead, and ordered to be printed. fir. RUM BO IJD prevented a petition f rom G reat Yarmouth against the duties on coals. —Ordered to be printed. WODEHOUSI presented petitions from Hillingdon, sad two other places in the countyof Norfolk, against the duties on.coals.—Laid on the table. Mr. Alderman THOMPSON presented a petition f rom t h e dealers in tobacco of the city of London, praying for a reduc tion of the duty on that article. It was purchased, the peti tioners observed, at 4d. per lb., and the duty on it was no les s than 4s. per lb. This, they complained, was a very great in_ centive to smuggling; and they also objected to the tax, be ea.uee it fell most severely on the lower orders of the people. li e (Air. Alderman Thompson) hoped, that amongst the reduc crocAs which the Chancellor of the Exchequer meant to announce in his financial statement on Monday next, the tax on tobacco would not be forgotten. The petition was then read, and ordered to be printed. Mr. Alderman THOMPSON presented a petition from cer ' tarn charitable institutions against the duties on legacies.— Or dered to be printed. I Mr. Alderman THOM PSON moved for an account of the quantity of raw and thrown:silk imported into this country, from Jan. 1824 to Jan.. 1825, distinguishing the country whence it came • also an account of the drawback paid on silk lodged in warehouses, under the act of last session, and the towns where the same was warehoused.—Ordered. CATHOLIC ASSOCIATION. Mr. ABERCROMBY presented a Petition from the Parish of St. Andrew's Dublin, praying that the Catholic Association might not be suppressed, and stating that the tranquillity of Ireland was due to its exertions. The Ron, and Learned Member referred to a petition from certain. Presbyterians in the County of Tyrone, calling upon the House to put down the Catholic Association, and stating that it gave protection to those who involved the country in murder, rapine, and blood shed. He knew not where this murder, rapine, and bloodshed were to be found, when they saw in the King's Speech the de:. lightful truth that all those severe measures which the House had adopted for coercing the country had been withdrawn.— fie alluded to this petition now, because he did not hear it read when it came before the House, and appealed to the one he was about to present as well as to the Speech from the Throne for a contradiction of its statements. . . Sir J. NEWPORT said, he was well advised that the Go vernment possessed documents from the Marquis Wellesley, in which that Noble Lord expressed his opinion that the Catholic Association had contributed to the tranquillizing of that coun try. He had been informed from a Noble Peer that such a do cument was now in possession of the other House. Mr. GOULBURN made an observation across the table, which we could not hear. _ . Sir .J. NEWPORT said, that he should move for the pro duction of the document to-morrow. Mr. Secretary PEEP, said, that if such a document ex isted, it would necessarily be laid before the Committee up stairs. Sir J. NEWPORT said he had the fact from a Noble Peer who was incapable of telling a falsehood, and he should to- . morrow move that the document be lid on the table of the House. The'petition was ordered to be printed. Mr. DENMAN presented two similar petitions, one from a parish in the county of Cavan ; and the other front Listowel, county of Kerry. - Sir T. LETHBRIDGE expressed his surprise at the argu ments of the petitioners, and of the Honourable. Gentlemen who presented all these Petitions. When they assumed that the tranquillity of Ireland was owining to the acts of this Catho lic Association, he thought they were really going a little too far. He would ask those lion. Gentlemen what might have been the conduct of this Association, if no such Bill as this had been introduced ? What was to stop this self-erected, self-ap pointed body, which was responsible to no human being for its acts, and over whom the Roman Catholics themselves had no controul ? He should have been surprised, indeed, if the Government had permitted it to continue its existence. In mercy to the Roman Catholics themselves, he urged the Go vernment to persist with a firm and steady hand to press this measure. It was not for the protection of Ireland alone, but of the empire at large. Mr. DEN MAN explained. Mr. HUME said he would answer the question of the Ho nourable Baronet. They could only judge of what would be the future conduct of the Catholic Association by the past ; and that, according to the Attorney-General for Ireland, had been perfectly legal. He was glad to see the Hon. Baronet so mor tified at seeing all these petitions from the Catholics, and none of an opposite nature. It shewed the improved feeling of the people of England upon the question, when no petitions ap peared except from the Clergy, whom he did not blame for being anxious to preserve their own possessions and incomes.— The people remained passive, notwithstanding the calls which had been made upon them by the Hon. Baronet, and by the Right Hon. Secretary for the Home Department (or the Fo reign Secretary), and in spite of the placards which they saw stuck up all over the Metropolis. Mr. secretary PEEL said, that he was surprised at the Ho nourable Members having ventured to make such an assertion as that he had sounded an alarm to the country upon this ques tion, and in the same sentence to allude to placarding the wails of ie metropolis. lle never opened his lips upon the subject of petitioning ; and he would tell the Ilon. Member, that in the whole course of his life, he never encouraged a petition against the Roman Catholics— ( Hear, hear !)—because he never wished to see a petition upon any subject which did not arise from the spontaneous feeling of the people.--(Cheer4:o—liow, thereihre, could the Hon. Gentleman venture to accuse hint of sounding an alarm, and to connect his name with the placarding the walls of the metropolis.— (Hear, hear t)—He was surprised that any Hon. Member of that House should condescend to adopt such means of argument. Mr. HUME explained that he did not allude to the Right Hon. Gentleman. After mentioning the Secretary for the Home Department, be corrected himself, and said the Foreign Secretary. Mr. BUTTERWORT H said he was in possession of infor mation which shewed that the Protestants of Ireland were in alarm at the existence of the Catholic Association. The petitions were ordered to be printed. Lord C. FITZROY presented a petition from the inhabitants of the borough Of Thetford, praying that the Assizes may not be removed from that town.—Ordered to lie printed. Mr. DENISON presented a petition front Croydon, praying a repeal of that part of the Assessed Taxes which pressed upon the necessaries of life.—Ordered to be printed. Mr. GRATTAN presented a petition from the Coal Meter' of Dublin, praying that the Duty on Seaborne Coals be re pealed.—Referred to the Committee on the Local Taxation of Dublin. Mr..l. BENET T presented a petition from Warminster, pray ing a repeal of the Assessed Taxes. NORFOLK SUMMER ASSIZES. Col. WODEIf OUSE rose to call the attention of the House to the petition of the Magistrates of the county of Norfolk, pray ing for leave to bring in a Bill to remove the Summer Assizes front that county front Thetford to Norwich. The Hon. Mem ber said that there were ample reasons why the House should comply with the prayer of the petitioners, and particUlarly dwelt upon the distance which the prisoners had to be removed to trial, and the demoralizing effects which grew out of that-re moval. He contended also that it involved. a violation of the spirit of the laws of the country. A new county gaol had been built at Norwich at a great expence, .and it was now rendered as perfect, and was as well regulated as any gaol in the king dom. It was close to the Court, and a subterraneous passage led from the cells of the prisoners into the body of the Court itself, so that they need not be exposed to the public view.— He had been told that in making this proposal, he was attack ing the prerogative of the Crown ; but this he did not believe. It was also said that the Judges would object to the increased distance, and the inconvenience to which that would give rise. Accustomed as he was to respect the Authorities of the State, he could not think that these learned and illustrious personages would consider their own inconvenience in travelling thirty extra miles, when the public interests required the alteration. Upon these grounds he called upon the House to support him in the motion, " That the Petition of the Magistrates of t'he County of Norfolk, requiring leave to bring in a Bill for removing the Summer Assizes from Thetford to Norwich, together with the Petitions against it, be referred to a Select Committee." Sir J. SEBRIGHT seconded the motion, and said that he thought his- Hon. Friend had not gone far enough in stating his case. He contended that every consideration of morality, expediency, and justice, was favourable to the alteration. Mr. It. COLBORNE- stated that he had before felt it his duty to oppose this question, and he now thought it more ob jectionable than ever. The Assizes had been held at Thetford for six centuries, and it was a source of much wealth to die place and its neighbourhood. Great sums had also been ex pended upon the gaol and Courts, and no objection could now be brought against them. And this expence had not been paid by the County, but out of the private funds of tee Borough._ He did not mean to say, that these reasons were conclusive against the removal, but they required that a strong case should be made out before they were altogether disregarded. Not withstanding what had fallen front his Hon. Friend, he must regard this as an interference with the prerogative of the Crown It appeared to him to be as much so, as if his Hon. Friend called upon the House to appoint the Lord Lieutenant or the High Sheriff's of the county. He should, however, leave this part of the case in the hands of the Right Hon. Secretary for Home Department. lie denied that this measure originated at the wish of the county ; it was Only at the wish of the estern part of it, which would be benefited by the removal. The petition which he had presented to the House against the removal, was one of the most respectable nature, and deserved their serious attention. With regard to the distance front the county gaol, other counties were similarly situated : and if this application were granted, all the others would be comi n g forward in the same manner. He moved as an a mendment, " That the House do now proceed to the ether Orders of the Day." Mr. F. BUXTON said the Hon. Member who preceded him had argued the question upon local terounds. Now he took it to be—not a question between 'Thetford and Norwich—but one which affected the interest of the whole country, and in volved impediment and injury to the a dministration of jus tice. This part of the question, however, he should leave in the hands of others, and only view it as a prison disciplina rian ; and he hoped to be able to make an impression on the mind of the Right Honourable Sedretary of State for the Home i Department,, who was certainly a better and a more effective prison-fancier than he was. In the measures which the night lion. Gentleman brought forward last Session, the principle was acted upon, that a gaol was only intended for the custody, and not the punishment of a.prisoner before trial. The law ad mitted no right to infliet suffering Upon the body,or degradation 1341 the mind of a prisoner who had rust been tried. Here, then, they found the untried prisoners heavily ironed, put into a public waggon indiscriminately without classiscotion, and dragged through the country as a public spectacle for thirty miles—all• against the spirit and even the letter of the law. Supposing the, prisoner to be acquitted, he might be then tifty miles from his home, and without the means of returning until he had cons- - mitted a crime which brought him again to answer to the laws of his country. But in the case of conviction, it was still worse. In addition to the punishment required by the law, the prisoner was exposed to the degradation of being made . a pub lic exhibition to •all the country for the 3)3 miles through which he had to be dragged back. In convictions for murder where the law required that execution should follow within a certain time after passing sentence, the greater part of that time must be occupied by the unhappy prisoner in meeting the gaze of the public. Supposing, in the case of Mr. Fauntleroy, that.he had been a gentleman of Norfolk instead of Middlesex, he must have been exposed in the same manner to the intrusion of all the public curiosity which his case excited. His Hon. Friend near hint said, " serve him right ;" but he denied that it would serve bins right, because no man had a right to ag gravate the punishment provided by the law. On these grounds he should vote for the motion. Mr. BARING said that if there was any thing m`-'the argu ments of his Honourable Friend, it applied generally to all places where Assizes were held, and not to that of Thetford in particular. Let the Assizes be held where they might, there must be some prisoners to remove, and in that case it was im possible to preserve what was called a strict classification of crimes. He would take the case of the next county,—the county of Suffolk for instance; and there the prisoners were removed twice a-year from Ipswich to Bury. No regulation could he made which would avoid this difficulty-. If these Assizes were held at Norwjch, there would still be prisoners to be removed from Swaffham. In the county of Somerset, with which he was more particularly connected, by represent ing one of its capitals, the Assizes were held alternately at Taunton, ,Bridgewater, and Wells, and the county jail was at Ilchester ; and so far were the Magistrates of that county front finding any inconvenience arise from it, that a complaint had never been heard of. If the Hon. Member were to alter his motion, so as to make the inquiry general, it would be far less objectionable, although he should still feel bound to oppose it upon principle. Mr. PEEL protested against the assumption of this jurisdic tion by the House of Commons : the House had already trans ferred that jurisdiction to the Chancellor and the Judges : and he had the additional objection to it, because it had already been referred' to the Judges, and they had decided against the . question. With respect to the precedents, he thought them of great importance, but he (lid not think that they applied to tins case. If the House was to take upon it self, as was proposed, the right of jurisdiction in this case, he thought that it should at least pass an Act repealing the one that confided that trust to the Lord Chancellor and the Judges_ As to the mere local question, or whether the Assizes should be at Thetford er at Norwich, he could not say any thing about it ; he would not give an opinion on that head one way or the other—but as the House of Commons had already given away all the power that it might have once possessed, he should feel it to be his duty to oppose the Honourable Member's mo tion, on the ground that-it did not come within the scope of the House. • Mr. DAVIES GILBERT concurred with the Right Hon. Secretary (Mr. Peel) in voting against the Bill. Dr. LUSH INGTON wished to know what were the grounds of the decision of the Judges. Thetford originally was selected when Norfolk and Suffolk made but one county, because it was the most convenient place for holding the Assizes; and now when that reason by the separation of the counties -no longer existed, he conceived that what other place was the most eli gible in Norfolk ought to be chosen. Mr. HUSKISSON supported the opinion of his Right Hon. Friend (Mr. Peel), and expressly because the law had confided the matter to the Lord Chancellor and the Judges. The distance of Thetford from some parts of the county, which was stated at nearly fifty miles, did not appear to him a valid argument. In Lancashire, those places where the greatest number of cri minal cases occurred, were more than fifty miles from Lancas ter, where the Assizes were held. If the present motion were agreed to, there would of course be similar demands from Lan-'. eashire, front Cornwall, and from Sussex, without reference to the real object in view—the best a dministration of justice. Mr. 11 ELIVEY was in favour of the motion. Mr. W. SMITH said be thought if similar inconveniences to those experienced in Norfolk were felt in many other parts of the country, that in itself was sufficient ground to entertain the present question. The grounds upon which the fate of the Bill was about to be determined, were not, in his opinion, the fair and just ones. The House then divided, when the numbers were— For the Bill - - 21 Against it - - • • - - • i - Majority ——5 l BENEFIT SOCIETIES. 31r. P. COUR TE NA i r moved, 'That a Select Committee be appointed to inquire into the subject of Benefit Socie ties, and to report the same to the house.—The motion was agreed to. EXPORT OF MACHINERY. Mr. HUME moved for the re-appointment of the Select Committee, to examine the I respecting the Prohibitions on the Export of Machinery. Ile wished to recall to the attention of the House, that the Committee which sat in the course of the last year had recommended the Repeal of the Combination Laws, and the Abolition of 'the I aws restricting Artisans from going Abroad • and they farther recommended the appoint ment of the Committee for which he was now moving. In con sequence of the proceedings last night, he thought it proper to remark, that he had no connection, directly or indirectly, with the export of machinery ; and he could assure the House, if he did not conceive the question to be one of vast national im portance, he should not trouble them on the present occasion.— This was a question which has hitherto been involved in great obscurity ; various prejudices had existed on the subject, but he was happy to observe that those prejudices were gradually disappearing. From the evidenced the Custom-house Officers, taken before the Committee, it was proved that it was most difficult to distinguish between what was prohibited and what is allowable to be exported ; . and, from their represen tation, it would appear most difficult to carry the law into effect. From his own knowledge he could sa y, that during" the last year much prohibited machinery had been exported. In France the duty imposed upon English machinery allowed to be exported was ,a 5 per cent., whereas upon making oath that the article had been smuggled, there was no difficulty in having it admitted. The pretence for pre venting many of those articles from being exported was, that they required the utmost nicety in the manufacture, although it was well known that in a great many instances they were executed by the mere boys, who wer e learning their trade .— Many of the prohibitions were perfe c tly use l es s ; such, for in stance, as the coining machine. In the machinery used for the manufacture of cloth, there was no prohibiti on , w hich principally extended to the cotton manufactories. Il e trus ted that in the Committee, such satisfactory evidenc e wou ld b e adduced, as . would satisfy the tnost scrupulous and doubtful, for however anxious he was that the measure should pass, he was by no means desirous to pass itin.opposition to existing prejudices, if - they were general. He should prefer the course of proving to the parties that they were injuring themselves and the public at lar g e. There appeared to him no reason what ever now for preventing the export of machinery, when we permitted the free transit of artisans, who could in foreign countries—do the same workmanship as home. Ile thought the alteration would secure to us a main branch of tr.ale, whilst at the same time we should be always able to resist any attempt to meet us in a foreign market. lie should therefore m ove, " That a Select Conmatt ea be appointed to inqu i re into the state of the law respecting th e export o f Machinery." Mr. HUSKISSON said he should give his concurrence to the motion of the Honourable Member, first, b eca use he thought that any l aws w hi c h cou ld not b e executed ought not to continue in force, although it might be a question , whethe r such laws should be wholly abrogated, or only amended ; and, secondly, because he quite agreell in what had been very pro perly stated by the H on. Me m b er , namely, that it would be improper to press any legis the sense and f ee li ngs o f those'lative measure , in o pp osition to whose interests were about to be affected. At th e same time he was b oun d to state, that those parties greatly overstated the consequences which, in his judg ment, were likely to ensue. Ile had taken upon himself to exercise a discretion which, although perhaps not strictly legal, Hydraulic Presses he hoped the House would not consider the criminal, in al lowing the export of some articles. of machinery, such as the Which all mankind agreed. lie felt •no difficulty in granting sent, so great is the demand for machinery, licenses for their exportati and, in so doing, lies hought he consulted the interests of c o o n hear )—At pre , and others, against the prohibition of i n many branches, that, withall the h an d s that can b e pro cured, the o rders can not be executed for eighteen months to c ome, and there are pended from the sam cause. on these grounds he thought many establishment s e , whose o Uperations are completely sus the re-appointme nt o f the Comm i ttee would be a great advan tage; and he requested the Honourable Member opposite (Mr. Hume) who would naturall take a lead in g p art in the proceed ings of that Connni ttee, to turn his earnest attention to all those points in which parties felt that that their interests Would bt: principally afFecied. After a few words from Alderman BRIDGES, the motion was agreed to. BANISHMENT of BRITISH SUBJECTS from INDIA. Mr. HUJIE rose to submit the motion of which he had given notice on this subjects. The practice to which he should advert was one which, though it could not be said to obstruct our trade with India, was calculated to limit in a great degree the advantages which we might derive from our possession of that country. It was well known that the India Company, by itself or its governors and presidents, had the power of banishing any persons who interfered with the trade of that country. This power continued until the 53 George 111., by which the trade was in a great measure thrown open to all British subjects trading from England. The preamble of that Act set forth the advantages which might be derived from an opening of the India trade (with the exception of that"to China and the tea trade) to the enterprise of British capital and industry.. , If he understood this act rightly, it was intended to give a vent to the capital of Great Britain ; but the practice which had since grown up, was, he thought, quite in oppositibn to the spirit of that Act. It was understood that all those who Went to India were to be subject to the regulations of the Company, but those regulations ought not to be against the spirit of the law. That law declares in substan'e that no man was to be removed by the Mere freak or whim of any Governor or Presi dent in India, and that such removal should .only he ordered in cases where the presence of the particular individual was considered as likely to disturb the tranquillity of any part of that country. He would in a short time move for an account of the number of persons to whom permission to remain in the country had been refused ; but at present he would confine himself to a complaint against the power which the Company exercised under this law. Ile knew that nearly half of those at present trading and residing in India had not a regular licence to remain. They had been permitted to remain and to trade, but it mattered not, in his (3lr. flume's) opinion, whether a . man had a licence to remain or not, he ought, if he was settled there, to be allowed to remain ; and it was an act of injustice, and against the spirit of the Act, tet send 'him away. Many persons who had been settled in India, who had a prosperous trade there, had their prospects entirely ruined by being sent out of the country. This was the case in many instances under the government of Mr. Adam and the present Governor, Lord Amherst. They had sent several individuals from the country, without trial or cause assigned. Many of those persons had been long settled in the country ; and he would contend that their banishment was an act of great cruelty and injustice. He knew it was said that the exercise of such a power was justified by the Act of Parliament. It' it were, he maintained that such an act was against justice and that policy which ought to be pursued in our colonies. It was not necessary for his purpose to detail acts of this kind, which had originated in personal feelings and motives; but, leaving such cases out of consideration, lie would assert that the effect of the general practice was, that no person in any of the Presidencies durst express his opinions, if those opinions should be hostile to the Government. Some Governors were, he knew, more liberal in this respect than others. Lord Hastings, for in stance, did not think it beneath him to submit his conduct to the opinions of the European population in India; and though the proceedings of the Noble Lord in this instance was not quite pleasing to the Government at home, yet it showed his liberal feeling on the subject. The conduct of Governor Adam and of Lord Amherst in this respect was quite different. They e t press, that aan general had e gloomnact enacted had sent away from. India certain individuals for the expression ral, elnl o i Ti n g t et l n. lat country; and the fear o f s u 'i tt r a c s o h l :r i a l e:s i t o t rniac overt t i i o ' i r t i e i s l u e o g n p h u t t b h i e i n r m e e s i d l s: c deportation was so prevalent, that no man dared to express his real sentiments upon what was passing in the country. The consequence was, that the people of this country were, generally sepeaking, as ignorant of what was passing in India, as of What was done in Japan. A war was now raging in India, and yet the English public knew scarcely any thing about it. The effects of this system of restriction on the press were seen in the deportation of Mr. Buckingham from.lndia, and in the atrocious conduct pursued towards Mr. Arnot._ After such conduct, the persons at present connected with the press in India could only pursue one course : if they wished to remain in India, they must remain silent on all subjects the discussion of which might be displeasing to the Govern- . ment there. Ile (Mr. Bums) had in his possession two notes t t i nt a y sent to individuals connected with the press of India, cau ti on i ng them against any notice of the casiof Mr. Bucki ng h am , or o f the condut of the Government in general .Such a systeM was, he contended, contrary to the spirit of the regulation es t a bliih e d when the courts of Calcutta were formed in 1775. It was the r setatrecent n o ca u s g e i s a , tleia under protection the then declared, that every person resident in I n di a s h ou ld b no: td eetbioenen wholly of nr British ial withdrawnlrw* it ihung b impossible lrea thatd. by the local authorities. It had been lately the f as hi on t o i i say, that o f the 2so, 00 o Britishm possession sinthatoi e en in India d a was In o y a thread. This he denied. He thought that while we maintained an we should lose our possessions there. But the best way to ensure the permanence of our power there, would be to allow the public discussion and exposure of delinquencies through the medium of the press. if that were prevented,. 11e was certain that 'mischiefs of th e most serious nature would ensue. It was, he would repe a t, t h e most impolitic w course which could be pursued to prevent E ng li s h men from emebarrake ing establishing their capital in that country. an d of there a regular system of colonization. lle knew Cat that word wou ld `.startle the prejudices of many persons connected with East In- I dial affairs, but still it was a system which in the result would be found most advantageous to our interests in that country. The Hon. Member, after stating that there could be no (la -1 culty ill procuring the returns for which he was anxious, as re• gular lists of all perso ns s e nt borne from Indi a were kept at the India-house, concluded by moving for " A Return, showing the number of British-born and other Europ ean subjects r re moved front any of our Presidencies in India by order of the • local Governments, or by direction of the Company here, stat. mg the cause of such removal, 'and whether it had been at tended whit personal arrest or imprisonment ; and if so , f or what period, and where, and whether such arrest had been fol lowed by any judicial proceeding; the return to include the names of all persons so banished from the year 1784 up to the present year." Mr. C. W. WYNN said, that in the few observations which he had to offer to the House on this subject, he would not enter into the general question of colonization in India. That he would reserve fin a more fit occasion. He contended, Th a t by the Act of 1783, any man resident in India w i t h out a licence was guilty of a high misdemeanor, for which he was punishable by fine and imprisonment; and that the Act of 1814, which made no difference as to the amount of the offence, only gave the authorities leave to send him out of India without subjecting him to a public trial. The Honourable Member for Aberdeen had made several observations in his speech relative to the manner in which the permission to re main in India was granted by the Governor-General in India. In answer to them, he would, merely observe, that the Act provided, that if the GoVernor-General found any individual resident in India without a licence, and granted him permission to remain there, he should state in his dispatches to the Court of Directors his reason for granting such per Mission. This was the most easy and natural mode of proceeding, for every Gen. tleman would see that it would be very hard indeed upon the Governor-General to call upon hint to state his reasons for send ing an individual away. The Hon. Member had also said that no person could go to India without the special leave of the Court of Directors, thereby insinuating that it was matter of some difficulty to obtain it. He held in his hand a list of the applications which had been made for such leave since 1814, which would enable the House to come to some determi nate conclusion about it. The number of app li cations in that time was 963 of these 74 3 had met w ith a successful issue from the Court of Directors, and 41 with the same from the Board of Controul ; so that in the whole period there had than 179 refusals. The HonourableMember had been more had found fault with the act, because it provided that a m an without a licence might be removed by the Governor-General's power al ne • Now, he could inform the Honourable M e mb er that no man could be removed by the poiver of the Governor- General alone, but only by the Governor-General in Council. Therefore, every Member of the Council had a right to state his opinion With regard to the propriety of removal, and thus there was same controul upon that arbitrary exercise of power against which the • Hon. Member had declaimed so warmly. After some further observations, delivered in a tone of voice which rendered them inaudible in the gallery, the Right Ilon. Gent. said, that he was ready to give in substance to the Hon. Member for Aberdeen, all the information for which he asked, though he could not consent to his (Mr. H.'s) vague and exten sive motion. He would therefore move, as an amendment, that " there be laid on the Table a return of all persons removed from, or ordered to quit India, by any Governor-General or other au. thority, from the year 1784 to the present time, on the ground of their being found in India without a licence from the Court of Directors or other legal authority in England, together with a return of all persons whose licence or permission to remain in India had been revoked by the Governor-General or other au thority, stating the special ground of such revocation, distin guishing the persons who had licences from those who had re.; ceived permission to remain, stating whether such removal had been preceded by any personal arrest or imprisonment, for what time,. and at what place in India, or preceded or followed by any judicial proceedings in India or elsewhere. Mr. HUME submitted to the amendment, though he said that it would by no means fully answer his object. • The question, as amended, was then put, and carried with out a division. HILL TO PREVENT BEAR-BAITING. Mr. R. MARTIN, in moving for leave to bring in his Bill against bear-baiting and other cruel practices, stated, that lie hail consulted those persona who, from official situation an& general information, were most likely to be able to form a just conclusion on the - nature and tendency of those sports ; and he could inform the House, that it was the opinion of every Magi strate of London and Westminster,whose opinion he had taken, that nothing contributed more to the commission of crime than an indulgence in such cruel practices : they were the schools in which thieves and murderers were educated. It had been cus tomary to evade the interference of the police, in such cases, by declining to take money at the doors. This was not always the case ; at least, he had a Bill in his pocket of one of these amuse ments, the admission to which was 3s. 6d. It was an exhibition of badger-baiting, and for training young dogs before being sent out on their travels..---(Laughter.)—lt had been objected to a former measure of his, that it was only his intention to put a stop to the sports of the poor, and that he avoided attacking the amusements of the Nobility. • He understood that the exhi bition to which he last alluded was supported by several-of the higher classes ; he was-sorry to hear it, but was determined, with the assistance of the House, to act impartially, and put it down. He hoped on that ground to receive the support of the Member for Winchelsea. He thought the Learned Gentleman stood pledged to support him in his present attempt, which struck at the rich as well as the poor. The House could not be aware of the cruelties which were practised upon the • animals, and he was sorry to say not .unfrequently, by men who had a character for learning and science. He could not avoid mentioning one instance of this kind—it was the case of a per son whom he would call a disgrace to science, an individual of the name of Majendie, who had made one of the most atro cious exhibitions at Coned our anatomical theatres that could be conceived. This person procured a greyhound, and made fast his four paws to a table with iron spikes ; the ears of the tortured animal were also nailed down in like manner ; the ope rator then proceeded to cut out and demonstrate the nerves con nected with sight, taste, and hearing, on one side of the jaw he applied his scalpel to the nerveless socket of the eye, and performed various other cruel experiments. When the opera.' don was concluded on the• dog, which still survived these; cruelties, he handed him over to an attendant, and informed' the spectators that if the assistant took proper care of the animal during the night, there was no doubt he would be' alive . in .the morning, and in that case they . would have another opportunity f seeing a similar operation performed on the nerves connected with the other side of the jaw.— However, said this humane gentleman, should the attendant be inattentive, there is little doubt but theoanimal will pos sess sufficient vitality to enable me to demonstrate the perestaltie motion of his stomach for your . further gratification. He trusted there could be "Ina one feeling of detestation - at such barba rities. He had consulted the most eminent professional men, among others Dr. Abernethy and Sir E. Home—he had taken the opinion of many learned and scientific characters in Oxford and Cambridge, and they all united in condemning and depre ' eating such cruel practices. The experiment had taken place in this metropolis, and he believed it was the intention of the operator to return, but if lie did, he (Mr. Martin) trusted it would not be to receive patronage and encouragement, but the Contrary. The Honourable Gentleman concluded by moving for leave to bring in a Bill to prevent bear beating and other cruel sports. Sir M. W. RIDLEY opposed the introduction of the Bill, on the ground of the subject not being of sufficient importance to' callforan enactment from the House. Mr. MARTIN replied. Mr. F. BUXTON supported the Bill. B k. Alderman BRIDGES approved of the principle of the Dlr. BUTTERWORTH deprecated the practice of prize fighting; the Bill should have his support. Strangers were ordered to withdraw, and the llousa then di vided, when there appeared— Tor the Bill - - Against it - • Majority -12 Leave was according giiren to.bring in the Bill. UNLAWFUL SOCIETIES (IRELAND) BILL. On the motion of Mr. Gov Lnurtw, the further considera— tion of the Report of the Committee on this Bill was gone into. Some verbal amendments were agreed to, and the 'further con consideration of the Report ordered to-morrow. SUPPLY—NAVY. The House took into its further consideration the Report of the Committee of the Supply on the Navy Estimates. On the motion for agreeing to that part of the Report, which recom mends the grant of 54,886/. for the salaries of the Admiralty, Sir J. YORKE did not wish his Hon. Friends to make any statements which they may think prejudicial to them, but he should like to ask them, why the salary of the Private' Secretary to the First Lord of the Treasury had been increased. from 3001. to 5001. per annum. He saw no reason for . • when it had been found prudent to reduce the number of Lords of the Admiralty. He was surprised, that in this great ana powerful country, he could only find a reduction, on all. the Boards, of three thousand five hundred pounds—( Hear particularly from the Secretary and Lords of the Admiralty Would his Hon. Friends say that one - Commissioner of ti le Victualling Board, of the Navy Board, or one Lord of the Treasury had been reduced ? No ; the whole reduction WO one Post Master and two Lords of the Admiralty. He thought if the Honourable Baronet who had brought. forward the mo tion for the reduction of the Lords of the Admiralty were to re consider the matter, he would be disposed to vote for , their being re-appointed. He wished to see an additional 20001 , added to this part of the estimates, to restore the two Lords,- as without that they were not fairly dealt by. On the motion for agreeing to that part of the Report which recommends granting the sum of 538,5061. for the Dock yards, &c.— Mr. HUME complained of going on, year after year, ex pending millions of' money to build ships, only to lie and rot. It was not proper for the House to pass such estimates, yea r after year.; For the year, 1823, 1824, and 1825, the a mount had been the same as 1817. The expence of building in the Dock-yards, &c. ought to be checked. Since 1811, we ha expended on the dock-yards a sum of 4,853,0001. ; and for works connected with them a sum of 1,587,000/. ; making l v total of 5,400,0001. expended 'on nothing but brick and mortar- One year there was an estimate for 600,0001. another year for 500,0001., and then the year after for 800,000/. It appeared that no system was followed, and was followed, and that some esti mate or plan should be followed, and the money not expended some Lord of the Admiralty took a fancy to . build. Since 182 3, 15,0001, had been expended on building and repairing ship s that were only kept to rot. It would be better to give pensions to every workman in the dock-yards, if it were the object to employ them, than thus to waste money on ship building. Sir GEORGE COCKBIJRN (lid not believe the Non` Member could be correct in his statement. Peace was th e ,. time for putting our dock-yards in a good state ; (luring war O• was impossible to do it. Mr. HUME replied, his statements were drawn from papers on the table of the" House. On that part of the Report. relative to granting for the Na v a l College,' at Portsmouth, the sum of 6,2521., Sir JOSEPH YORKE inquired if it were intended to keep that College up to its full extent, as he understood thq one of the pupils, Sir. Bonnycastle, had left this country an d gone to America? He approved of science being taught, but charity, he thought, began at home, and we ought not to yaY for the education of young men who were to carry their scien tific acquirements to another State. Mr. CHOKER replied, that every student of the College wa s obliged to give a bond of 500/. that they would remain in th e King's service. He did not see what other security could be taken from them ; and if Mr. Bonnycastle chose to forfeit his bond, he did not know how that was to be prevented. Sir GEORGE COCKBURN stated the number of student. had been diminished. Some further conversation then ensued between Mr. Croker , Sir Joseph Yorke, Mr. Home, Sir George Clerk, and Mr. Gordon, on the subject of their being a limited time after which prize money could not be recovered. Mr. Hume complainP of this, and Mr. Croker contended it was not possible the pub' lie accounts could be kept open for ever. After some further conversation, the other Resolutions Were_ agreed to. :rhe Annual Indemnity Bill, after a few words from I% l r . HUME, who suggested that it should be perpetual, and &on! the Chancellor of the Exchequer and Mr. Croker, who oppose ( ' this suggestion, went through a Committee; as did also the F•x chequer Bills Bill, and the Transfer of Aids Bill; and the Re ports were ordered to be received this day. The House adjourned at HALF. PAST TWELVE O'CLOCIC. A late Berlin Paper states that a most outs" genus attempt to rob and murder (a very unusual thing) w iis made in that city on the 28th ult. About 10 o'clock in th e evening of the day mentioned, three villains made a violen t and murderous attack on an individual, a merchant, fro m Saxony, who was walking along the Ross-Strasse (Horse: street). Luckily, however, the individual in question 10 presence of mind enough effectually to conceal about his person a pocket of Treasury notes, which, it is surmised; these 11 ° - creams had somehow got intelligence that he was the bearer of. —All the money they got was 18 groschen, and being alarme d by the approach of footsteps, while rifling the pockets of the merchant, they fled precipitately. Although very dang e rously' . wounded, h o p es are entertained that the unfortunate man 1 1381 i. survive ; an d, w h at i s very satisfactory to state, the officers Of. police having got a clue to the robbers, there is every reason. to expect that they will ere long be in the hands of justice, '