The Sun. — London, England, 1825-03-11 00:00:00

~. ~,: ~~. - ;.40.411,- ~,_, r ,...., e . ~~ _~. ~y~ '- ~ Kt.-4 ~_.r y 1. ~4. g/ ~.1 °h ~. ?~.4 COZ: 4' 4 d • dpro 3- / , _-? • 4, . „. „*' ; : att. 0, NumBER 10,139.. -- • Ei GARRATT, MAYOR. A`COMMON COUNCIL, holden in the CHAMBER of the GUILDHALL of the CITY of LONDON, on THURSDAY, the 10th day of March, 1825. , Resolved unanimously, THAT this Court have observed, with regret and disappointment, the measures proposed by the Chan cellor of the Exchequer for the reduction of Taxes. They are strongly confirmed in the sentiments they have re cently expressed by their Petition to the Honourable the House " Commons, and whatever may be the policy of reducing the "utY upon Wine and Luxury, they decidedly deplore the con tinuance of the House and Window Taxes, which have so long 4 t ,'' ,l so heavily pressed upon the most industrious Classes of oo e li ty. That the relief which arises to the Community from the re- Thission•of direct, Taxes, is immediate and substantial, while other modes of finance are problematical, and are often more beneficial to individuals than to the Public. TI;;:1;1;;ridently of other objections which exist to the present system, numerous Surcharges occasion the most vexa tious contests in every part of the Kingdom. That although this• Court are anxious to uphold that liberal Policy which may promote the Interests of Commerce, they feel 'bound to declare that they. believe the People of Great Britain, in common with the Citizens of .London, are unanimously-op posed to the continuance - of the House and Window Duties. WOODTIIORPE. YORKSHIRE SPRING ASS'ZES, 1895, fore the Honourable Sir JOHN BAYLEY, Knight, and the Honourable Sir GEORGE SOWLEY HOLROYD, Knight, on Saturday, the 19th (lay of March. -IL is ORDERED, That there be Two Cause Papers; the first, where the Plaintiff's Attorney resides in the North or East Ridings, or in the Ainsty or City of Y ork; the second, where the Plaintiff's Attorney resides e lsewhere. The entry of Causes in the first List must take Place before'Eleven - o'Clock in the Morning of Monday, the 9 1st day of March: and in the second List, before Twelve 'Al6 e k on . Tursday, the 22d day of March. The Causes in the first List will be first proceeded in till they are finished, and the undefended Causes its that List will be taken at the "lin g of the Court on Tuesday Morning. if not sooner dis- I '''sed• of; and th e und e fended Causes in the second List will .e. taken at the Sitting of the Court un .the Saturday Morn- I nt in the - first Week of the Assizes., if not sooner' eis.. Awed of. The Witnesses in the Common .fury Causes in the second List need not be in attendance until Friday Morning in the first Week, un!ess tbey receive notice to the contrary during the Assizes. . The Witnesses and speci a l:Jurors in Special Jury Causes in the first List need not he in attendanoe until Thursday "fling in the first Week, and the Witnesses and Special furors in the Special Jury Causes in the second List, need riot be in attendance until the second Week, unless they re ,6te Noti ce to t h e con t rar y d ur ing the first Week of the . . -• And it is further Ordered, That the Under-Sheriff shall, nnomoning Special Juries for the Next Assizes, give No tice to ttiem that a full attendance of Special Jurors will he Pere ,'"Ptotily required, and that Notice by the roit shall be b e fi„ t° l; of them of the Days on which the Causes shall pet r ' and that in default of attendance of a pro 4'""',-the Court will impose a fine upon them. By the Courti M CAPES. essr s Vt A.j e —rook and Bultner, York, Under-Sheriffs. : - Is ssrse 1 and rirodrick, B"w Church Yard. }Agents. BAKER'S PATENT MANGLES. 0 BAKER. and SON, PATENT -MAN . ef, ad • . GLE, ENGINE, and PRESS MAKERS to HIS AJESTY and the ROYAL FAMILY, respectfully acquaint' t he Public, they hare ma n uf ac t ure d a l arge Assortment o f P atent Mangles, Washing, Wringing, Crimping, and Goiter- Machines, with every Article used in the Laundry. Chaff-cutting' Engines, Ploughs, Drills, Haymaking Ma- V?ines Malt and Bean Mills, Turnip Cutters. Winnowing M achines, Corn Screens, Shovels, Sieves and Measures, Munro's Cattle Tubes, Hay Truss Knives, Drag Collect 'nit /takes, and Agricultural Implements of every description. Butter Churns and Cheese Presses, Milk Pails, and Bowls, W ith other Dairy Utensils. „ Garden and Green. house Watering Engines, .Rollers and parrows Daisy Rakes, Insect Destroyers, and Horticulturist Toni, I Ca ne Top Cutters and Casada P resse s ; Coffer Fan ners , l i "ss and Roasters ; Pridia Corn Mills, with East and West din Tools. o,Portable Corli • Mills, Family Scales and Weighing es, (Bennet's) Patent Pilferers, Shower Baths, B ,. onnet .Peking... Machines, Portable Water Closets, Cinder Sifters, .441 Table Cloth Presses, with a variety of other Domestic 4141 C ommercial Machines. „,rif be 'seen at the Patent Mangle Manufactory, 64, 65, and Cripplegate, and 309, Oxford-stieet, oppo lte Pladong's Hotel. FOR PRESERVING THE TEETH AND GUMS. OE VEGETABLE TOOTH-POWDER has so long been in general use, that it is unnecessary ;;Car L er any further recommendation of it. Composed of Ve it Without the admixture of any Mineral or pernicious tt ) i ;edientwhatever. it is free from the usual objection against of other Dentifrices. Its detersive power is just suf ta'tyl4t to annihilate those destructive particles which adhere nr !' Gums and the Interstices of the Teeth ; healing inju 1 14 , "4 the termer, and promoting a new Enamel (where it 11 4ri, unfired or corroded) . on the latter. It likewise ins ed a firmness and healthy redness to the Gums g ge. r egularly, will preserve the Teeth in a sound state to old Stsp44l.n Box es , a t T s . 9d. by B u tl er , Ch em i s t, 4, Ch e apside, geb t 4 ; Savory and C o . !SC, New Bond-street; Re tlstr'et; and by the principal Medicine Venders through f...e United Kii4gdom. NZ Ile careful to ask for " Butler's Vegetable Tooth 4, c h er, ' and to observe the name and address of " Bntler, t4 el; "Pside" ale engraved on the Stamp and Label at f_,ed to each hox of this esteemed Dentifrice, to distinotish Zr Imitations under similar titles. COMMON COUNCIL. k„etel°lnrn On Council was held yesterday at Guildhall, for the 4 , di dispatch o f public business. jest ". Alderman WAITII MAN addressed the Court on the sub .l, ° I . a Petition he was to have presented this morning, the Oanable Loan Bill, now pending in Parliament, and request ,' the 1 4 ,-, call Court on an early day for the sores 14, ...AYOR to a e se of receiving • and considering the same; and the mea " that ne cessary to be adopted thereon. LORD MAYOR appointed this day for a Speci a l C our t rpose. itiYhe Committee of City Lands delivered in a Repo r t on hay 411_eanferred with a Committee of Aldermen in respect of . the `'Y to be paid by Mr. Sergeant ARAIIIN., for the Judicial (leftl,,a performed by him at the Sessions of the Old Bailey, un itilonie recent arrangements, and for the Court to make him an a gre nn t ee in addition to the sum already paid him, which was . ti a re, smile Committee also presented a Report on the Memo.; 4 1 ,. et Colonel .TRENCII, relative to the proposed Thames tli e ' s r a , and the Memorial of sundry Owners of Property against f ectee le ' s tating that it did not appear, if the measure was ef tjtz., that would be prejudicial to the navigation of the river, it would interfere with the trade thereof, they would not re ,1,1");nd the Court to sanction it. T h e ,;?ur i t agreed with the Report. th e R e ou t-au t unanimous! yagreed to a Resolution in respect of w hich tilse and Windoiv Duty, and the necessity of its repeal . ; of t h e _eY directed to - be'communicated to the CHANCELLOR the V:"4.Tj.EIL c,eme,teagbooltition was order e d t o be advertised. _ (tic ) Vide Adver- PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, AT .:_ARCH 10. Mr. GASKILL brought up copies of all Orders in Couneil which have been issued relative to the Export and Import Trade with Sweden. The Duke of MONTROSE brought down his Majesty's Answer to the Address 'of their Loidships to hasie a copy of the Eieventh Report of the CommiSsioners far inquiring into Charities in England; which his Majesty had. Ordered to be laid beforetheir Lordships. Mr. BnoGnil( and other's from the Commons brought up the Weights and Measures Bill.—Read a first time. The Glebe Lands Bill was read a third time, and sent back to the Commons with amendments. The Earl of ROSEBERRY presented a' petition from the Church wardens, Overseers, and Parishioners of St. Peter's, Cornhill, against the Assessed Taxes. Baring's and Green's Divorce Bills were read a third time. On the naotionof the LORD CHANCELLOR, their Lord ships resolved themselves into a "Committee on the Scotch Ju dicature Bill. After some crinsiersation, in which the Earl of Rose berry, the Lard Chancellor,' Lord 11lelyille and the Earl of - Lauderdale participated, the Biir was r e port e d to the House, with amend ments, and ordered to be re-printed. • Lord. MELVILLE postponed the Conimittee on the Scotch Juries' Bill till this day week.—Adjourned. HOUSE OF' COMMONS. LIVERPOOL RAILWAY. Mr. IVIILBRA HAM presented two petitions froth the Earls of Wilton and Derby against the Liverpool Railway. The Hon. 3leniber presented a similar petition from certain inhabitants of the district through which the'Railway was to pass. The petitions were ordered to be refetfed to the Committee 07 the .Bill. . ROYAL -EXCHANGE ASSURANCE BILL Mr. ORENFELL obtained leave to bring in the Riy..l change Assurance Bill: ASSESSED TAXES. Mr. GOSSET presented a petition from Chippenham, pray ing for the repeal of the Assessed Taxes. Mr. Alderman BRIDGES presented a similar petition from the parish of St. Peter, Corabill. The petitions were then ordered to be'printed. BANK OF IRELAND. Mr. SPRING RICE presented a petition from certain* No blemen and Gentlemen of Ireland, respecting the claims on the Bank of Ireland, as we understood. COUNTY COURTS BILL. Mr. SYKES presented a petition from Kingston-on-Hull, in favour of the County Courts Bill. Mr. MANNING presented a similar petition from Lyming ton.—The petitions were ordered to he printed. Mr.,ABERCROMBY presented a petition from a Mr. Dawson, against the County Courts Bill.—Referred to the Committee on the Bill. CATHOLIC EMANCIPATION. Colonel PONSONBY presented a petition from Kilkenny, in favour of the Catholic Claims. ' Mr. G. LAMB presented a similar petition from Kenmere, in the count/ of Kerry. Mr. 31. k ITZGERALD presented a .similar petition from the Protestants of the county of Kerry.—The petitions were or dered to be printed. COTTON TRADE OF IRELAND. Mr. SPRING RICE moved for certain Returns connected with die Cotton Trade of Freland.—Ordered. LEITH DOCKS. Mr. A BE RC ROM BY presented -a petition against .the Leith Docks Bill. After a few words from Mr. W. DUNDAS, the petition was ordered to be referred to the Committee on the Bill. , STAMP ACTS. A petition was presented from Dumfries against the present Stamp Act.—Ordered to be printed. IRISH PROVINCIAL BANKS. Mr. DAWSON presented a petition from certain Noblemen and Oentleinen of Ireland, in favour of the measure for esta blishing Provincial Banks.—Ordered to be printet:. MARINE MUTINY BILL. On the motion of Mr. CROKER,•the Marine Mutiny Bill was read a second time, and tomorrow was fixed fur going into a Committee on it. PERSONAL INTEREST OF MEMBERS IN PRIVATE BILLS. Mr. HUME rose to bring forward his motion to prevent any Member from voting for or against any question in which he has a direct pecuniary interest; He wished that a duty of so much importance had devolved into the hands of some Hon. -Member of greater experience. The usage of Parliament. on this subject had arisen out of successive Resolutions adopted at various periods of its history, and he found, that at a very early date, objection had been taken to the votes of Members interested in favour of a particular measure. Cases of this kind were not unfrequent, but the instances were more rare where Members had not been allowed to vote because they were 'pecuniarily interested a-ainst a Bill. Nevertheless, this latter principle had been acted upon more than once. He was well aware that the House would not too. hastily interfere to alter usages of long standing, especially when private business had been generally conducted with so much satisfaction to the country. On the other hand, however, it' any existing law of Parliament appeared obviously unjust, it became the dignity of the House to reconsider it and to abrogate it, if it appeared expedient. He thought that a power of challenge existing on one side ought to be given to both. He was desirous only that Members should stand before the country in a light to deserve its respect, and the confidence of the community. As Patna.. ment was the highest Court in the kingdom, it became it to take care that it did not reject regulations to which inferior Courts were subjected, for the sake of doing more effectual justice. In cases of trials by jury, it was undoubted that either party enjoyed a right of challenge to any juror suspect ed of being interested, directly or indirectly, and he hoped that the House would not countenance any thing which placed Members above this useful regulation. His object was, that the House should come to a deliberate decision, weighing, all the •advantages, as well as disadvantages, of a change; for he was bound to admit, that on looking into the subject, he had found it encompassed with more difficulties than he had at first expected. In various particulars it was impossible to compare the proceedings of Parliament with the proceedings of any other Court, and hence much of the difficulty in which the question was involved.—(Hear, hear !)—Still there was an evident in justice that required a remedy in disallowing the vote of a Member in favour of a Bill, and allowing it when lie was equally interested against it. By care, however, some amelio ration might be effected, though lie was averse to throwing any obstacle in the way of improvements which many private mea sures were designed to carry into effect. The very Bill, out of which this motion had arisen, was to put an end to an injurious monopoly. He would now proceed to lay before the House what had been the practice and the law on the subject. He could find no precedents previous to 1604 ; but in that year a Mr. Seymour's vote was challenged on the ground of his having a direct interest in the Bill with reference to which that vote was given. It did not appear what his interest was, but the vote was set aside. Whether the vote was for or against the mea sure, he (Mr. H.) could not discover : but the decision of the House appeared to be, that Mr. Seymour's vote could not be allowed, because he was a party. It was then stated that such decision " was agreeable to former orders and precedents in like cases," though lie could not find such precedents. The next case of importance which followed, was one on the.4th of February, 1664, where it appeared that a question arising as to the vote of a Sir Thomas Parston, he withdrew. On that occa sio* the votes were 80 to 81, which materially shewed the im portance of admitting or rejecting that vote, anti the House determined, that because Sir Thomas Parston was a party, his vote could not be received. No other case, decidedly in point, occurred until 1797. On that occasion a fall had taken place in the price of Scrip for a loan ; and a Bill was brought forward to afford relief to the original parties who had not sold out. It was proposed by Mr. Pitt, that a bonus of five per cent. should be given to them, and an objection was taken to the votes of several Hon. Members who had subscribed , anti were lik e ly to b e be evident t h e y h a d an i nterest t n o efi tl t i t e ed lo b an y . thi A s s pr th op ey os w iti e o r n e s p i a t r w ti a e s s in the Bill passing. Objections were taken to their votes by several Members, a nd by Mr. Sherid an among the rest ; - and on a reference of the question to the Chair, the Speaker de clared that " he bad always understood the rule and practice of the House to be that no Member could regularly vote on any subject which involved the immediate interest of such 31em ber ; and when any measure was sulrmitted, the substance of which gave, a pecuniary advantage to, or diminished the loss . , fir . • • that, any imperfect legislation would be extremely ill. advise!! ; and if it was their intention to put down all personal influence, it should be at least done openly. But he did not consider that as the greatest evil. What he had chiefly to. complain of, was the outrageous practiCe of privately canvassing M em b ers to ,give their vo t e • one way or another on Committees.— (Hear, hear !)—He did think it• occasioned greai private injustice when Members lent themselves to that mode of pro_ ceeding ;—(Hear, hear I)—and this was really the evil that ought to be checked. He should therefore object to the Hon. Member's motion. If any motion. was necessary lie thmild prefer one, expressing that it was derogatory to the dignity of that House to be so .interested; but he was not prepared to , adopt even that, for then there would be the objection that every, thing in that case would be left to the private honours of individuals, and by that means the existing law would be superseded. The most satisfactory method, in his opinion, would be, for the House to h ave th e p ower o f d ec idi ng on each individual case, so that, instead of forming any general rule which was dangerous, the House would be able to come to a de cision on the merits of each particular case. The passing on to the Orders of the Day Would certainly leave open the ob jection, that those who have a direct influence for a measure, were debarred from voting, while those who had an interest the other way, were at liberty to oppose it. The question like wise might involve some injustice, because by that measure stop might be put to all improvements by the, opposition of those who had a private interest the other way. • There was a par ticular case of that nature at the present time, and he, felt that he should he best discharging his duty by leaving the:law as it stood then, and voting fur the Amendment of his Hen: Friend, more especially as that Amendment did not tie 'him. to the not taking any subsequent step. Mr. HUDSON GURNEY mentioned a case in, which an Hon. Member had been 'offered Shares at a very favourable rate by the Committee of a Company, and in the postcript Of the letter that contained that offer it was said, •" the Com mittee rely on your best exertions on all occasions to promote the interest of the project." The Honourable Gentleman had refused to take any shares on those terms, and had.gone into the public market tOr them, and purchased them at b'd per cent. advance. r.•W.YNN said _that the question was one which certainly involved very great• difficulties, but there were some parts in which he saw no such difficulty. Such a one as had been stated by the Honourable Gentleman who had just sat down, and he was sure that it would only be necessary to prove such a trans action to cause any measure to be thrown out of tf.A House, as the most effectual remedy that could be devised—(Hear, bear!)—He had certainly entertained a stricter notion of the rules of the (louse ; for although he was aware that most of the precedents that occurred were • instances An which only those Members who were favourable to a Bill had been ex cluded, yet still there were some other cases in which Mem bers had been ordered to withdraw. In the case, for instance, da motion of censure which might subsequently lead to an iniPeachment, it was the law to hear the Member in his place, and then to order him to withdraw. On the whole, it appear ed to him•that the I'"t4t course the House could pursue would be to make no new raid. Indeed he did not think that it was in the power of the House to prevent any Alember from giving a vote; all they could do was to disallow it when given.— He disliked innovations where there was no direct use fin' them ; he should therefore stand upon the old law, but when any case was - brought to the notice of the House of direct and pecuniary interests, he should no longer feel inclined to oppose the measure. . Mr. ABERCROMBY had no .doubt that the motion brought by the lion. Member for Aberdeen had been introduc ed from the very best motives. There was ni+thing with which men so easily ran away as the idea that no person ought to give his vote where he was 'interested ; but if such an idea was established into a law, how would it be possible to get at a single vote without such an investigation into each Member's motives, as would render them obnoxious to the public? It was usual talking about this remedy and that remedy ; there was but one general remedy_a remedy that applied to every possible topic—the controul of-the public opinion.—(Hear !) In the present measure he saw much cause for objection ; a Member was to be excluded fr,,u, voting because he held 100?. stock in a company, and another Member from voting because the interests of his constituents were involved in the question ; if the House was not in that state that_ its Members could be trusted according to the common rules of sense and honour, in God's name let them depart from that House as :Altogether unfit for the office they held. Ile agreed with the -Right Hon: Secretary for the 114.. , m2 Department, that . the House had no right to impose any restraint on the vote cf Gentlemen who were sent into it by their constituents, and while he was upon that subject, lie would take the opportunity of protesting against the right of expulsion that the House claimed ; he could not acknowledge any such right;. Members were sent there by their constituents; they were responsible to them alon e , an d no ot h er authority had a right to impose any restraint upon them. With respect to what had fallen from the Hon. Mernber for New castle (Sir M. W. Ridley), he was somewhat surprised at it.— • It only amounted to—because such a thing wits improper, Gen tlemen were requested to refrain lions doing it. If lie was to suggest any step:to be taken,• it would be not only to abstain from taking any measure, but even to appoint a Committee for the purpose of examinin g ; what preced e nt s an d examp l es t h ere already were, in order that they might be expunged. Mr. STUART WORTLEY thought that the Hon. Mem ber for Aberdeenhad been ill-advised in bringing forward his Motion. How could the business of the House possibly be car ried on if the disqualification that he proposed took place ? For if they were disqualified in the House, they would of course be disqualified in the CommitteeS• likewise. At the same time he Would allow, that nothing could be more scandalous as the can vassing that had taken place, hut still the only way to repress any thing of that kind was public opinion and the example of other Gentlemen. Mr. LOCKHART opposed the motion, and hoped to prevail on the Honourable Member tb' abandon it. lie considered his Honourable Friend's propbsition injurious to the constitu , . tional privileges of that House, and incapable of being carried into efl'ect. Sir E. KNATCHBULL opposed the motion. He denied that business in Committees up stairs was carried on in a cor rupt or partial manner. Even if the practice were, as it had been represented to be by the Hon. illetnber for Aberdeen, the parties sustaining any injury from it could always refer to that House for protection, and in no case had protection ever been denied. Mr. ROBERTSON supported the motion. It was a no. torious fact in the city, that wherever any great Company was set afloat, shares to the amount of hundreds of thou sands of pounds were always set apart to be appropriated to Members of Parliament. lie would ask whether this were not a practice to which the attention of the House ought to be called ? It was the duty of Parliament to check that spirit of wild speculation which was now abroad., and which had been too much encouraged by individual Members of that House. Mr. HUME, in reply, said, that if he were impressed be fore with the necessity of the measure which he had proposed to the House, he was still more impressed with its necessity after the observations which had fallen. from Honourable Members, to night. The Right Honourable President of the Board of Controul (Mr. Wynn), whose opinion on a question of this na ture, was entitled to so much attention, had declared that, in principle and in fact, as the law already stood, pecuniary inte rest would be 'a sufficient ground of objection to the vote of a Member of that House. Ile (Mr. H.) wished to introduce no change ; all he wanted was to explain the law, so that no do u bt might remain upon the subject. It had been said that the *ho nour and character of individual 'Members afforded a sufficient pledge for the integrity of their conduct. Our ancestors, how ever, did not reason upon that supposition, when they preceded to impose restrictions on Members of that House. - He consi dered it the bounden duty of the House to restrain a practice which had been characterized by the Right Hon. Secretary for the Home Department as a most outrageous pract:ce—a prac tice which reflected on the character of individual Members of that House, and which was derogatory to the character of Par liament.—The motion was negatived without a division. CALEDONIAN CANA L. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, that as the House would fortunately not - be called on again for any votes on account of the Caledonian Canal, he now rose for leave to bring in a Bill to limit the time, during which persons might be entitled to claim compensation on account of land taken fbr this Canal. Mr. H UMI3 said, he would take this opportunity of remind ing the Right Hon. Gentleman of a subject to which he (Mr. H.) had adverted on a former night. He hoped the Right lion. Gentleman would take into his comideration the Situation. of persons who• might be called upon after a lapse twenty or twenty-live years, to pay large sums to the Government in cases where no vouchers were to be obtaned. As this was a Bill to protect the Treasury against the Public, he hoped the PRICE SEVENPENCE 'tight Hon: Gentleman would also bring in a Bill to protect the Public against theA'reasuty. Leave was granted-to bring in the Bill. • —'• - REDUCTION OF DUTIES: - Colonel ‘,DA VIES brought tbrward his motion: for :the ridnie tion of the ditties on various -articles of •foreign e observed; that the effecipf the reduction of duties inincreasing the amount of revenue was, a principle acknowledged by all enlightened men. . His Alajesty'sAliniSters had certainly in his' (Col. D.) opinion, taken a, liberal - and enlarged view ot• ques - - tions connected with the finances end 'general policy of • the country. H e (C o l. D.) gave t h em every credit for there - enlightened conduct, at the same time l however 'he could mit help thinking th a t th e suppress i on of smuggling, 'an object which the Chancellor of the Exchequer had expressed so rune., anxiety to accomplish, would have been more effectually obi - tabled by a redaction of the duty on tobacco, than by a redue-' tion of the duty on wine. - Smuggling was undoubtedly an evil _ of - the greatest magnitude ; it led to every Species of crime to fraud, perjury, and murder. The Honourable l'dember re-" . • ferred to a correspondentie he had with a Magistrate residing on the coast of Sussex, .on the subject of smuggling, and to se veral conflicts between smuggler's and revenue officers, in which lives had been lost on both sides. No revenue obtained at the expence of so much blood could compensate for the horrorS of such a system. The expellee of the Preventive Service amount- - ,- ed to 322,0001. for Great Britain only. The Honourable Metr- ,, , ben sheaved, by a reference to Parliamentary Returns, that ac the duties had been increased, tile amount of revenue had progressively diminished. Even at this moment, ri-otwith standing the great increase of population, the cormimption of spirits was not so great as it was in the year 1805. What' he should propose was, to reduce the duties on foreign bran: dy, gin, and home-made spirits, to the standard of 11:105, which he considered the golden y ear , f or t h at year wou ld' be found to have been most propitious to the revenue. lie complained of the enormous amount of the duty on tobacco, which was above 800 per cent., and of the effect which the duty had in diminishing the consumption of that article. The consumption of tobacco had not increased since the year 184/1, although the population had increased to the amount of four millions. In Ireland, the , : diminution of consumption since that period was still snore striking ; for in that country the population had increased from " • four millions and a half t o seven millions, and the consump tion had diminished by one h a lf ; t h e population bad increased one half, and the consumption had diminished one half.- Some decided slept should be taken to check the growth of smuggling. lie thought that the only effectual mode ofputting an end to the practice was by hermetically sealing the coast.-- " The Hon. Member then referred to the Report of the Commis- • sioners of Inquiry into the Irish Revenue to support his Gni.. nion. The result of his calculation'was, that the augmentation of consumption which might be fairly presumed, and the dimi nution in the expence ofcollecting the revenue,' taking the data of 1812, would produce a saving t o th e country of 400,060/...: 7' But even though there should arise no pecuniary adv=tage from the measure,. still he contended that the House. was bound.' to adopt it, because, by so doing, they would put down smug gling, and would purchase the peace and prosperity of the country. He should, therefore, propose " That a Select Cur-u. Mittee be appointed, to inquire how far the duties on the itn - • portution of foreign spirits, tobacco, and tea might be reduced, without injury to the revenue." Mr. CURTEIS seconded the motion, and said he could bear' Witness to the meancholy consequences resulting from smug-7 gling on the Coast of Sussex. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, if were to oppoSe the principles or question the details of the . Hon. Member, it would occupy much more of the time of the — 1 House than seemed necessary on the present occasion (there were not more than 30 or 40 Members present). It was only doing him justice to state that he felt a strong -desire to put - down smuggling, and he thought that, considering what Go vernMent had aheady done towards the attainment of that ob ject, no grounds had been laid to justify the House in . tak..: ing the question out of the hands of the Government; . "and referring it to a Committee. Under these these circumstances.. he felt he should best discharge .his duty by objecting to the motion. Mr. BRIGHT supported the motion; and Contended, that the smuggling in tobacco was, in place of being diminished, increasing every day. Better abandon the proposed reduction . on wine, and give relief to that ar ti c l e . S mugg li ng under mines every honest principle in the mind of the poor man, and ! , it became the first duty of the Goiernment to put down such a .. crying evil: . a e t l en ih s a h t o t r h t e a ß Ei ilt o l l l ... o n n p . r t i h n e ci. C pi l e m s n i c n el r l ioo t ; of -A th i e Excheque c r o ha a s i d d e r r ' reducing the duties on tobacco, in which such extensive smug gling, both in England and Ireland, prevailed. Ministers, by not interfering, incurred a very great responsibility. Mr. HA Tt T DAVIS observed, that if the Duty on Tobacco „ was reduced to 2s. per pound, smuggling in that article would be put down. He was also convinced that the Revenue would not suffer by the diminution. Indeed, he believed the receipt of the reduced duty would be double in England and fourfold in Ireland. With reference to the fair trader, the evil was, that he was reduced to the alternative either of losing his character or his property. Alderman BRIDGES observed, that smugglers,ma,de their calculation with as much accuracy as any merchant in London: He trusted that the Right Honourable the Chancello r of the Exchequer would diminish that great evil by reducing the To bacco Duties. Mr. Htß E ho N iein o l i pmuur ta e sib : El p se r os e expres sed the s oeT e n d cogblhya t a l cnircsecoce:ao recommenced i p nrm r : o ef b not a iidli t ee l tctn Exchequer.et i oe f t nte,hrm moderatearticles te, • course which had been pursued with respect to this subject by , t he:a re duction Ott. to which his Honourable Friend, the Mover of the proposition before the House, had adverted. He was exceedingly desirous that the subject should be investigated by a Committee, be cause it was well known, that in cases connected with the re venue, evidence came out before a Committee which might be withheld from a Chancellor of the Exchequer. He was anxious to give the Right Honourable the President of the Board of Trade an opportunity of correcting a misapprehension with re spect to something that had fallen from the Right Honourable Gentleman on a recent occasion with reference to the Duties on Wine, and to the conduct of the individuals connected with .• the wine trade. Many of the latter had waited on him (Mr. Hobhouse). and complained of its having been stated, that. the Right Honourable Gentleman had asserted, that as soon-as they had heard the intention of Government to reduce the duty on wine they had doubled their stock—a step whiCh they ob served it was quite impossible - they could hai'e staken without the knowledge of the Excise. He (Mr. Hobhouse) had told them that he did not recollect any statement of the kind falling from the Right Hon. Gent. They also remarked that the Right Hon. Gent. said he understood they had raised, or were about to raise, the price of wine, so as to deprive the censumer, of the benefit of the diminution of the duty. Now the fact was, that several of the wholesale deale rs , an d a l most a ll t h e. reta il dealers, had considerably reduced the price of wine: By the • latter, the price of port had, in general, heery • diMinishetl' shilling a bottle, and that of French wine eighteen pence. ' Mr. HUSKISSON declared that not a single word of impo , , tation on thewine merchants, such as that which had been- as cribed to him, had fallen from his lips. So far from having sai4.— that . they doubled their stock, he had not- charged thern• - ., with even adding ix single bottle to it. He knew that the thing .• was impossible. With respect to the increase of what he had said was, that if the wine -merchants shOuld add to their charge on wine, the amount of the duty reduced, as he had received information it was their intention to'do; it 'would -, be a question whether the period for taking off the duty should not be postponed until the consumption of the existing-stock.--::,, This observation had been drawn f r o m hi m i n cOnsequence. of. his having been told, not an hour before be made it, that such."::: was.the intention of some of the merchants. Heins hapiiy, state that he had been misinformed; and that excellent p0rt...;,,, wine was on sale at a price correspondent to the reduction the duty. As to the motion before the House, be felt it his duty to oppose it; and as to the prevention. - of smuggling, lie was persuaded that that •object would be more forwarded the reduction of the duty,on spirits than it would have been by the reduction of the duty on tobacco: • • After a few words from Mr. Lockhart and Mr. Monck, and . a brief reply from Col. Davies, the motion was negatived with-• out a division. The House went into Committee upon the •Fishery The Report was ordered to be brought up to-rnerrOW. The 3lutiny Bill was-lead a second time and:the BiII for raising and liteping a Standing Arrity in time of Peace.--The. latter Bill was committed, anti the Report ordered to be brought up to-morrow. 31r. BERRIES brought up a return cf the number Of pet,, sons who had lost their lives in the. Coast Guard, employed 'th' the prevention of smuggling..4.A(iri :N (5' a., zpc the House: . acljc.ttrned. .a . ;f .. FRIDAY EVENING, MARCH 11, 1825. of, any - Member (which was the same thing) delicacy prevented such Member from voting." After this declaration, Mr. Man ning, he believed, being interested, withdrew. Two other Hon. Members remaining, their ,votes were challenged ; but they declared it was their intention to vote because they had datermined not to accept of any bonus: Thus having divest ed themselves of any pecuniary interest, and not until then, they did vote. This, - however, was not donerwithout consider able objection and discussion. Mr. Ryder stated that he theiught if the rule laid down by the SPeakzr Was carried to its full tent, it would prevent Members from voting in question of taxes. But 'the Speaker drew this distinction, that where the interest was no more than that which was held by the whole commu nity, the vote mighrbe received. Some short time afterwards, some votes of Honourable Mernbera were questioned on the Grand Junction Canal Bill ; but it did not appear that they had any direct interest, :and - their votes were admitted. In 1811, a distinction was drawn between direct and general inte rest. A Bill was then brought into this-I - dense, called the Bank Note Bill, the object of which was, to render. Bank Notes cur rent throughout the - .kingdom. Upon the voting for that Bill, the Hon. Member, now foe Appleby, but then for Thetford, objected to the votes of nc than 45 Bank Proprietors. lie held, that every Bank - Proprietor was interested in the passing of the Bill; and, therefirre, their votes were objectionable on the ground of direct interest. Mr. Manning,'the then Chair man, stated his opinion that the votes were not exceptionable, on the ground that this was a measure not asked for by the Bank Proprietors, but was in fact a measure introduced by the Go vernment, The Speaker, on being referred to, declared his opi ' nion. He said; " ifthey opened the Journals, they would find it established 230 years ago, anti then spoken of as an ancient practice; that personal interest disqlieNfied a Member from vot ing ; but that interest must be a direct pecuniary interest, and not an interest.in common with the rest of his Majesty's Sub jects, on state of State policy." The question was then pUt, and a challenge negatived without a diiision. So much for the principle on which the interest proceeded. There were , how.: ever, one or two m ore c a s es which ought to be noticed, as ex planatory of what had been the law on the subject. In 1623 the question was discussed bow far a Member could be con sidered interested as a member of the community generally.' An Act was brought in for the reversing and making void a de cree made in Chancery, and all orders made against the Master and fellows of Magd..den College, Cambridg e , at the suit of the Earl of Oxford. The House on that occasion decided, that Dr. ()ouch, 31aster of the College, should be beard, and should then withdraw, thereby disqualifying him from voting on a subject, in which hi's conduct was immediately in question. Another case upnn the subject was this :.—On the 20th April, 1621, a Bill was introduced for the improvement of free trade. On the second reading of that Bill an objection, was taken, that members of Corporations having monopolies, and therefore hav ing an interest that free trade should not take place, were dis qualified front voting ; after discussion, the decision of the House was, that ... they should not vote. To save the time of the House, the Hon. Member would not go f ar th er into- the question. Be thought he had laid sufficient groun d f or t h e Resolution he was about to propos; and he felt confirlmt the House would consult their own honour and dignity, by slim ! in,,o the community at large that they entered into an impartial and fair consideration of every question woic:i was brought before them. In conclusion, he begged leave to move —" That no Member shall vote for or against any yg t u he wasestion in which u he - has a direct or pec u ni ar y i nterest ." LVT T ' lia ,ETON begged to say,rriehina. pressed with the necessity of maintaining the individual cha racter of Members in this House as the Honourable Member could be, and he was the more sanguine in his expectation, that he (Mr. Hurtle) would give him credit for sincerity when he said so, if he recollected that he (Mr. Lyttleton) had a similar object to the . present in View, on a former occasion. He had given notice of a similar motion some tune since ; but be found the objections so insuperable, that he abandoned it. His object had been to remedy the evil where it occurred more grievously thaii im me di a tely iu the House, namely, in the Committees up stairs, which were only frequented by those Members who had an interest themselves, or else advocated the particular interests of others. He could not think the House would gain any thing by supporting this motion ; for under the present system, every one knew who those Members : were, who had an interest in a particular question, as they were heedless as to avowing it, not knowing they would be objected to on that ground ; and there-. fore we knew what value to attach to their opinions. But if they were rendered incapable of voting on the ground of direct and apparent interest, they would get their friends secretly to sub scribe to measures fir them in their (their friends')natnes ; and thus their interest would be concealed, while the mischief com plained of would be the more effectually accomplished. But if a Resolution, such as this, were to be adopted by the House, how often would it happen, that :lie only Member who could throw the most light on, and do the greatest justice to a subj e ct, would be driven from the House, because his interests were wrapped up in those of his constituents ? There was, moreover, another point of view in which it must be considered. It con stantly happened that counties, towns, or particular parties, were divided between two. measures. Members would often avail themselves adds motion to disqualify their own votes.— To avoid the bickerings of parties, and to prevent creating ene mies among their own constituents, they would subscribe to a measure, to avoid interfering directly on one side or the other. The House, in his (Mr. L.'s) conception, could not do better than by abstaining from expressing any opinion on'this subject. They would then call upon Members to consult what was due to their character and honour (Hear, hear !), as the only means of putting a restraint on that which had brought great discredit on the House. He concluded by moving, that the previous question be now put. _ . _ Mr. GRENFtLI, said, that after his vote had been disal. lowed the other evening, on a question for promoting an object of national welfare, he called upon the House, by every prin. ciple of justice, to disallow the votes of those who had an in terest in voting against it. He alluded to the St. Catherine's Dock Company; and he found one of the Members for Gram pound had signed a Petition against that Bill, on the ground that it would injure his pecuniary interest. The disqualification on the of interest ought, therefore,_ to he on both sides ; but he could not vote for this motion; because, if it were car ried, one-half the time of the House would be consumed in fiuding out who bad, and who had not, an interest in any par ticular measure. In the interim, however, until the disqualifi cation of his vote on the St. Catherine's Dock Bill was recinded, lie should avail himself of every opportunity to apply the same principle of disqualification to all Members who might have a direct interest in opposing any measure brought before the House.—Hear. hear !) Mr. HOLM: SUMNER conceived that this subject could not be better disposed of than by its being left to the honour able feelings of Members whether they ought to-vote on ques tions in which they had a direct pecuniary interest. He had intended to have made a motion himself on the sub ject, but the amendment that had bcco offered to the atten tion of _ the House had, of course, excluded him from that step. -- —-- tiir M. W. RIDLEY could not agree with the motion that had been introduced by the lion. Member for Aberdeen ; it was a measure calculated to give discontent to the constituents of Hon. Members, and would bind Honourable Members themselves. His own wish was, that whatever motion should be proposed, should be left to the honour of the Members of that House to act upon. - Mr. PEEL was aware of the great difficulties that would arise from the adoption of any one of the me asures t h at M ut been offered to the consideration of the House, though, f or hi s own part, he was inclined, upon the whole, to adopt the measure of his Hon. Friend (Mr. Lyttleton) for passing to the other Orders of the Day, as that proceeding would.not prevent the House from taking up the su bjeet on any future occasion. There had been three courses proposed to the House, either the adoption of the measure of the Hon. Member for Montrose, whichwenttloeatl:e. entire disqualification of those who had any direct influ ence in Billiang the ; ttibiliengadeoltpntgioentheorfut,htehellpotniv.aßteahrnonnnener of earth i n di v id ual Baronet's proposition, 3ie li)c Orders o r : or, l a st t the i lf ,tla l t hiy. H e confessed that h of his licoon.e Friend's for passing to the o ther n e saw gre a t difficulties in adopting the first o f tho se three courses, for, w ith. out entering into the question o f whet her the House of Com mons had any right to enact suc h a measure, it was, a t a ll events, toacted 0 0 with verygre a t caution. Hon' that House to perform their d u ti es to Members were sent e their constituents, and he, for one , could never cons e nt t o any law for disqualifying s e q e i n ta u l l i d tyi ttg not h those 31 embers from giving their vot e . Indeed, pr i or i doubting th e authority of elp a . Parliament in a such a proceeding, for if the interests of his constituents required him to vote in a certain way, he could not see how those interests were to disq ual ify hits. The Hon. Member's motion was in fact only a n extension of the present disqulifications. . [The Hon. Member expressed his dissent.' Then, if it was not, he would ask the louse, i n G o d' s name, to leave the law as it was.— (llear, he a • 1) 7. In such il point as This Dav was published, ,211 French and English, in Two Volumes, price 21$. THE LAST DAYS OF NAPOLEON.-- pDr. F. ANTOMMARCHI, his Physician. mted for Henry Colhuin, 8, New Burlingtop-street.