The Sun. — London, England, 1825-04-27 00:00:00

PARLIAME NT, HOUSE OF LORDS, APRIL 26. Mr. COURTENEY, and others, brought up from the Gam mons the Bankrupt Laws' Amendment Bill, and several Pri vate Bills, which were read a first time. EQUITABLE WAN BILL. Earl GROSVENOR presented a petition from the Trades men and Manufacturers of the town of Stockport in favour of the Equitable Loan Bill.—Laid on the table. Lord WILTON presented a similar petition from the town of Chorley in Lancashire. Petitions to the.same effect were then presented— By Lord SUFFIELD from 164 inhabitants of the King's Bench Prison, who stated they had suffered from the eseetions of,Pawnbrokers.—From tlee Inmates of the Fleet Prison, and Pram-the inhebitants'of -the Prison in WhitiCress-street. Zy. Earl TAZiK.ERVILI.,E, from the Wearers of Spitel fields. - By Lord DACRE from the Officers employed in the East India Warehouses, andll-oni the Tradesmen.ef ,Hy .the .3 I arguls of . pAT II , from, the InhabitantS and Trades men of Bath, and, from those of Warminster. ' - • - - By Lord ROLLAND, frorri the Inhabitants of Harnmer lenith, Fulham, and Llielsea. . . -These Petitions having been laid on the table, The Earl of L.-iUDF,RDA LE presented a petition from the Sugar Bakers of the City of London 'against (as we under.: stood) the Equitable Loan Bill. In - doing, this he wished to remind the House of the. exact situation in which the Bilinow ,t;od. ft had 'been read a first time, and *before the-second readint• shottlit take place he - had been anxious to' procure all the information-possibl, on the -subject. • The Papers moved for had been ordered to be printed,. and he trusted th4t their. Lerdshipe would see tile impropriety of proceedint -until they were before the House. The petitioners against the Bill said they could prove at the Bar--,the illegality of the. Company which it was sougiit to esteblist; and he was §uteill'it'elone . of thiir Lordships world wish' tb set nft iliegeot ',Crimpariy; which stood exactly On - the same. footing as the -Caltelier AsmPt., elation, which they. had j3ined in.puuine , down, pn the ground of ilkgality. As the decieion of thZ. esting and important-to the *bole cetintry, ?le should !neeva tbr the attendance of the Jndges to put quesionu to, the witnesses examined at the bar, and bctrtistpd. that die .Ilonse:wbuld ap point a 'timefor the qu&stioh of law to be argued. He stated this, in ostler flhat'Their , LorgShipte should know what course he• ineendedtpintr,ite and thetno individual should be taken ,by surer:se. 1...-(I*.DACIZE was lay) unwilling to take - the HottSca or the bls Eart-bk eurpris. e,.and therefore would abstainfrom‘moV- Mg the second, rvaclingoi the Bill till all the papers to-be pre duced on the, subject . were prinied and' on their LordshipS! table.-:-The petition was t.,Tvrait.litint Thai tabk. - • T:1 IE CA TH ole , CLAI MS, . ' The LOR D CkiANCEL r.OR presehtedapetition frorn the Pro- . testant Dissentersof the Baptist perstiasion,.heloligi,ig to Kist street' Chapel, Waheottli. e,gainSt- further cOncessions Lathe Ca tholics, evertif _their remaining sobjeeted to the same resiriction under which ;they (the petitioners) laboured, were,theconse quence.--Laiii Oit the table. The Earl of DoN orott MORE presented a petition in favour of the Catholic Claims from the Protestant Dissenters of Car rick-on-Suir.—Laid on the table. . . . . . ' Lora HOLLAND Faso presented a petitionfrom etri-tirV ' Pro testant Dissenters in favony of the Catholic Claims. Ile watt surprised that Protestant Dissenters should have,expressed sen. tments hostile to these claims , especially as there was now sns.: pended over them. a cruel law known by the name of the. Test Act. .lt was true that at the time of t h e gre.-..t struggle _agalist Popery the Protestant Dissenters had manfully contr!b4t , A to die passing orthat Act, but= it was with .an 'expressed ltoe' that a day would come ivliert.the Members , of the Church would 'aid them in being freed from its disabilities. But from Ow moment of its passing to the preient time no Chaoge been cif:.:cted in their favour: - The conduct of those who petitioned for its eon tinuance might.be consistent. with that of their stio....:stors, but ij was not has ; in opposition to what they ncw. had a right to wish and to clni!n. • The petition , havinr , been laid on the table, `2 - .1. 4. , Earl Rom YE Y. pre;iented a petition from the Clergy of atone against the Unitarian Marriage Bill and one -from the Mayor, Common Councilmen', and Sheriff's of Kitigstown, in 31aiditone, again st the Catholics.—Laid on the table. • Lord KEN VOli presented a similar peation from a parish in Itterionethshire.—Laid on the table. CORN . 'LA WS: Viscount MELVILLE presented a; Petition from the Ma , gistrates and • Freeholders of the county of Edinburgh against any alteration in th& Corn I on the table. Plie Earl or ROSEBERRY , presented- a similar Petition fr,-)m the Landholders of the county•of Ross, signed, amongst othzrs, by the Lord Lieutenant, and the :Idea :ben and the She riffs of the county. 11 - thought that if it was impossible to continue the present system of Coira Laws,.-it wottl4l haiie been wiser, at the ennirm..neernent of the present Session, to institute the inquiry necessary to lead to a settlement Of this great finestion. lle was glad to - heafthat Parliament were likely to tit: called upon to pass-wmeasure to relieve the Corn bonded in this country. lie conceived that such a measure would Le most timely and beneficial by preventing the general opening of the ports, itntl - he trusted that it• Would not be opposed by anyone connectal with the landed interest:- • - • 1 9 0 N DQV PETITILO.N. . The Marquis of LA NSDOWN, in pursuance to his notice, had to present a Petition of great importance, which called for particular attention on • ace tent of the respectability of the" iSedy from. which it came..: As in conitequence of ,the question put yesterday by his. Noble Eriond (Lord Lauderdale),, the Ilouse was in possession of the feelings and' vies Ow N'tre . earl opposite, and of almost every one of their Lerdship4;-: if would be unnecessary for him to trespass at any length, epos their time. It was his duty however to the Petitioners to state, that their Petition appeared to representihe sense of the commercial part of the Giro-of London.: ft waSsubseribed by., 6000 names, amongst which would- be found, if not ail,. at least the principal Merchants and Bankers of the metropolis., It was particularly gratifying to find that this Paition was by no means an unqualified petition infavourof an absolute free _trade, but that it called for an alteration in the presentsystem Of the Corn LIWS en the principle of giving protection to the Corn Trade as far as it wanted' protection. On 'this principle there was andtticre could be no difference of opinion amongst , those who- had witnessed the evils of : a. sudden revulsion. He. agreed with the Noble E.tri oppo4ite, that it would be in - ipol= •sible to enter into the reqUisite investigation dining the course Odle present Session ;:hut.the intcrest of the landed propriew tors:themselves demanded that it should not be long delayed. An unpropitious season would be sufficient to 'Make the price . auti np it> less than , a year to 853. Orlins.,"-tinti. then corn-would be admitted at once from all parts of -the world without any-, duty at all. The effect of this sudden inundation must be to drive down the price of English corn to 40s. or 30s..Per - qUarter, Which would produce a: most violent revulsion: -He did nut ex.: pest• this, because he did not expect the ports-would be open, in consequence of the wise measures which his Majesty's Govern ment were adopting for allowing' the ltdrnision ' of corn 'from Curiada;und the release.of.that which was bonded in. this coun try: These measures wculd.prevent the price of corn froM teach ing the point at whith'Unlimited importatioh Must take place. But still the possibility . 'of revulsion existed,. and it was equally the interest-of landed- proprietors and of merchants to provide against it. This he thought must ultimately hey -4one - by a fixed duty; the great advantage of,which would - be its permanency; for lie did not think' it would require to be altered, as the Noble Earl opposite seemed to apprehend. For even war itself, by t'ne.odditional freight, and difficulties of introduction which it would occasion, would afford , an additional and tounterVailing protectiOn to.. the landed -.lnterata: Ile :had .been , requested to Mate' tilat the .chiuf cause of the variation .in the, Exchange, fird of its turning, as - it had done tor some 011ie' against this country, wasnOt, -as It-lind• been suppOsetk the agitatien'of this , great.guestion, : .hut, that,the alteration : bed takcn.i ) l a c. before in consequence of the .great demand .for co ,::e and" fo reigir produce. - whiCh had beenTaiti for i ri - nr6n cy. -- ThiAtrtlktri be trusin some degree, but was sot, itrivikopinion, the-sole cause. The Noble .Marquis then zoquested, that,,,on account. of its, ifirprirtance, their Lordships would - 4116w the whole' petition Lo be reap. • •• • 'The Petition having been read, •• - • The. Earl of LIIII;RICK thoughtthtit• the admission of Canadian corn into this country would,' in tact, be the ad.: mission , of the corn of America, which would come as the tim')et:bf thelJnited .states •dat under the •nntne of Canadian There •would be therefore .no.. cause 'to appreheud a detioienay but rather an overflow acorn. - - - -'tart Earl of LAUDEII.DAI,g contended that too demand' fur, trawariaterials, which was said to have-effected the , Ex= chanAe• of. this country must •have been:occasioned by the de nior-td. favour manufac..turt% from ahroall. -If: this • wen?. • the case; however, there: would have been no variation in the exchange: ' But the great demand :for raw' materials arose. eTitfly -from .the immensity of our home iconsumption of owolnanufactures. It beosme the ipaaufacturera, therefore, i to , besutire -how they Injareti the l a ud e d ;proprietors, de prived therm the- trins •of continuing. that •consumptlon from which all interzsts derived equal benAit. 7 '• The Marquis of LANSDOIVN said 'that the depression which had been t %pet ienced the last 12-or 14 months had Jaen in li - gresi theasUre occisionekby the speculations Of individuals who,' &Minting on a pro hle rise in the price of eatfe and otheenttides ; had cqil them on the continent and paid fot• money:- He' sted that the' manufacturers would ' never forget that it was the increase of the home demand which had drawn them from their situation of deep distress, anti that it was the home demand alone, which, while all other must be affected, if not destroyed by war, would afford them a constant and unchangeable vent for the produce of their industry. The Earl of LIVERPOOL was aware te thakifthe cause of any thing were inquired of different persons, different answers would be received. He believed that etreht speculations had been made on the Continent- - notionly foe raw materials, but for other articles which hid been paid by specie from this, country. But lie also thOughtethrit the speculations in corn founded on the probability that the ports would be opened, or that a change would take place in the Corn Laws, had gone a great way to increase the depression understood that speculations were at this very moment car ried on to a vast extent on the Continent. But things must be left to take their coarse, and whatever that courseititig,lnibe, it ought not to alter the views of Parliam.ett with respect - to the settlement OF the Corti.:Laws gym - eta-1 :1t.. - wcadrlebeeimpossible toeinatieutethelaborious inveetigalionreftl4s4, a/4 ). tß,effe i ct. any change duzing the - present 'Sessibn, arid ildleed Was a question whether, to delay the , 'leigitiree till (thu 9 d6ltt; wotild: lead to a later - conclusion. If the importation, of ; corn froth . America in the shape of dour (e. t'. it must come. in.that shape) were looked 'to, Would be: fotied tlint 'the' countrT, had. to eptirehend 'tlanger:tif , art overflow. • The great sunply of corn came tkPin, the countries bordering on the - I t le, . The length of .the piissage front America was pnt ec ti on against exeeSsiv'e'itifpenh.tiOn. As to Canada!: Which' was an integral part of 'the ietrielie; he theught the:Canadian landowners .and toragrOwers idiilei.entitled to the advantage securea to thein,by the law now in progress. . • Tarot FILUITSBOROV6IItoneeired it imtisalliletci adopt a perfectlerpernian i ent systems read upon die iwiwk: rep:ratted that the,subjec i t e hAde.been. ee%rtd, at . .present, the, peitation, which existed arose not - frelii tie neceseitY;blit'flone tiie expec tation of • 1 " - , • Lord KlMl,thought that it was admitted on• all *ides that a change was .neceseary, and that the protecting price. web* too high, it watt doing eereatinruetice to the consumers not to make the alteration this - yeai. , If the: object was• to do ate-ictejustice to both sides, it might be-done at, once by fixing a protecting price suffleieot to remunerate landowners, to the amount of the exclusive burthens which ilieY 'lsbricirich as the Poor Laws, the church -It ates . ., and the Tithes, and he thought that 4., turfy of 1 . 25. per quarter on wheat would be .a fair compensation to the landlord tar all had a right to conceived that . the measure Ought to be a'Govemthent measure', and 'would roach rather entrust it to TtlieNoble e Earl opposite, And to the Pre, sident of the Boerd of Controul, arbitretors e than to a Par habientary'Corrimittee. The last coarse won!d'orily'len.d to use d'elays. - • .The pr CARBERRY supposed that the Noble Baron rncan to Lave said the President of the Board of 1 1 2;ade, In stead of that of the Board'af Confront - '."' I Joh: '.l lt 1.7, differed from hi a (Noble Friend, ( Lard..K in g) who had argued for inamediatcly.prneeedingin,agrelt,question which in every interest in the "country., He tlioutent laborious and .iirolOhg . ed 'investiatitln absolutely riees;(ary.— Indeed the - existing systern•hadbeen.llitherk sucatsibl , :lnd beneficial a) all classes, and it -onlhc,to,,be a aerioto.t question, with his Friend and iheMuSe.; Whether it!sa L iteratitin . would be egnall:si - advantageous; ;'''' 7 • . • Zrbe Peticiob was then laid on the table. The,MAke of ATHOL presented a Petition from the Land osvtier'ot "Fifeshire against any alteration in the Coin Laws. — Laid on the table. Earl , BROWNLOW presented a similar Petition from cer-. tain Irindholders in the wont/ of Lincoln.—Laid on the.table. . • , ---Adjo:trntA. HOUSE OF COMMONS. Mr. DOUGI4 A S'fireSented it l'etiti(in from Berwick' against the timing al #.1.. t;od.Fishery (;oropany. , • - . .. . - .111 r. PALNEn. presented several Petitions from the Owners and*Occtipiers of Land in the County of lierks, against any alteration in the Cprn - bow S..- - . Bcx•rox, presented .a Petition from the illannfac, turers of for a revision of the : . orn Lairs. Also, a lir/kith:ln fronytheCitureh . Niartlent; &c: of Christchurch, Spi talfields, for a repeal of the Assessed:Taxes. : • Sir ELIAB HARVEY prcsente.d a Petition from 'Chelmsford, and also one from the. Hundred Dengy, against- any altera tion of the Corn LawS. - • " - 11.1r.76. DA*sex brought up certain Papers horn the•Hdine Office. Mr: NE presented a Petition from the Chu rehwar &e. of Three Pioislies in•the City of Exeter, - against any .further concessions to the Roman Catholics. , IitiSKISSON. presented a Petition from the Merchants of Dundee, to be allowed to bond Corp. ' AlSo, Petition froni the Rawer Merchants of • Liverpool, against any alterations of the Irish Butter Laws. Also, a Petition from the Millers of Liverpool,..for the protection of the 17 INT Trade. Also, a Pe tition from the Merchants of Liverpool, for a - revision of the Corn Laws. - - Mr. BRIGHT -hegg:ed thel3onse would interfere between the Country and the Uoveininent, and bring about a speedy detisidir tit the question reverting the Corn Laws. Nothing could be more injurious than to leave things in their present unsettled state. till next Session. , __ . • . 'Mr Du sconnu presented a'Petition froth the 'North Rid ing of York Shire, .praying the establishment of Piotecting .Duties on Foreign Corn. . . Mr. S. COOPE it Presented a petition from the Merchants of "sligo for a revision . of the Butter Laws. • Sir J. MACK IN . TOlll presented a petition from the county of Ross against any alteration in the Corn _Laws. . Sir J. WIN - NrmuTos: presented a petition . for an alteration oldie Corn taws. .- Mr. DIJOIYALE presented four petitions from the county of Warwick against any alterations in the Corn LAWS, except as regarded the taking of the averagei. FlaxxEs presented a similar petition from a place in Gloucester. , - ' Mr. R x presented eleven petitions against any alteration in the Corn Laws. 111 r. CdAPLIN - also presented several petitions against any al. teration in the Corn Laws.. 111 r. WH TAI 0 took that opportunity to say that nothing should induce ltini not to proceed on Thursday next with the motion of which he had given notice. The course he proposed was, -to move that the House resolve • itself into a Committee on the Corn Laws, when he should submit certain Resolutions; which, if 'agreed to, would afterwards be embodied in a Bill. • Mr. S: WORTLEY. postponed- Lord GowEa'g Motion re; peet in Ica Pro.vision for the Roman Catholic Clergy. till Friday . nest. • The Cutlery Bill was ordered ta be 'read a second time this day six months. • • - • 7 . • ...lir. S. Wourt.Er presented- a petition from the Mayor, Al dermen; &c. of LeedS, against further concessions to the Roman Catholics; . also two • petitions' from- the Owners and Occupiers of Land in the county of York, against any alteration of the Corn Laws. S Row I..ASSD HI LL presented a petition from Salop, against any further concessions to the Roman Catholics. Sir. Will. WATKINS WYNN, presented a petition from Wrexham, in the County of Denbigh, against any further con cessions to . the RoMan Catholis. The Honourable Baronet did not coincide with the petitions ; but, on the contrary, if thy.statements of what took place elsewhere last night were correct, - he was more. than ever impressed with the necessity' ot'bringing the Catholic Question'to a speedy termination thin_ ing the present reign. The evidence which was given before the, Committees .must convince every man that hitherto the CathOlic4 lad been debarred of their rights on the - strength of. mere prejudices. Sir '1'.11.3T1 - 113RIDGE, for one, rejoiced at the declara tion which, was made in another place last night, and which was calculated "iti'inspire the country with confidence. As to the evidence to *hid) the Honourable Baronet had referred, it oitght .to :be . recollected that it was exparte—that all which had been oft:e.red was on one side of the question, and whethet th:e examination was finished or not, such evidence was no ground to legislate on. Many questlims relative to Ireland had yet to be fairly and fully sifted before, a just conclusion could be come to. Sir JOHN BRYDQES congratulated the House and the country on the declaration which had been mado by an Illus trious Person elsewhere.—(Cries of Order, order; Chair, chair.) —lie was riot aware that he had been oat of order. Istr. SPEAKER -rouse and assured the Baronet he wa'S out Of order. Nothing could be more•disorderly . than to refer to what had takeu . place- in the other House of Parliatnent.,• The' on. 'Baroriet, h4ireler , . was'the best judge Whether the' retitainder of-his Speech would be cOMpatible with' the rules of the:Honse. • . ' SIR .1. BRYDGES resumed. lie bowed ,to the decision of the Chair: He Should make every exertion oppose the itill ntiw before Parliament. • In doing so, he denied that he was a bigot:, but he never could consent to exchange:the pure bless ings. orthe P r O testant faith fur the disgtlOng the Ifontan• CatfinfiC 'worship. mummeries of He cOngratulated the louse mummeries th e' nu meTimi petitions •whitii had been presented again*t‘the Catl . mike Bill, and.wou/il as, far as ill hint layi, put.off the evil . • Lan d day with Which that 'measure threatened the.country. Sir THO4l A ir 14e;14i1BRIDGE. iiSeiiiea , :6 , in - petition4- from the OwDep•anil O ccup i ers of L an d in' New Nikon and another place againSt any alteration in the Corn haws also a petiii9n front Chant, Window Tax. ' - -...; 'hi S 6 ineisitshire 'or are Peal or the Muse anti ' S ir W 4. INGiEBY presented fire petitions against anralte ration,in the Corn Laws. . . aptain.:lloim presented a similar petition from Borou o - *WO; county of pork: ; . .. .' T 1 " Sir JOHN WELorrxsLEY presented:a-petition frora-Woj-1 verhampton, praying that the County Courts' fill might have a concurrent jurisdiction with the Court of Requests. Lord ALTHORP said that it was his wish that the concur rent jurisdiction prayed for should be embodied in the Bill, and he should accordingly do sty. Mr. HUME rose to postpone his motion for to-morrow to the 10th May. He al so presented a petition from the Opera tive Shipwrights of Newcastle•hipon-Tyne relative to the Com bination Laws. Mr. ilENisox presented a petition against the Duties on Beer from Great Cocidesham. Lord BE LG RAVE . preTientea a petition from the Owners and Occupiers of Mills, in Che s t er , aga i ns t the Importation of Fo feign Van' Mr. WHITMORE presented a petition from Nailsworth for a revision of the Com Laws ; and a similar petition from Bislty; • , ' Mr. WELLS presented a petition 'from Maidstone against - :aary - further-,concessions to-._the -Roman Catholics._ He was a tfriend to Ireland e but he dud not think that.the King's Corona ion Oath would allow Such ameasure to pass.: ' • Mr. ROBARTS said, when lie first came into that House, he had the same prejudices as his .Hon. Colleague; but, after the, speech of the Attorney,...General for Ireland, and that of the Right /lon. the Seeretary -for Foreign Affairs; he. regretted he had ever voted against Catholic Emancipation ; and no con sideration on earth should,- in future induce him not to support that question. Mr. .1. SIIIITH bore testimony to the declaration of 'the Ilon: Member for Maidstone ' that he was the friend of Ireland, and he. therefore .the mare deplored his opposition to the Ca= tholic Claithe. After, '163 Members - of the House had from a sense "ial" 'duty voted -for the present Bill, he ihnost doubted' whether this petitions, whiehivas directed against that decision; ought to, tie: received., At all events, althoush he,was stirs there "%cis iuithing disrespectful' in the language of the peti tioners, too much care could not be' taken- by - Honburable Members in , pOrsuing similar petitions before they were sub indted to the House. .111r.'IVELes explained. Mt Secretary PEEL took that opp or t u niey f of stating, that it would be most convenient if it were settled before hand, in what order the • several Bills relative to the Roman Catholics would be disetiesed: had heard that the Hon. 31einlierforStafforcl shire would move the second reeding of: the Elective Franchise Bill this evening, and / that the Catholic Relief Bill, was to go into a Commit tee on some subsequ e nt day. He wished for cor rect itifornratiOn bn the Subject, as on the conviction that one of those tneSsures'waS•to be tdebated last- night,. he .postponed a e l eeie e which. he had intended,to bring forward., Sir, F.I3ITP.DETT' stated in r e ply, t h a t if h e cou ld• no t get . the Iternaii Citholia Relief Bill into a Committee to-night, he intended to postpone that stage to Monday next. Mr. Secretary P,EELshould trespass agaip on the House to eriintion; that as the principle of the Catholic Bill was carried on Friday last, he should noton the question for leaving - the Chaie to go into the Committee take the sense of the House,. as thict appeared to him to apply to the principle of the measure which had been already decided. He should hoWever consider himself, notwithstanditig e ' at-liberty to object in Committee to Such of the clauses of. the Bill as. be disapproved of, and to divide the Committee, if necessary, upon those points ; and he ftirtheegave notiCe,'tliatif the 'hill passed through a Commit tee, he should, -on itsahird .reading,, also take the sense of the House. . Getreral GAcCOYNE said a few wordi, which were inau dible in - the gallery: • Sir 'l'. „LETH BRIDGE felt convinced, 'however desirops maatellbn. Members might be to have the Right Hon. Secre tary for a lehder in their opposition to this; bill, they should not deem themselves beand to follow precisely the course which he' had pointed oat. lur his own part -he trusted the Bill would not be allowed to go into a Committee at all.. Mr.' Secretary PEE!, did not wish to hind any one to the' rule he prescribed tbr himself. , 'He, however, put it - to the Hon. Baronet, the Member for.Westminster 7 whether it would net bathe most advisable det e rmination to fix Monday, next for going into the Committee. ' Sir F. BURDETT should adopt the course pointed out, if, after the decision on the Hon. Member for Stafford's Bill, this , evening, it would he hypos •ible to go. into the ComMittee at in early ur. The petition was then read ; and .after .a few words from Mr. Mr. J. Seirrit, Lord- CLIFTON, and Sir E., KNATCHBULi., in explanation, ordered to be laid. on the table - and printed: • CATHOLIC RELIEF BILL. Sir F. BURDETT said, that ashe thought it would be more agreeable to the House to, have some certain knowledge as to the period for the next discussion upon this Bill, he would name Monday' for that purpose. The Order of the Day for tha House going : into a Committee upon the Catholic Relief Bill, was then read, and postponed to Monday. • , • Lord VALLEToRT presented a Petition from East Staner, praying for a revision of the Corn Laws.-- . -Ordered to be printed. Sir M. RIDLEY posponed his motion, which stood fur Thurs day next, to Thursday,,May 12. Mr. LAMBTON presented a Petition from Mile End, praying for a repeal of-the Window Duty/—Laid on the table. - Mr. U. BROWN presented a Petition from Liam, in favour of the Catholic Claims. 14 , 1 rd RECTIVE obServed that this petition was signed by upwards of 12,00 persons.—Ordered to be printed. • Mr.. W. SivitTli presented a petition from Norwich signed, by 13,000 inhabitants, praying fOr a revision of the Corn Laws. Ordered to be printed. • Mr. JotiN SMITH presented a petition .from an individual. who was Clerk of Appearances in the Court of . I(ing!s.Bench,. Ireland, complaining that he had net received adequate rem., ncration for the loss Of his situation. Mr. GOULBURN said that he had had the statement of this, and he believed other individuals similar:y situated, before him, in his official capacity' in . Ireland ; but he had not seen any thing in his claim requiring that it should be entertained. Mr. S. Rtc E supported the claim of the petitioner. The petition was read, and ordered to lie on the table. Mr. HOME presented a Petition from the Operative Colliers of Ayrshire against the Combination Laws.—Referred to- the Committee on the said Laws. . . Mr. LtJsursoTozz presented a Petition from two: Parishes in Canterbury against the Catholic Clainis.--;--Ordered to be printed. . . . Mr. MoNcx postponed his Motion, evening, till to-morrow. which stood for this Mr. secretary PEEL obtained leave to bring in a Rill to bring the Laws of England into ,operatioa in Bermuda in the trial of ofinders. IRISH ELECTIVE FRANCHISE 'BILL. LurrbErro N said, that in rising to move that this Bill be now react for the second time, he must entreat pie indul gence of the House while he endeavoured to explain the nature ,and objects, as well as - the advantages of the measure. The • 1 motive by which he was impelled to bring: it forward • sprung from the conviction, that the present mode- of exercising the Elective Franchise in Ireland was pregnant with the ruin of the 'property and population of 'that country. And he - was the more induced to choose the present time, for -urging .it on the adoption of the House, because he thought that any mea sure which should assimilate the exet - cise of the elective fran chise in Ireland to the practice of England, which should tend to destroy the multiplication of fictitious but yet efficient voters amongst the poor, and for the most part Catholic po pulation of Ireland, was an indispensible accompaniment of a measure for restoring their rights to the higher orders of Catho lics. From the moment of his giving notice of this Bill a cry bad been raised against it, and industriously propagated, on the alleged ground of its being adisfranchising Bill. He should be able to chew the fallacy of this charge; but before proceeding to do that, he would just point out that be had actually begged for a postponement of it to this day, in order to make the more effectual provisions for tli protection of vested interests. With reference to that ground of objection, too, it was mate rial to observe that the Act by which the elective franchise was enjoyed - by 40s. freeholders in Ireland, would expire in the course of eight years from the present time. Ile would how-• ever at once state, that the object of the provision he had added: to his Bill was to make it prospective only. This could be done by enacting that all registries of freeholds should be good which were made pending this Bill in Parliament. He trusted, therefore, the House w ou ld see that the. most unqualified atten tion had been paid to vest e d i n t eres ts. - The Bill was on l y calculated to check the creation of votes; not to disfran chise. With reference to the object he had in view, he would freely declare, that if the Irish leasehold voters had at all resembled the electors of this country, he (NIL Lit tleton) would have been the last man to trespass upon them. But . it was because he thought the samo characters in the two countries were totally dissimilar, because he thought the prevailing practice in Ireland kept down the .real freeholders of the country, checked not only the expression, but absolntely destroyed the existence of public opinion, and instead of being, as in this, country, as source of strength to the landed interest, was a means or weakness and degrada tion..--for these reasons, he wished this Bill, to stop the further progress of so pernicious a system, to be enacted. By the tern*_ freeltulder in England, was understood one who had an abso lute fee -simple, amounting to 40S. ; it also applied to the holders of an annuity or rent-charge to that amount. There of the oldest 'Roman were also some. few instances of variation from the established rules in cases, however confined to Bishops' leases, and some case was different in Ireland. . They did not always find there 'Catholic' familfei in the leaseholder a • bon fide freeholder in the same character ns the English. a He -ragged a Miserable. existence, dependenttor„ upon the produce of the sOil for 'life, the country. scarcely scraping II ci. pence- clear anima profit from his freehold as it was ca He was always in arrears for rent, and liable to be put into gaol at the caprice or vengeance of his landlord, who, never theless, he was ashamed to say, obliged him to go annually before the authorities of the land, and perjure himself.— (Hear !)--He was also driven with the herd of voters to the hustings to support principles of which, were he conversant, he Would perhaps disapprove. He need scarcely, he believed, tell the House, that theie voters were not like the electors of this country, solicited for. their votes. There was a degree Of participation in the working of the British Constitution with which the. Irish voter,was not acquainted. He had been informed that to canvass a leaseholder in Ireland 'was an of fence - which invariably involved the daring innovator in all - the - consequences-of a hostile-meeting with the landlord ; and and that it was a ruled point in the Court of Honour, that the man who had been guilty of such a breach of the individual irights of , another was bound to receive his fire without return ing it.—(A laugh.)—For further particulars upon this interest ing subject, with- which lat did- not profess, tnticb abstract- ac quaintance, he would reterihe House to his Hon. Friend, the Member for Galway (Mr: R. Martin), a hi g hly accomplish ed Gent/email in , these Matters. The""-Catholic Prick, alone was qualified to trespass upon-.these electioneering preserves, and this he - was enabled to' do to the ciangerotis excitement 6f ani mosities.- He hoped that every one who then heard hiM in justice to himself, to Ireland, and his country, read by the body of evidence upon the state of Ireland, with which they had lately been furnished. - UpOn. that evidence he was content to rest his. measure. They would there find the system of Os. free holders reduced to the mere erection of mud huts upon a piece of common land, and to aye the phraSe otone of the witnesses, that the electors-were, in reality, but a 'fr mere mass of mere rabble." Mr. O'Connell -properly called, them a part of the live stock of the land, and said' that the Creation of voters to any extent was' the: easiest.thing hOhe' world. In justice to O'Connell, however, he. must add, th a t h e o b serve d i t was still a great thing for the Irish peasant to have a vote upon the a foriY shilling qualification.—(Hear !)—Who, indeed, among the friends of the Catholics would doubt this when he ,knew. that the power thus conferred had been of :qv greatest, assist. ance in adiAncing their claimi? 'Mr. lirallack, of tiownpa - - trick,•stated-in - his evidence that the tenant has no . freedoni. of choice whatever, that his landlord always leaves half a . year's rent unpaid that lie' might Suddenly distress him for it if' he should •be -unfavourable. to his views. He also retained the power of cutting off some of his privileges.- --Thug it- would be seen that nothing could be more demoralizing than this sys tem.„ Han English County Member.were• to speak' : of dis tressing his tenant for rent in. order to make him vote in his favour, he' would inevitably receive 'at the next:election a 'dismissal" from the honour of serving the County. In Mr. Blake's evidence the, ,folloWing question and.answer oc. curred • • " Q. Do you think a considerable outcry would be raised in Ireland if it was proposed to raise the quaitication.of forty shit ling freeholders ?' A. If the forty-shilling freeholders were persons of independent property, exercising through their pro perty a free choice„ I think it would . produce a very serious out cry ; but I do not think they are persons of 'a description likely to have much feeling on the subject." —lf this Bill passed, it was to be obierved that the Irish free holder would gain an equality with the Protestant, so far from. losing any thing.—(Hear !)-,--But the landed proprietory would be Most benefilted by such a change,_ in the improvement which would accrue to their property. There was one striking mark of demoralilation proceeding from the present system in Ire land, which he had .not noticed. This was the int er f erence with the sanctity ,and obligation of an oath which it caused. One of the witnesseti . declared ,that the multiplication of oaths had, the direct tendency to create a feeling of indifference with regard to them.. This was among the greatest evils of the sy tem. The first Act for limiting the elective franchise was th a of 'Remy- Vh, enacting- that none but freeholders of 411 s. year should vote for Knights of the Shire. _Blackstone ob sefved that this was: founded. in goo d reason, seeing that, those whose interests were under this amount were so com pletely villers of the Lord, that they did not deserve to be trusted with such - a: privilege. It wits - :•to be observed, however, that few in this country since that had possessed 40K. freehoicri, without holding more valuable property. This had. been the course with-regard to England. How had it been with regard to Ireland ? In 179:i Parlianient gave the elective franchise-to the peasantry. 'The -consequence; as might have been expected, was that the intention of the law was evaded, and the posi , ese fell entirely into thd hands of priest's and large propyietors of land, who multiplied the qualification as' far as they possibly could; The Legislature upon this inter fered, and ordered that the ,qualification should not be complete without actual occupation °rale land: Still the old evils con tinued—new ineans,of , ,evasien were devised.. A .new measure came out requiring that the freehold should be registered one year before inning,' and shoUld be renewed every seven years.— An Act of the Session before lait provided against the multi plication of votes by means of joint tenancy. This was known in Ireland by the name of Brown's Act, and was decisive against the elective rVit of joint tenants. Here then was a distinct Act of Disfranchisement,- Which went to .dispossess- the parties of the means of promoting the success of the Catholic Cause. He .should be glad to hear from those Gentlemen who had shewn themselves favourable to this Bill what consistent groubds of opposition they could have against the measure he now present- . ed to their notice, and which was, destined to assist the Cause of Emancipation. As to the amount of qualification it varied in the minds of different individuals from bL to 101 and 201. The exact aniouet..must retnain in the breast of the-. House. For his own part he was afraid 51. would be tantamount to 40s. as to the evils now felt; but he should think they would scarcely venture to swear falsely to 101. obnoxious as that would make. them to the notoriety of their neighbours. As to the advantages of the measure he thought it would operate as a bounty upon that class so ninth wintedia Irelaini-e.he meant the - Yeomanry. ( Hear!)—He also thought that the purification of ,the'elective franchise would be a greater security to Protestant interests and Establishment. Ile was convinced, however,in whatever way it might act, she result wohldebe henefitial to Ireland. Ile should beg leave to found hie.opinion in this respect upon the sentiments of 'two Gentlemen who had given evidence most opposite in their views, and similar only- in their great talents. Ile meant the Hon. Member for Louth (Mr. Leslie Foster) and Mr. Blake. The Hon'. MeMber fUr Louth was asked : ; "CI: What is - your opinion of the effe - ct• of the operation of the elective franchise, in respect of 40s. freeholders since the Act of 179; ?-A. I have no hesitation in saying (and I never met with 'any Gentleman who would differ from me in private, whatever he might say in public), that, however beautiful in theory it may be to admit persons possessed of 40s. freeholds to l a participation in electing their Representatives, in practice it tends to any thing but their own- freedom or the assertion of their own privileges; and that it has had the operation of add ing very considerably to The number of the existing population in Ireland, and still more to their Misery.' A More mistaken view of the subject could not be-, than to_ suppose there, is any freedOm'Cif Choice practically existing on the part of those per sons; it is a clear addition of weight to the-aristoeracy, and net to the democracy, in elections.", • ~- The Hon. Member was also asked which way the contest would - turn if the Priest and Landlord were to come'into contact. lie unhesitatingly answered that time Priest Would drive the Land lord out of the field—" he thought they had done it whenever. they had tried." He also stated that the effect . of raising the qualification would be to throw the -elections more into the hands of the Protestants.- If , then his Honourable Friend was afraid of the appearance of half' a dozen Catholic Gentlemen in that House, why did he oppose this Leasure, which, by raising the qualification, , would have . a tendency to decrease the Catholic influence ? lie was bound, however, to state with regard to this part of his Hon. Friend's sentiments, that' he wished to raise the qualifiCidion to He should next refer to the evidence of Mr. Blake. He walirof opinion that the hands of the Protestant landholders would be strengthened by raising the qualifitation,' and that this, the elective - franchise, would rest upon the Constitutional basis of property. Here lie would stop, but that there-was one further answer of this. Gen tleman's which he thought compriSed all the political and. moral reasons for a measure of this nathre.' It was as fbllows 4. The Act of 17913,t00k things atehe , wrong end; it. ele vated the lower orders, and left the higher in a state of depres sion, The security nf, the Protestants. in. Iraland is in • the strengtliiif property against numbers ; .what you have done is to grant to the Roman Catholics a privilege in which number g t i i i p w t' o o n i t :t i h d is b o e n q i : tells against property,' and tn . withhold a priiilege in whichpro perty tells against 'lumber. ou allow the lowest orders to vote, anti you do not allow the higher ordere to sit. I certainly should. consider', in the settlement of the - CatholiC Question, if ever 'it is to - be settled, that the qualification for the exercise of the , elective intticeotonun'tsi)escreoedu altered." . 'Thies"was' his question. reviewede l s ) t e io to n. increase e a a r' s led : vision must take place. To attempt to rectify the system by With. reference, to - , the r e . L i i il a:lLine a ry; n u o p r o c n co tl al ie p o l l i t e l a - pri ted ne t i o p r le ;rn. character which the Hon. Member for Code Castle had given this Bill, viz. :—" Odious, unconstitutional, arbitraiy, and ty rannical ;" . he could not help suspecting that much of its odium in his eyes, proceeded from its tendency to seance some of the n tl e ie w e n v Hon. Member's new recruits,. and 'inflict the disgrace of defeat upon the old adherents ,of thiS felling reuse: (fleas !)--There, had been a•great desertioh to the polalar side of the question e . and it would Become ;it extensiv The question ;would never again remain statiOn ae . ; was 'the time for. causingthe question. Tlic Catholic` Priesthood' and Laity were pre pared now to concede mere than they before.. They ever were were now willing to subse e to any einulitions, and hold out the hand ot fellowship; with oblivion for the past. He shoUld he not act honestly if 1;1 -- . (•" not sav that amon g his constituents some were opposedto him;; but the feeling he thought,' sprung niorefrom eintlp.ithy than politiod I , ri'mment. For his own hart he should uLiver cease t be convinced • °zealous tare cause, . as he was in his conscience that until Parliament granted these just claims there would be no peace or security for the empire. The lion. Member concluded by moving the second reading of the Bill. Mr. LESLIE FOSTER and Mr. BROUGHAM rose at the same time. There was a considerable cry for the latter Gen tleman, but he gave way to Mr. Foster.—That Hon. Member then proceeded to observe, that he intruded himself thus early upon the House in consequence of the allusions which had been made to his evidence given in another place, where he was - under obligations to deliver his sentiments freely. He had al ways said that there was an improper degree of influence in the hands of the Catholic Clergy, and heemust therefore always have been anxious to see that abated. Ire would however sug . gest, as an individual, that the removal of particular evils might lead to the introduction of others more consequential. If his Hon. Friend would only follow up his .oevli principles, and not direct this Bill merely to catch - certain votes he would be sa tisfietl.- wouldethen -- epply• the remedy wherever the-evil of : fictitious freeholders , existed, and withhold it were it did. not. (IMar, hear !) 2 —Neitlierof these; liweVer; did hi Brink - the Bill calculated to accomplish, but on:thecontrary he ,conceived it went to make thesystem more ohjectionable and unconsti- tutionabthan it -nciW was. Ile lead 'some idea that this was `the rock upon - . which the measure would eventually be Wrecked. He would here wish to sey a word abouta measure. that was passed in the fi r st y ear o f the reign of his- Present Majesty, without: even a speech being made upon it,orlitt being noticed in any way whatever. It was the new Election Act e ,tor which, , he believed, they were indebted to the Honourable Member for Queen's County (Sir H-: Parnell). ' By this Act, any free holder who regiatereci for a - 40a. freehold was obliged teeproduce the instrument of his title, and to. occupy. He could not vote Without producing proofs to this - effeett - Now, there *ere many persons, wise hail built mud hovels upon commolis,• who 6uld swear they were entitled to hold. • But if they quashed the 40s. freeholders by this Bill, these occupents":would have such in. fluence, .that they would be; able, in some counties, to return two Members. The principle which went`to cut np . the decep-• tive franchise - should apply to: theta, and he called itpen' his Honourable Friend-to go this_ length. He was even more et licate about the destruction of the elective: franchise. than. liiS Honourable Friend. For' his part, lie should wish that no one should be allowed to.vote unless he possessed two acres of land with his' freehold. He would-apply the principle •to tenants in fee.as well as tenant's for life, exempting only those who liVed in the vicinity of great towns for _other reason's.. This he thought would be the fairest regulatitiri-L , one Which would not touch the bona fide freeholder, but which would reach the obnoxious class. In one county he knew there were 150,0 f tite electors he had spoken. - There were also 3;500 40s. freeholders. - But destroy ; the 3,500, and this 150, which might- perhaps be' in creased to four or five hundred, wound carry all before them. The Hon', Member coneluded by repeating Iris- desire to see the, principal of the present me a sure impartially applied -- to tenants in fee as well as-to tenants for life, exempting all such as were in the vicinity of market towns.—(Hear !) Mr. BROUGHAM began by profeSsing hirbself to he very imperfectly informed on the question before the House. He felt all the anxiety which' Such a want of information was Cal culated to produce ; an anxiety increased by the, awful circum.; stances—for he would call them awful—under which thefriends Of the Catholic Question were placed, who were called upon, whether willing or not, to enter upon the discusgion of a measure- having no natural or neeesSary, connection .With that great question, and which was - calculated to defeat all the objects which that qiiestion was intended to promote. Tile . present Bill had been mixed up with the Bill for relieving the Catholics, in a very remarkable way.. ''lt was read a first time immediately after - .the other had' been 'read a second time, it was now to; be read a seeond time, just as the other was ping into a Committee, and it *ould'go into a Committee_abciue the time that the other was carried td the ,Upper House. In short, all the proceedings were purl passe, But it was not• this ' circumstance• -alone of which he comPlaihed. - The whole proceeding was 'contradictory and absurd. The House, was called- upon to provide a security Against the effects of its 'own measures. There was a claitse•ln the Bill which said,. that it was to into operation six • months after snipe_ - other should . be passed by . the House. Of a shriller pro ceeding he had never •• heard. There was no "eXampleof it in the wholebegislative. History of such a wise and venerable Body as the Parliament of Great Britain. lie complained ; Of being placed in a cruel alternative.' Ile was a.sincere friend of. the Catholic Question. From the first Moment he had ever considered the subject, he was solemnly convinced of its ne cessity,' and ever since he had been in that House he had steadily and conscientiously supported it by his vote. Now it was about to be carried; homes placed in the cruel pre. dicament of being called on to vote foe another measure on which lie had little information, except what. was most' eontta dictory—a measure which-, on the very face of it, sounded in • disfranchisement, or else of being told that he prevented the , carrying of 'a measure which he held to be absolutely neces- • sary to the safety of the State. That was his chief coniplaiet, and yet he would_ not go so fir es -to pronounce against the soundness of the measure, because he knew nothing of its me alaelrgehi its character; portio:loi the it tended to the ple, aad d no isfra in n c: beenq rli ii itis i s r ,e y m l l l e a tn d twa entered snovel of into as. to its necessity. • The , Honour- able Mover of the Bill had referred"4O evidence of the Ilonourabk Member for Lowth (Mr, Leslie Foster), as 4n F, of the chief supporters of the Bill, and yet that Tloneur-. able Member had just risen in his place and said that his evi dence. ought not to support the - Measure. That Honourable - • Witness aaiti, that either the measure was unnecessary, or it ought to go,much farther. He contended that there ought to. , be no forty-shilling freeholders in Ireland at all, as they. were already much too numerous both in Ireland and England,— This discrepancy hetween the statement of one Hon. Gentle man and the eyidenceef another, ought to be a reason why the House should pause before it- Passed . a Bill which went to deprive' one portion of thepeOple of their elective frepchiee, and to prevent another portion front acquiring it hereafter. He told, however, that the measure was espoused by. large and triumphant sect in the country—the political m0n0.... mists. True, some of this sect went so far in their disputes about " the real nature of value," as to persecute their oppo nents, as in the case of the attack made upon the Moral cha racter of his friend Mr. Malthus, On account of some metaphy sical difference with Mr. -Ricardo. This sect had stamped with ridicule and charged With:dogmatism ail who might oppose the plesent measure, because this me asure - wotild tend to diminish. population, and check the - subdivision- of property. In look ing, however, to the evidence which had been giyen' before' the Committee, he found nothing to slew that the measure could have any material effect on either point. Ile had con sulted his Ildn. Friend the Member for Limerick (Mr. S. Rice),-who was of the directly contrary opinion. Tens, then, one'of the reasons urged by_ a dogmatical sect in f avour o f the measure Was dest ro y e d. But there was another sect to which tile lion. Member for Staffordshire belonged,- which said that the leadii l 4 Catholics, both Laity and Clergy, had generously conceded the question, although it might greatly injure their own interests.. Now it did not at all appear from-the evidence that any injury would be done to their interests. True, it ap peared from the evidence of one side, that it would diminish the Protestant political influence ; and from that of the other, that it would dinfish the political influence of the Catholics. Abe Hein Member held the latter;' Mr. O'Conn e ll h e ld the. former opinion. .He denied, then, that the Catholics had con ceded the principle of the Bill. Mr. O'Connell, who exerted a great arid beneficial influence over the Catholics, said in one • part of his evidence, that he should be g l a d t o see t h e qualifi cation raised t o 51. ; but in a subsequent part, he said In my meterer judgment, it is not at-ell right to meddle with the 40s: freeholders of Ireland. I have not expressed any opinion faVourable to raising. the elective franchise in Ireland.'? The Honourable and Learned Gentlemen then exantined the, evi— dence of Mr. O'Connell at some length, to shear that it would he better to leave the subject of the 40s. freeholders to - the effect of progressive improvement,. or to enter upon a more • minute inquiry with respect to it. Much h a d b een said ah4lt. the evils of a n enslaved peasantry, and the picture of that- evil. had been drawn in the most glowing colours ; but• he. ven tured even -in his present imperfect 'state of information, to, deubt whether the 40s. qualification was the real 'Cause of the evil. • He had listened with great anxiety .to the speech of the 'Honourable Member for 'Staffordshire, and in the -pie.... tare of . the Irish-freeholders. being driven to the poll like droves of cattle e he did not recognise a single feature which - did not apply to other -countries. The difference was not im, kind but in degree. Ile could draw a picture of, What oceurred." bi'England, 'which would be quite in keeping with :the other.: It was customary f or wea l t h y landlords,- with .1 numerous tenantry who held leases at will s - to .require from the tenantry that they. and their sons should qualify themselves to vote ase freeholders at . the County Elections,' or else that their least" ahOuld 'be cancelled. Thus the tenants held their leases by Virtue of their .freeholds, just as the Irish freeholder, kept his bog .by virtue of --his.4os, qualification. The Honourable and • Learned Gentleman th en alluded to the case of a large town where voters were Made in nearly the same way in whichthey - Were made in. Ireland.. It was urg e d i n f avour o f t h e Bill, pt., it would tend to destroy the debasing and corrupting. practice of false swearing.. He should be, glad to • see that-practice ' abedialied, and'he would therefore pray the House to look at home. Ile did not mean to speak of the Cpun;y of . Tipperary.' but of the.lo or 12 , square feet where he then stood.—(llear 4(141, not .become those Members who were in -the h, bit of taking-the Qualification Oath to hOld• up their hands anti thank Goil that. ahey were not as other men. The Irish cottier swore, perhaps, falsely as to•his qualification, and then-some Dlemb.r ;erne down to the House with a Bill to take away theequalihe cation in order to save the - soul of the poor cottier. But the, Irish Man "night say, " I am -thankful tor, the care you show about my soul in disfranchising me; but wouldit not be just ase. Well for you" to .set about' disfranchising .yourselves. Volt, *;