The Sun. — London, England, 1830-03-31 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT: NOUSE OF LORI )S—..(LAST NIGHT). the Eaol.ef KINNOUL pre tented a per . ,tinn from ti e Torporatinn,of Perth, for free tr ade to Ind':a. The Ead-of ROSEBERRY • presented a petition ft.( m lirdithgovo :ao - tilze same effect. The r Jeze of DEVONSHIRE 'serer Prrae nted petitions from fl og 4,4ces in the county of Dealt y for free trade to she Earl of 141ORLEY presentefif a petition from .Ex idte-r, against the punishment of detail for forgery. Lord RADNOR presented- s.lpitit ion from Farringdon, :against the punishment of death fie • forgery. The Noble -Lord also presented a petition fro-a Whitehurch, in Kent, .complaining of distress. __, The Earl of ROSSLYN preva' ted a petition from Stir iar free trade to India. Marquis of CLANRIC : I' iWE presented a petition _from;tl a Eastern Division of persons of the Jewish per invasion in London, pray suf , for a removal of their Lord ST AN ElOPE . , , , res eh ted a petition from Bedford iistress, and prayi ng f or t h e repea l o f ehire, complaining of the Malt Duties. The Earl of ATARDEEN laid on the table, by coin wand of his Ma j esty, a copy if the Treaty entered into between his rJritannie 316esty and the United States of America. The F..,arl of STANHOPE. complained that the Treaty - "eV.. not afford that reciprAcity to this country whi c h ow 6 .ht to exist, and that the s.'iipping interest would be =float injured by it. The Earl of ABERDEEN admitted that the Treaty was not a commercial treaty in the may in which the Ne' Lord looked at it. He could not ]however see how treaties would injure the shipping interest. Th. . these Treaty was in progress when he came into .4 present vithout acting in an inconsistent !panne let And could not do otherwise than conclude it. r Vso*stnment Lord GODERICH considered t Lail entered into these treaties or ~.et. since this country reciprocity, the slii r p: ng interests of this country bail Jeen materially benefitt e d. of British ships e Lord ELLENBOROUG .tI observed that th e num b er mployed whole number of foreb 'in trade was ne a rly equa l t o t h e foreign ports. The gn vessels engaged in tr a d e w ith subject being browaware Noble Lord was n o t of this ~ htforward, or . .. he would hare been provided with tl• return of the different vessels employed. Sereral Pd. /ate Bills were brought up from the House of Common , Mr. Fr " from the Navy Office, presented an account tii the cont- .acts for timber nude by the Navy Board sit - lee 1610. '.he Marquis of LANSDOWNE presented a petition 'froin a congregation of Protestant Dissenters in the vici nity of Finsbury-square, praying for the abolition, of tl punishment o f d ea th f or f org ery, and offences affe.cang pro perty only. The Marquis of BUTE presented a petitie tq , the s ame effects—Laid on the table. SOUTH AMERICAN Mr .flEs. Tlae Marquis of LANSDOWNE,, pursuant to his iiodce of yesterday, to move an A ',raying that be would instruct t 1 Areas to his Majesty, States of South America to Ae Consuls to the diff e rent lie of the South American gold . and silver into the state ke inquiries trans t° ihi " ° " ntr Y a" the InfoematiOn onm anditnhees, subject to whichstbey 'be able o collect. It would be difficult, perhaps, to !procur a Very accurate account of the degree *if r" 1 " .ativerness of the mines at present; of wo:e lkina g there could be no doubt whatever, and ttas,, we e, tilst the changes and revolutions which had 'taken place among these States had a powerful eP.sec+t in ditaini4 - aing the produce of the mines. Another sateateriii 'e aeration was, that gold Lad been now sound iniht Russian dominions, and was raised in con siderabk 9 !luantities, and therefore he would propose that ,our Oo;'.sul at St. Petcrsburgh should be instructed to }proctr,e all possible information as to the productiveness .of the Russian mines, an osind home a report on that :subject. He would also add 'tb the address a prayer that ibis 'Majesty would be pleased to order to be laid on their lordships' table a copy of 'the evidence given by certain distinguished merchants before the Pilvy Council in 182 S, as to the standard of gold and silver. In order to throw sfurther light on the subject, he would propose, that his :Majesty might be requested to direct an amount to be I Lid .on the table of the amount of freight ;arid to the Cap •tains of ships of war and Government packets for the car sriaga of the preeidus metals during each year, for some gears past. The :Earl of ABERDEEN saw no objection to the Ad sdreei proposed by the Noble Marquis. The truth was, t that the Consuls had already been acting on instructions of is. somewhat similar kind ; hut, perhaps, it might be of advantage that their attention should be directed more speci fically to the points mentioned by the Noble Marquis. Lord ELLENBOROUGH doubted whether the motion of the Noble Marquis would answer the purpose which he himself had in view. It appeared to him that it would be !requisite not only to know what was the amount of pro duce of the American mines, but also to know whither it wen*, In a late year no less than forty-five millions went LSSOne East Indies. The Alarquis of LANSDOWNE said that there was a aconstant flux and reflux to and from India, so that it was scarcely possible to trace where the produce went. There could be sae doubt that the increase of civilization, popula tion, and taste for elegant luxuries, had occasioned a much greater expenditure of the precious metals in latter times thaw formerly. 'The Earl of MALMESBURY had no objection to the address, but he wished to make an obse'vation on the sub ject of the great expence occasioned to the public by the :salaries of these Consuls. He himself bad paid some at untion to the subject, and he found that the expence amounted to 97,000/. Till 1825, a great portion of the allowances to the Consuls was made in the shape of fees paid by the merchants who had occasion for their services. But in outcry rose against that plan, and in 1825 the fees were abolished, and the expedient adopted of a salary paid out of the public purse ; and of the 97,000/, '70,0001., be believed, consisted of salaries substituted for the fees. Now the system of fees was certainly liable to great abuses, but still he thought that under proper regulations it ought to have been continued. It was very fitting that part at least of the allowances to the Consuls ought to be paid by those who more immediately profited by their services, atol it appeared hardly just to throw the whole expences on the public. He hoped the matter would be taken into consideration by Government. The Earl of ABERDEEN had been paying some atten tion to the subject, and believed that he would, at no dis taut period, submit a proposal to the House about this matter. But it would never answer to make the whole allowances to the'Consuls consist of fees; for if at any long period of a year the commerce of their stations should be suspended, the Consuls might be reduced to great distress if they had nothing to look to but the fees. But in 1825 the old system had been very much objected to, and the fees bad been abolished. But whether the change had been advantageous might be doubted ; and, perhaps, the beet plan might be to make the allowances payable partly in salary and partly in fees, guarding as much as possible against abuses. He hoped to bring forward a plan to di minish the expellee. As to these South American States, almost the whole of our relations with them was of a com mercial nature ; but in every case where a Minister was sent out, the office of Consul-General was made to cease. The Earl of MALMESBURY expressed his satisfaction at the explanation given by his Noble Friend. Lord GODERICH said, that in 1825 great objection was made to the system of fees in the other House, and by merchants out of doors, and the consequence was the abolition of the system. Great caution ought, he con sidered, to be observed in the appointment of Vice-Consuls, and they certainly should not be nserchants—this was more peculiarly necessary in a country wherein our rela tions were rather commercial than diplomatic. The Earl of ABERDEEN was unwilling then to enter into any further particulars, the more especially as the matter arose incidentally. Lord HOLLAND wished to know if the Consuls of the North of Africa were,appointed by the Colonial or the Foreign Office ? The Earl of ABERDEEN said the Consuls to Egypt were appointed by the Foreign Office—those for the Barbary States by the Colonial Office. Lord HOLLAND saw no reason for such a departure from what was usual in other cases. The Earl of MALMESBURY explained. The motion was agreed to, and their Lordship; then Adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS—(LAST NIGHT). Air. LITTLE'f ON presented a petition from the Pot- terks in Staffordshire, against throwing open the trade in beer ; and another from the same place, praying f or a free trade with India and China. The How. Mrstaaa then presented a petition from West Bromwich, praying for a revision of the criminal laws. Sir C. HASTINGS presented a petition from the li censed victuallers of Lancaster, against throwing open the beer trade. Mr. DUNCOMBE presented a petition from the West Biding of Yorkshire , com p lainin g of g eneral distress. Mr. FYLEH presented a petition from the City of Coventry', praying that the punishment of death might not be awarded to the clime of forgery; another from the Licensed Victuallers of the same place, against throwing open the trade in beer. The peti tioners stated, that if the measure was carried into effect their business would be ruined, and prayed the House to take their ca,e into its serious consideration. Mr. LEGGE presented a petition from Danbury against the severity of the Criminal Let. Mr. MUNDAY pre.rnted a petition from Derby against the punishment of death for forgery, and for a raitigatiau of the severity of the Criminal Law. Mr. MALCOLM presented a petition frord praying for an alteration of the present laws relating to the licensing of public-houses. General GASCOYNE presented seven petitions from congregations of Wesleyan methodists against the b/rning of Mindoo Widows. Mr. LITTLETON presented 4 petition from Sibthorpe, in Staffordshire, against the truck system. It was his inten tion to bring in a Dill on the subject on Thursday next, and he hoped the first reading would not be opposed by the Hon, Alernb'er for Aberdeen. Mr. HUME would not oppose bringing in the Dill, but he thought the object of his Hon. Friend to be one of impossibility. In his opinion there ought to be no laws to interfere with arrangements between a master and his men. After a few observations from Sir M. W. RIDLEY end Mr. RENETT, the petition was ordered to lie on the table. SUGAR DUTIES. , Mr. C. GRANT wished to ask the Chancellor of the 'xcher' i tter when he intended to bring forward the Annual S _ "" - Itr Duties Bill, as it was his intention to propose a re duction of those duties. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said it was his intention ta bring forward the Bill at the earliest possible opportunity after the Easter holidays, and of which time he would take care sufficient notice should be given. Sir JOHN NEWDORT presented a petition from Dublin, praying for an abolition of the Duty on Coals. SIERRA LEONE. Mr. HUME postponed his motion respecting the Colony of Sierra Leone, which stood for Thursday, until Thursday, the 27th of May. MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS. A Message from the Lords announced that their Lord ships had agreed to several private Bills. COURTS OF CHANCERY. Sir C. WETHERELL moved for returns of the number of causes, pleas, demurrers, further directions, and bank rupt petitions set down for hearing before the Lord Chan cellor, and the time when they were set down ; also for similar returns from the Vice-Chancellor's Court and the Rolls' Courts. _ _ CROWN LANDS. Mr. D. W. HARVEY, in rising to redeem the pledge he had given at the close of the last Session, to bring under the notice of the House the present state and management of the Crown L Inds, exprosed his regret that it had not fallen into the hands of some more distinguished Member, who might relieve the dryness of the subject by adorning it with the graces of eloquence. His regret was somewhat lessened by having observed that the greatest talents had of late led men into the greatest inconsistencies, and that at present ordinary minds acting under honest impressions might be of the most substantial advantage to the country. He only claimed to be one of this class ; he pretended to none of the advantages of learning, and could claim none of the support which faction or party sometimes lent to indi viduals. He presented himself to the House as a repre sentative of the people, to bring under the notice of the House a source of the national revenue which had been greatly perverted, and required to he judiciously applied to be m ide available to the public service. There was scarcely a part of either our domestic or foreign policy which had been less inquired into ; for, with the exception of one examination under the authority of a Committee, in I7B6—with the exception of that solitary examination, the subject had not been inquired into by the House since 1705, at the accession of Queen Anne. It could not be said, therefore, that this was one of those subjects which had grown tedious by repetition. He did net regret that circumatances had deferred his motion, as it had given time to display a glimmering of anxiety on the part of his Majesty's Ministers, if not to promote reform themselves, at least not to check those who were reformers. He was glad to see that they had recognised public opinion, and he neither would damp the hopes nor falsify the pretensions which had been raised by their late reductions. Ihe Right Honourable the Member for Liverpool had stated the other night, much to his satisfaction, that one source , to which we might look for the improvement of our revenue was the Crown Lands. He wished at the out set to state, that the object of his motion was to move for a Commit tee to inquire into the present state and management of the Crown Lands; and so little was known of them, that if the Members of that House were to conjecture what was the value of those lands, some would say half a million a year, while others would rate them at 50,0001. If they were to suppose them sold, seine of -them would say that they would fetch 500,0001., and others might estimate the sum at 20,000,000/, TI . e reason of this, he believed, was, that the Crown Lands were held sacred ; but there was no branch of the public revenue which was more entirely available to the service of the country, and none which had been bought at a more enormous price than what was called the Crown Lands. He meant to state the origin of this property, the fluctuations it bad undergone from the commencement, and he should conclude by pointing out the use it might he of to the country, not from what it did, but from what it might be made to produce. There never was a large public property so entirely diverted from public uses. The House were called on as trustees of the public to interfere, and see that the property was made available to the public. In the early periods of European history, every Monarch of Europe had no other revenue, whether it was intended to keep up the magnificence of his Court, or maintain the tranquillity of his dominions, or protect theta from foreign invasion, than that which was derived exclusively from the soil. When the illegitimate Norman overthrew the legi timate Harold, the revenues which came into his possession amounted to 400,0001. a year. This revenue was the ex clusive source of all the menus possessed by him and his successors to protect their throne and the country. He begged here to remind the landed gentlemen, who now complained of their burthens, that formerly all the burthens of the State were borne by the land, and the Conqueror not only exacted the summa-he could also call on those who held of him in capite, and compel them to furnish him with 60,000 men at arms. It was in the subsequent reigns that the fashion was introducad of purchasing of a pa triotic nobility concessions and forbearance by large grants of the Crown Lands. Dnring,the 12th, 13th, and 14th centuries, the public revenues were so dwindled away, that several Acts of Parliament, yet on the table, were passed to resume the Crown Lands. In the reign of Hemp IV. a statute was passed restoring to him all the land which had been held by his Royal predecessors, Ed ward 11., and Richard 11. In Henry the Fifth's time the 400,0001. a year possessed by the Conqueror had dwindled down to 57,0001. In Henry the Sixth's time the revenue of the Crown Lands was only 5,5511. In Henry the Seventh's time, several Acts of resumption were passed, but it was reserved for Henry the Eighth, that great pluralist in churches and wives, to take into his own hands a number of Monasteries and Abbies, and other Church lands, so that he was in possession of a revenue that yielded 273,000/. a year. According to Sir John Sinclair, this was equal to six millions of our present money. But Henry was as generous as he was rapa cious, and gave away with one hand what he had seized with the other. The consequence was, that his son and successor found it necessary to seize on two thousand more chantries, chapels, abbeys, &c. and the lands belonging to them. He repeated he did nut wish to embarrass this question by language, or to e=vgerate its evils by ornament; he stated plain facts, from which he hoped to be able to draw obvious conclusions. In the reign of Mary the Crown Lands were of the annual value of 86,0001. ; but by the judicious management adopted in the reign of her successor, they had reached the amount of 132,000/. a year in the 44th year of her reign. And here it might be well to observe, that it ap peared the whole sum placed at the disposal of that pre eminent Princess--(A laugh)--in that year for the main tenance of her dignity at home, and for the support of her power against all aggression from abroad, amounted toa sum very little above half a million o f mone y , of which this 139,0001 of Crown Lands' Revenue formed a part. It was reserved, however, for the Napoleon of the seventeenth century to consummate the destruction of the property of the Crown in England. Cromwell, at the earliest opportu nity, instituted an inquiry into the nature and extent of the Royal Revenues derived from land, with the intention of making them really productive ; but assailed by jea lousies at borne, and by enemies abroad, he was unable to effect the good he contemplated, and the result was that be disposed of 666 aliments and 770 manors, for which he re ceived the sum of 2,200,0001., and among them the bo roughs of Launceston, Fowey, Liskeard, Saltash, and some of the most important properties in Cornwall. At the re turnfelted except those oa of Charles the Second, several attempts were made to _ pel time restoration of these lands, but none were for remainder were sectleodngtninthg their persons possession whoofl t ed e p an ay d me th n e t ever, that the whole of the prop ert y by h of fines proportion e d ,to their extent. e T t he b r e e i sult . w , as, how l: Crown, which survived the shock r Y of th°engl:ivbiltowati: amounted to the sum of 217,9001 a year—the remainder being leased out for long terms at notniintl rents. In the time of William, the condition of the Crown Lands was not improved, treat portion of them being ceded to his fritnds in Parliament. On the accession of Queen Anne; a Civil List was first granted to the Crown in lieu of its es- Wes. The preamble to the Act, which granted that Civil List of 600,000/. is peculiarly remarkable, for it states that " it is ft the purpose of defraying a part of the ex pettces of the Clown, and lessening the burthens of the ople by means of a preservation and improvement of the Crown Lands;" and every subsequent preamble on the same subject contained the same words. At that time the Crown Lands were subjected to a new system of manage- ment, and it was provided that no lands should be let for a longer time than thirty-one ears, and no house for a longer time than fifty years : that the reserved rent, should be always one-third of the yearly value, and that the other two-thirds should be paid by fine. Although these regulations were made, yet no steps seem to have been taken to carry them into effect, nor did it appear that the two-thirds ever found their way into the Treasury, or were applied to any other purpose than that which was already well known—the consolidation of the power of the Crown. The greater part, indeed, of the Crown pro perty was let at nominal sums, amounting to a mark, or sixteen shillings and eightpence, or sometimes one pound. So great had the abuses become, that they attracted the attention of the House of Commons, and three Members— Skipper, Strangeways, and Lockhart—brought in a Bill to remedy the misapplication of the produce of the Crown Lands, and to empower the Crown to resume the posses sion of those which had been granted improperly. This Bill was read a third time on the 29th of March, 1711, but it found its grave in that place where so many other Acts of utility had been entombed. From that time they heard no more of the Crown Lands until the year 1760; but, to show the nature of the management of the !Ands during that period, he would call the attention of the House to the fact, that property which, if fairly let, should have brought about one million per annum, produced in 1760, just 4821. 16e. 7id. of yearly rent. By a new regula tion it was then provided that every lease shoed reserve a rent of one-eighth of rent, and that seven-eighths should be paid in fine. But a new method was found of evading this, for the managers of the Crown Linde, first let the properties for nothing, and then they estimated them at the rent as worth nothing, and then sold them for nothing. That is, they let a valuable property for ninety-nine years, at a nominal rent, and then sold it for 2001. He would give them an instance of this from the course pursued with respect to one or two families, and the House might, from thence, be able to form a judgment of the general course pursued with respect to the property of the Crown. From a Return to which the Noble Lord opposite (Lord Lowther) had access, he found that a parcel of Crown Land, lying between Park-lane and Swallow-street, in Piccadilly, was let to the family of the Pulteneys for 100 years, at a rent of twelve pounds sixteen shillings and tenpence, the yearly value being two thousand and forty-seven pounds. This property vas then sold for five hundred pounds. He believed that the lease to which he alluded was on the point ofexpiring. The steps taken with respect to it would become a fit subject of consideration hereafter. This was a speci men of the course pursued both by Whigs and Tories when in power. It was difficult to say which of them pillaged the country most, although, if he looked to the proceedings in 168 S, he thought the balance was rather against the Whigs. Again he found that the estate of Bowood, near Chippenham, including the Borough of Calue, was first let fur thirty pounds a year, and then sold for 4681. 10 , . Furness, in Lancashire, was in the same manner, in the year 1770, let to Sir Thomas Lowther for a trifle, and afterwards sold in the same manner. The manor of Spalding, in Lincolnshire, worth four thousand pounds a year, was in the same manner given to the trus tees of the Earl of Dalkeith, from whom it passed to the Duke of Buceleugh, at a rent of five pounds. The Com missioners appointed in the year 1786 distinctly declared that these properties were disposed of without any estimate of their value. He begged in saying this to observe, that he did not allude to those transactions which occurred many years before the Committee of 1786 made their Re port for the purpose of disturbing the possession of the holders at the present moment. He mentioned them merely to show that they afforded good reason for not al lowing the Crown Lands to remain under the management of the Government, if it was proved they so misused their power, and took no measures to remedy those abuses which were pointed out in the Report of the Committee. The Hon. Member then referred to the disposal of the Manor of Seaton, in the county of York, together with the valuable alum-works to the Earl of Mulgrave. This sale took place in 1774, on the 16th of November, the pro perty having been previously let at a rent of 2,6961., and it was sold for 27,000/. In the same manner the extremely valuable alum-works were sold for 20,0001.-14,0001. being allowed for a lease which had been granted of April preceding. Now what became of the money thus obtained for this property of the Crown F The Commissioners who sat afterwards, in the year 1786, sent a letter to Mr. Peter Burrell, requiring to know what had been done with the money ; and he replied that, to the best of his belief, it had been paid by his father to Sir Grey Cooper, the Secre tary of the Treasury. One thing was certain, that the money was never applied for the benefit of the public. He thought it necessary here to mention a case which proved that those who managed the Crown Lands were not so free from all responsibility as they supposed. In the re bellion of 1745 the estates of the Earl of Derwentwater were forfeited to the Crown. They were of the annual value of 9,0007., and some influential persons, who, at that time, as now, were in the habit of keeping about the office of Woods and Forests, being anxious to become pos sessed of them, the commissioners managed to get the whole property sold to them for 1,000/. The matter was, however, too gross to escape; and an inquiry being instituted in the House of Commons, two of the Members were expelled the House, and the others were reprimanded. He mentioned this merely because he thought it important the House should keep it in mind that such things were done formerly, and that such were the consequences. H e had stated that one eighth was to be reserved as rent, and seven-eighths to be taken as fine. The rent agreed to be paid in consequence of that regulation proved to be 13,6621., and, supposing that seven-eighths were also paid as fine, the money received by the Crown should have been 95,6341. But the whole sum actually received was 7,0781. In 1770 the manor of Newark was let to Henry Duke of Newcastle at a rent of 482/, the fine being 3,374/.1 but the fine actually paid was only 2001. ; and the Commissioners, when they alluded to the subject, emphatically declared the abuse to be enormous. He avoided any mention of Wales in these e xplanations; but lest it should be said that, bad as was the management in England, there was something redeeming in the ma nagement of Crown property in Wales, he would just state, that, from the year 1760 to 1786, the rent received in Wales was 125,1251. and 124,466/. were paid for management, leaving 649/. to be placed in the coffers of the State. The rents and fines received in England, during the same pe riod of 26 years, amounted to 11,575/. The sum which the estimate showed they ought to have received was 78,049/. ; so that they had lost by mismanagement a sum of 66,4741. yearly ; or during 26 years, . a total of 1,728,3241. which must have gone somewhere, but which never found its way to the public charge. He would dismiss that part of the Woods and Forests, being aware, that were he to continue his observations respecting it, he should have to encounter all those national prejudices which existed with respect to our Navy. In fact, be had enlarged upon it merely to show the extent of the misma nagement which had taken place on the subject. If he were asked what he would do with regard to that portion of the Woods and Forests, he would say, place them under the superintendance of the Navy Board. The Commission of 1786 examined minutely into the Woods and Forests, but not so much so into the Crown farms and estates. — There were 18 reports of these Commissioners, and to do them justice they appeared to have discharged their duty fearlessly and honestly, and they expressed their sentiments boldly in reference to abuses, with regard to which their total silence would not have been surprising. The Commissioners stated, as a proof of the bad manage ment of the Woods and Forests, that from the year 1761 till 1786, the entire produce of them did not suffice to pay for their management, but that the balance was de frayed out of the general funds of the land revenue of the Crown, and that over and above what bad accrued from the sale of timber there had been expended upon the su perintendence and management of the Woods and Forests during that period, the sum of 144,882/. The Commis sioners further stated, that this property was let out in a manlier most disadvantageous for the interests of the Crown, and that the greatest neglect prevailed as to the mode in which the property was set. They gave an instance where a distinguished individual held property uuder the Crown by the right of passage for one horse over a certain tract of ground, and where it appeared that land to the amount of 460 acres belonging to the Crown was appropriated to this single animal. They gave an instance of two forests in the county of Southampton—Alice Holt Forest and Woolmer Forest--where the costs of the management, ma king for up wh of ile th t e he ti r m ec b e e ip r te fo in r sale, far exceeded andtheone year amounted the receipts; to 15,410/, the charge for the management, &c., of this estate was 24,0847., being an expenditure of nearly 9,000/. over and above the value of the entire produce of ,this property, They instanced another forest, the Forest of Whittlewood, amounting in extent to 5,424 acres, die average profits of which to tie Crown amounted to 85/. per annum, while the expenditure upon its manage ment was 145/. a-year.—(ileac'.) As another instance of the manner in which the Crown estates had been managed, the Commissioners spoke of Rockingham Forest, and of a property adjoining it amounting to about 400 acres of fine land, which bad passed from the Crown to Lord Westmoteland, which was held at less than one farthing per acre, and with regard to which it was impossible to obtain any account from Lord Westmoreland. They likewise spoke of Sherwood Forest, which comprised upwards of 95,000 acres. The Commissioners stated that, owing to mismanagement and to want of attention b the interest of the Crown, from the year 1760 to the year 1786, the expense for the management of this im mense amount of land exceeded the receipts from it by the sum of 9,0371. They stated that they had inspected the accounts with respect to Brecon Forest, and the eum ._ . . ber of trees that hadbeen blown down and sold there ; and that it appeared from the accounts of the sale the trees sold, during a period of 30 years, produced 8501., but that upon turning to the books in which the entry of the sale was made, they found, that though the trees sold for 8501., that was written off " even," for the expenses of the sale equalled that which the sale had produced.— (Ilear.)—They mentioned an instance, too, of a piece of natural generosity of the Crown towards the Duke of Newcastle, which appeared to be also extended, in other instances, to his noble descendant. It appeared, that in a wood which the Duke of Newcastle held from the Crown, ..„__ the produce of the timber sold amounted to 15,0001., while 1131. was charged to the Government for the ex- pense of the sale. These Commissioners, as be had stated, were appointed in 1786, and their primary object ap peared to be to inquire into the state of the Woods and Forests, in order to obtain returns of the description, present condition, and available value of all the Crown estates, with a view to ascertain the amount of the available Crown rental arising from the Crown property throughout the country. '1 hese returns they obtained. He (Mr. Harvey) now held them in his hand, sad he would state the result of them. It appeared from these returns made by the receivers connected with the various estates in the kingdom to the Commissioners, that they valued the revenue available to the Crown from all those estates, exclusive of mines and some other proper ties of an uncertain value, in 178 E ,, at 102,626/. ; that was the value which their returns set upon this descrip tion of Crown property at that period, and which pro perty was to be found in 40 out of the 52 English coun ties. That was the return of the receivers as to the value of the Crown estates in 1786, but the Commissioners be ing anxious to ascertain whether that was the real vales of them, determined, though they did not consider them selves obliged by the terms of their appointment, which ap plied more especially to the Woods and Forests, to make a personal inquiry into, and inspection of these estates, to ascertain whether the returns stated the real value of them. They accordingly had an actual survey made indiscritni nately of ten important estates. The properties which they had thus surveyed for the purpose of ascertaining their real actual value were situate in the counties of Lancaster, Essex, Lincoln, Worcester, &c. The value , of these estates was estimated by the receivers of the rents, in 1756, in their returns, at 3,2421. ; but upon the actual survey being made by order of the Commissioners, their value was estimated at 8,394/. New, looking at this fact, he conceived that they had a right to take for granted that since in the case of ten estates, indiscriminately chosen, the real value of them was found to be three times greater than the estimate of the receivers, if a similar survey had been made in regard to all those estates which were estimated altogether at only 102,626/., it would be found that their real value amounted to treble that sum, or to 300,000/. His (Mr. Harvey's) opinion was, looking at the facts stated by the Commissioners, that such was the value of these Crown estates in 1786. In concluding their report, these Commissioners advert to a proposition which at that period was very generally discussed,—namely, the expe diency of selling this Crows property; and, after balancing the arguments upon that point, they state it as their opi nion that it would be imprudent to do so then ; and their reason for coming to that conclusion was, that the prin cipal estates of the Crown were let at leases of long, unex pired terms, and at a low rent, and that it was not likely that, upon a sale of them they would, under such circum stances, fetch their real value. They did not hesitate to re commend a sale of the Crown estates when they could be sold to advantage ; and they strengthened their opinion by quoting a passage from Adam Smith to that effect. Now considering the state of the Crown property, as regarded the length of time the leases of it lead to run, he conceived that no fitter period could be selected for inquiring into the expediency of selling it. It was estimated, as had been seen, by the receivers, in 1786, at 102,6261. Between the year 1790 and 1802, 12,235/. worth of that property fell out of lease. Between 1802 and 1816, other leases of Crown property, to the amount of 54,952/. expired, thus leaving the proportion of this property, the leases of which had not expired in 1816, at 31,426/. Between 1816 and 1830, several other leases had expired, and there now only remained 14,400/. in amount of that property, with leases to run till 1836. If no leases then bad been improperly granted since the recommendation of the Com missioners in 1786, all the leases would expire in 1836, and this property would be then perfectly unencumbered, with the exception of an amount of 26/. 13s. 4(1., the lease of which had to run till the year 2770,—a period that he did not apprehend they would be likely to wait fur,—before they determined as to the expediency of the sale of this property.—(A laugh.)—He should now ad vert to the manner in which this Crown property had been disposed of. In doing so he did not wish to cast any im putations upon the Noble Lord opposite on account of these transactions, and he should refrain at present from praising the conduct of the Noble Lord, because he did not wish to make any invidious distinction between him and his predecessors. He should call the attention of the House to the manner in which several houses iu Piccadilly had been let. Every Hon. Member was aware of the value of property in that quarter. Now, by referring to the returns which were triennially made to the House, it would he found that several houses in Piccadilly had been let for 30/., 501., and 70/. a year, the value of which any individual acquainted with them would estimate them at five or six times that amount. He should also call the attention of the House to the very inadequate and delusive descriptive given in those triennial returns of this species of property. Ile would take any one of the items, and ask any Hon. Member whether it gave any thing like an idea of the property to which it referred. Take for instance the following :—" The manor of Epswortli, with Westwood and Haxey, and divers lands and tenements in Epsworth, Belton, Ouston, and Haxey." It was impossible for any one to form an idea of this property from that descrip tion, or to say whether it was worth Si. or 50/., 500/. or 5,000/. Such a practice placed in the hands of the Go vernment an extraordinary and unconstitutional power ; fur he would'assert, that those lands, under the superin tendence of the Woods and Forests, if applied to the pur pose, were quite sufficient to corrupt both Houses of Par liament. It appeared from a return given in the report of 1786, that property of th i s description to the amount 9971. a-year had been at one period settled for thirty years upon Sir Samson Guise as a means of political corrup tion. Similar grants might have been made upon other Hon. Members on different occasions. This, therefore, was a species of power which ought not to be lodged any were; and without desiring to cast any imputation upon the Noble Lord or his predecessors, he (Mr. Harvey) would say that this property in its present shape pre sented it source of corruption sufficient to contaminate any Parliament, and pervert its Members to any purpose. He should now call the attention of the House to the manner in which the property of the Crown at Newark had been disposed of. The Noble Lord upon a former occasion had said that his (Mr. Harvey's) estimate of the value of that property was too high. Reference had been made to the low amount of the rents at which the Duke of Newcastle set that property ; but that, it was obvious, might be done by the Noble Duke for political purposes, and there was no guide to enable them to ascertain by the returns the real value of this property. What was the way in which it had been dealt with ? In 1730 a lease was granted of this property for thirty-one years, at the annual rent of 1441. to the Prime Minister of that day. Since that time Newark had of course increased considerably in wealth and importance There were 900 acres of land, with fifty houses upon them, and that property was let in 1730 for 1441. per annum. The lease had been re newed now to the descendant of that Noble Duke for 2,000/. per annum. Now he (Mr. Harvey) was sure, that the value of that property: upon proper management, would amount to 200;000/. He had a letter from a pro fessional gentleman of eminence in that town, in which he stated that that property, if offered freely for sale, would bring 200,0001., and that the inhabitants would willingly bid for it to that amount. The present rental of the Duke of Newcastle was 4,000/. a year out of that property, but the writer stated, that if the property were let, without reference to political purposes, it would bring ' 7 ,000/. a year. He should now advert to the conduct of the Com missioners of Woods and Forests in reference to the sale of the manor of Rosedale, in the county of York. It was situated in the mountainous recesses of Yorkshire. The lease of these premises expired in 1816, and since that period they had been let to tenants at will. The conse quence was, that the roads and parks were in a most dila pidated condition, and that.the whole property was going to ruin. It was at length determined at the expiration of " S k. . `,.. It years to set this property up to sale, and it was an nounced for sale on the 30th of September. But front the account given of it no human being could tell whether these 5,000 acres were woods, or grounds under pasture, or corn. He (Mr. Harvey) having drawn the attention of the Commissioners of the Woods and Forests to that cir- cumstance, the sale was postponed ; but when did it come on ? On the 31st of December, when the mountains in Yorkshire were covered with snow, and when no one cattle' have access to those premises. He (Mr. Harvey) being commissioned by a friend to purchase this estate, sent an individual down to York to bid for it. -The mode of sale was most extraordinary :—The Government as -rv ed to thems&ves a concealed bid, and, as the bid,ling pro. seeded, they accommodated their bid in reference to the highet.t, instead of having it sealed up aswas the nsuAl prac tice. The person whom he (Mr. Harvey) employed was tie last to bid, and be bid 37,0001. What was the reserved bid of the Government? It was 70,0001. Now this was in his opinion a very prejudicial course for the public ser vice. For when penile found that such a tutu as 70,000/. was the reserve bid of the Government, and that the actval biddings did not exceed more than 10s. in the pound on that sum, it would prevent them from coming forward with other offers for such property, under the idea, that as Government could not dispose of it as its own price, it must ultimately, if disposed to sell, yield to theirs. He thought that this property ought to have been sold, not as an entirety, but in lots ; and he had called upon the Noble Lord n at the head of the department to say, that if it were sold in lots, the tenants were inclined to become pur chasers. He would read to the House a letter, which he had received from 41 or 42 of the tenants, informing him of their desire to purchase their respective holdings. That desire was very natural on their parts: for it somehow or other happened, that the tenants of these farms at will, were generally the holders of the tithes upon their hold ings. The Learned Member here read the letter in ques tion, in which the tenants informed him that they should feel greatly obliged to him if he could obtain them their respective hirings either by sale or on lease. Property like that of the Crown in Rosedale was never so available when put up to sale as a whole, as it was when put up in va rious parcels or lots. The next property to which he wished to call the attention of the House was that which was known by the name of Sunk Island. Sunk Island was at the mouth of the river Humber, and had been rescued from the sea in the course of the last forty or fifty years. In the year 1756 it was vaguely described as a parcel of sandy land in the river Humber, and strange to say it was thus described in a modern return for which be bad himself moved last year, though it now produced a rental of 10,0001. a year. He had moved, in the course of last year, for a return of all the Crown property held tinder leases which would expire within the next seven years ; and Sunk Island happened to be included within that property. The modern description of it was as fol lows :---" Sunk Island.—To whom granted ? To the Rev. John Lansdale and other gentlemen, a parcel of sandy land lying in the river Humber; a great part of it is to be embanked, and a chapel is to be built thereon :" and then it gives the items of the rent to be paid, and the names of the parties. An Hora. Mxmara.—When was the lease granted Mr. D. W. HARVEY—The lease began in 1802, when the value of land was much greater than at present. This land was first let in 1771, on a 30 years' lease, at a rent of 60/. a year, and with a fine of 1,550/. Its estimated value was then 9601. a year ; and thus when the fine ought to have been 8,4001., the Crown had been content with receiving 1,5501. That lease expired in the year 1802. Sunk Island had then been considerably aug mented in extent by, what was called, the warp of ti-e sea. It was in this augmented state let to the Rev. John Lonsdale and his copartners for 31 years; and that lease would expire in 1834. It was let during the first year for a rent of '7OO/. ; (luring the second for a rent of 2,0001., and during all the rest of the time for a rent of 3,000/. ; and the lessees were to expend all the money which might be requisite for the embankment of the soil, and for the erection of houses upon it. What then was done by the lessees? Individuals residing in the neigh bourhood informed him that the lessees, after the first year of their lease had expired, expended 10,0001. upon the island, and let it for the next year at no less a suns than 10,000/.—(Hear.) —At the last audit he knew that the Rev. John Lonsdale and his co-lessees had received the sum of 9,600/. He had a letter from a very intelligeat gentleman, describing the condition of this island, and the profitable lease which the Rev. John Lonsdale held under the. Crown.—[The Hon. Member here read an ex tract from the letter, in which, amongst other matters, it was stated that there were nearly 6,000 acres in it of the finest land in the whole kingdom, and that being tithe free and almost extra parochial, they were as cheap hold ing as any land in Englandl—Now, as such was the Case, he wished to be informed why the Commissioners of Woods and Forests, having all the resources of the nation at their command, could not have laid out themselves 10,0001. for the embankment of the island, and then have let it out to different tenants at an annual rent of 10,000/. as well as the Rev. John Lonsdale, who was now clearing 7,000/. a year by his speculation, and by their want of prudent forethought?—(Hear, hear.)--He had men tioned this as a case where the Commissioners had taken an inadequate consideration for the leases of lands which they had granted. He would now proceed to point out the inadequate considerations which they had also taken for the leases of houses. Two houses in Piccadilly, eight houses in Jermyn-street, as many in Little Jernsyn-street, four in 'Crown and Sceptre.street, and several others in that neigh bourhood, making altogether 31 houses, in the very best part of London, were let for 125/. a-year; and yet, in 1'786, this property was estimated at the yearly value of 786/., and must now, as every man who heard him must be conscious, be worth at least many thousands. Nineteen houses in Holborn, near the Turnstile, were let for 664/. a year ; and from an estimate which he had desired to be taken of them, he was led to judge each house worth from 1001. to 130/. a year.—(Hear, bear.)—Three houses in Spring Garden-terrace were let for 2361. a year, on con dition of 550/. being expended on the repair of them. H e believed that all the houses in Spring Garden-terrace were built upon the same scale, and he thought that any single house in that terrace would be a cheap house that could be had for 2361. a year. On that point the Noble Lord op posite could easily set him right if he was wrong, for he believed that the Noble Lord had rented a house there some time himself. Four houses on the north side of Piccadilly were let on a lease of 2601. a year, with 207/. for repairs. Three houses on the south side of Pall mall were let on a lease of 3501. a year, without auy sum being fixed for repairs. Now, every gentleman who walked along these streets must see that these were mere nominal rents—far, far below their real value.—(Hear.) --He found in Huntingdonshire what he could not help calling a very singular let. In the year 1815 a lease for lives was graired at a rent of 1171. of property, of which the estimated value on oath was 1,104/. The Jessie in this case was Sir John Throgmorton.—(Hear, hear.) — He came next to what he should call the inadequate con sideration obtained by the department of Woods and Forests for the real estates of the Crown, and he really must re queet the attention of the House to what he could not help calling their singular disposition of that property. He found in the year 1812 they had sold the following estates, which yielded a rental of 1,0841.. They had sold free hold estates in some of the finest counties in England, com prising ancient manors and parks, and royalties, for only twenty years' purchase. They had sold the manor of Eltham and all the manorial rights and royalties belonging to it—of which the annual value of it was represented to be 559/. odd—for 11,1861. 17s. They had sold the manor of King's Cliffe, with the courts, demesne, and other lands, and the royalties and appurtenances thereunto be longing, estimated at the annual value of 138/. for 3,0001. They had sold the manor of the Chapter of Beverley, with all rents, courts, rights, members, and royalties, demesne lands, and tenements thereunto belonging, estimated at the yearly value of 3251. for 6,515/. Now it was impossible to speak of manors, with courts and royalties attached to them, without seeing that they were a species of property which to many persons were highly desirable, and which were consequently highly valuable. The holding of such c e o % u v r in ts e g n av w e er a e lo c c ap al ab d l i e st o in f c i t i i nd onertovatlluteinirg.proNproiwetotrhs; whichh f missioners had sold these estates, together with the New market race-course, of which the estimated annual value was 150/., for the mere sum of 21,1601. These sales, besides, were upon the old rents, which he had before had occasion to remark, were nearly nominal. They had all the land-tax charged upon them, which the Cotimis-. sioners, however, had redeemed previous to disposing of them, as if they were determined to give the purchasers the best bargains in their power.—(Hear, hear.) —They bad bought up the land-tax at thirty-nine years' purchase and Lad sold it to the purchasers of these estates at twenty years' purchase. That was indeed management.—(Hear.) He now came to a very singular transaction, which had taken place in the year 1809, and to which allusion was made in the first report of the Commissioners of his Majesty's Woods and Forests. On the 28th of August, 1809, all the estate, right, title, and interest, re maining in his Majesty, in and upon the hayes or walk of Sulehay-fermes, and Shortwood, and More hay, in the forest of Rockingham, under an Act passed in the 36th Geo. 111. (1796), to enable his Majesty to grant the same to John Earl of Westmorland, his heirs and as signs in fee simple, upon a full and adequate consideration to be paid foe the same, was granted away to two gentlisa men appointed in that behalf by the said John Earl ofr ,• Westmorland. There was no return made as to the !miner of this property in the report of the Commissioners of 17e6. The annual value of this progeny previously to. the year 1796, was stated to be 71. ss. 3d. ; bet a survey of it having been made at that time, it was declared to be. 952/. 15s. 3d., exclusive of the value of the lodge, and the timber. So that John, Earl of Westmorland, previous to the year 1790, bad been holding for a rent of 71. sa. 3d., a property' which was then declared worth the an, teal sum of 9521. 15s. 3d.--(Loud cries of "Hear.") exclusive of the lodges and timber upon it.—(Hear.)— ' He could not conceive by what mystery the value of this forest had so entirely escaped the notice of the Crown.— It teal been made the subject of a special report at an ears 7 period in the last century, and from that report he would venture to read a short extract.—[The lion. Member then, read an extract, from which it appeared that no timber: had been felled in that forest before the year 1704 ; that:. in the year 1702, information was given to her Majesty,. that her rights in that forest were much undervalued, anda that if they were made matter of investigation, they would be found, in land and timber, to be worth 50,0001. ; that an investiea'ion was made, that subsequently a consider able fall of timber took place, and that then the rights of the Crown in that forest were estimated at 50,000/.] — This property, then, which in 1701 was declared worth • 50,000/., was let to John, Earl of Westmorland, up to 1796, for 71. ss. Od a and after that year for 9531. (Hear.)—John, Earl of Westmorland, bought it at last, and it was, therefore, worth while to consider what he • had g iven for it. John, Earl of Westmorland, gave for it , including the lodges and timber, 10,0381. 15e. 6d., and that bargain was sanctioned by Act of Pathament. But though that Act passed in the year 1796, the money' was net paid till July, 1509. It was then paid in with ire'Oate. , . rest, computed at the rate of fire per cent. on the prin.-. cipal, his Lordship having received from it in the interim a rental equivalent to 10 per cent.—(Hear, hear. )—No wonder, then, that his Lordship should have been so back ward to make the return for which he had moved in the last Session. He mentioned this circumstance to show that there were transactions connected with this Crown property which placed it in the power of the Commissioners to bring in to their aid, aid to place under their beck one-half of the Members of both Houses of Parliament.— (Hear , bear. )—And here it became necessary to consider who in general were the tenants of this Crowe; property ? It was not usual to find Noble Lords and Hon. Q,entlemen taking lands of third parties in order to get a few pounds by the higher rent which they might extract for them to'ona their own tenants ; nor was it an ordinary circumetanso to find them acting the part of middlemen, unless thee! were likely to receive a compensation capable of assnagingg the injury done to their pride by such apparent degrada— tion. When, therefore, he saw such a number of men of rank among the tenants of the Crown property, he could notehelp inferring that they derived considerable advantages from the nature of their tenancy.—(Hear, hear.)—Out 408 tenants to the rental of 200,000/. in the year 1786, upwards of 200 were men of title. Now he could not conceive that they would have placed themselves in that humiliating situation, unless they expected to derive some benefit from it.—(Hear, hear.)—He saw among the tenants of that day the names of Sir T. Clarges, the Duke of St. Albans, the Earl Bathurst, Lord Viscount Bacon, the Duke of Gloucester, the Duke of Newcastle, the Earl of Lichfield, and many other Noble Personages; for, to speak the truth, they were as thick as the Peerage could mke them throughout...—(A laugh.)—He had now shown how inconsiderate the Commissioners had been when they had got any thing to sell. He would next proceed to the converse of that proposition, and would prove to the Nobles Lord how lavish they had been with the public money whenever they had got any thing to buy.—(Hear.)—ble wished to ask the Noble Lord opposite a great conatitu ti null question. He did not know that the Commissioners of his Majesty's Woods and Forests had power to diaa. pose of the money which came into their bands, in pur— chasing parcels of lands to round off the parks or to ha— prove the views from the royal residences. He might be , mistaken in his notions ; the money which came into their hands might, perhaps all of it, belong to the Crown ; but• if it were under the controul of the people, any diversion , . of it to other purposes, without the leave of the guardians of the people, was, in his opinion, a mal-appropriation of the funds of the public. He found from these reports, that at Virginia Water a public-house called the Wheatsheof had been bought for 5,000/., and had afterwards been let • to a gentleman of the :lame of Ramsbottom, who was thei a Member of that House, for the low rent of 50/. a year. hear.)—Now it they could sell the enciersepro perty of the Crown, with all the courts and royalties at tached to it, for 20 years' pUrehase, surely they ought na take care that they did riot themselves purchase land at ae worse rate ; and above all things they ought to guard' against giving such an extraordinary price as 100 year , purchase for a paltry public-house.—(Hear.)—Then they' bought certain premises at Egham, for which they gam 1,100/., and then they did not let them at all. They also bought certain premises at Windsor, and these he found , _ were to be occupied by different members of the Royal es teblishment. He a'so found that they had bought the perpetual aelvowson of the rectory of St. Marylebone or, the Duke of Portland for 40,000/., transferring, to his Grace, by way of exchange, at a fair valuation, the rights of the Crown over a waste called the Hayes of Birkland, and of Billsagla in the forest of Sherwood, with the trees , standing thereon. Now, for that outlay of public money, they ought to have a return of 2,000/. a year. But how stood the fact? They paid annually for repairs of chapels, &c., the suns of 10,000/. ; and they received annually, is the shape of fees for pews, and other emoluments, the sum of 8,0001. ; thus losing, instead of gaining, 2,000/. a yearr ' by the transaction.—(Hear, hear.)—Now this appeared to , him to be not a very judicious applicat.on of the public mo— ney.—(A laughs.) An 110 N. MIMBER.--It was sanctioned by Act of Par ment. Mr. D. W. HARVEY.—I know that there was an act of Perliament to sanction it, but I likewise know that you may get an Act of Parliament for any thing.--(A laugh.) —Then there was 21,000/. paid for having the Moat Park auditor's n ce i n ; g and to yet it fo they r3o2 l7 . d a let year.-- three housesestate laid into Wi n d sor G rea t P ar k. Th en th ere was a house in Spri ng - gar d ens , b oug h t o f L or d D e Gifford, for " 3'S°° offo r their an own ad 1. (Hear, hear.)—Then there were certain premises at Pim lico, for which they had given 15,000/., in addition to 21,000/. which they had given for ground in the neigh- . bons Loud of Buckingham Palace. Then they had b oug ht at Egham certain premises of the Hon. John Coventry for 7,3501., and had afterwards sold them, with their usual providence, to the Hon. R. Westenra for 6,000/. Then they had likewise bought certain premises at Windsor for 1,350/., which they now were glad to let at 13 guineas $ year.—(Loud cries of " Hear.")—He was not aware that the Commissioners had a right either to borrow or to lend money. But it appeared from their reports that they had fist lent the Duke of York 56,000/. to assist him building his house in St. James's Park—that uporr death, they bad bought his house for 81,000/.,—arid that they had afterwards sold it again for 73,0001.--e(Hear.)--e• There might be an Act of Parliament, too, for thie, for any thing he knew.—(A laugh.)—Then there 'was the property in Birkland Hayes, which they had exchanged for the perpetual advowson of the rectory of Marylebones Then be saw that in the year 1819, his Grace the Duke of Richmond had intimated to the Commissioners that he was: ready to accept of a fair price for his interest in his haute ha Privy-gardens. They had therefore ordered his interest to be valued, which was found to be worth 5,000/. This sum they agreed to give his Grace ; but then they said, By the covenant of your lease we have a right to call ot , your Grace to make good certain injuries which befel these premises in 1791. We estimate those injuries at 700/., and therefore we shall deduct from the purchase-money of 5,000/. this sum of 7001., for which we have had a lienupott you ever since 1791," Now upon this he had only one clime lion to ask ; how was it that they had allowed this lien to re main so long undischarged ? He had mentioned the name of the Duke of Richmond perhaps unwisely, so far its re ferret' to the fate of the present motion.—(Hear.) it might be said that it was true that in past time the pro' perty of the Crown had been let for inconsiderable smolt much below their real value, and that the cause wasohat there was no con t ro lli ng power by w hi c h it s real value could - be asce r t a i ne d ; b u t th a t i n 1786 an expedient: had been devis e d w hi c h remove d t h at o bj ect i on , an d ' thi t ' ex pedient was, th a t we now l et no property utitiftsve had . a return of its valu e g i ven b y our own ' Surveyors upon their oaths. Now that was not qu i te so goo d an expe die n t as some persons were inclined t o i mag i ne i t. N o man c ould help being struck by the difference of va:ne set upon the same premises by respectable surveyors when examined upon their oaths before juries empanelled to award compel' sation to persons whose property :night be injured by the building of bridges, or any other public work. He had had a memorable instance of that difference of opinioti within his own experience —a difference which bad led upon one occasion to his loss of a seat in that House. ill (Mr. D. Harvey) had challenged the qualification of a. gentleman who had rested it upon some property . whio he had upon Clepham-comrnon. He had surveyors readi to swear that it was not worth more than 1201. or 13 01 ' a-year. But what then? Lie was told that If 'One" sur :veYor would only swear that it was worth 3001. a-yel it e was of no use all the rest swearing it was not wort, , I half that sum. He would g ive a few instances of .t,