The Sun. — London, England, 1821-02-15 00:00:00

PARLIAMENT, HOUSE OF LORDS; Ftu.l4. MAtON, from the Direc . tors of the Eas India Company, presented a Copy of the Regu lations passed by the Governments of India it ltili?.—Laid on the table. Mr. l'AvNr, from the Commissioners of the Thames Navigation, presented the Annual Ac counts of that Commission.—l.aid on the table. The Langitudeßill went through a Comm. tee:- R.epOri•to-morrow.—Adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS. Mr. MAso;tr, from. the East India Company, presented a ti St of_ the Regulations passed by Governor-General of India in 1519.---Order ed to tie on the Table. • Stil.6ta . gave notice, that on Wednes thly he Would move for the appointment of a• Selet toTbrnittee to invire into the applica tion of. the Orphan Fund. Mr. GRINFELL gave notice of two motions for Tuesday the one respecting the Public Ba;ancrs in the hands . of the: Bank; the other (as we believe) with regard to the Ordnance Estimates. Mr. PAYE presented the Annual Abstract of the Accounts of the Thames Navigation Com pany.--Ordered to lie on the Table. • Mr. Serjeant 0!:;seow . moved for the appoint latent of a SeleCt Committee, to take into con sideration the state of the laws relating to the ad mission of _Attorneys and Solicitors in that part of the United Kingdom called England, and to report - their opinion aMd observ.ations.thereon to the House. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman, in the course of a few prefatory observations, said, that as the law at present stood no person could be adMitted as an Attorney or a Solicior, who had not served a clerkship of five years. One of the objects lie had in view was to take - off two of those years in cases in ‘i - hick the indi viduals had taken a Degree at either of the Uni versities ; for he was persuaded,- that in three years a person so prepared would become quite as well , qualified for the profession as a raw and inexperienced young man would becotne in the live- years at present prescribed by law as the necessary term of clerkship. An Hon. MEMBER. asked, whether the Hon. and Learned Gentleman . intended .to.. apply his proposition to Conveyancers? but we ware un able to hear the answer. The motion was then agreed to, and a Select committee, composed o most of the legal Gentleinen in the House, ap pointed accordingly. TIMBER TRADE. General GASCO YNE; seeing . .the Right Hen. the yice-Presicknt of the Boaid of Trade in his place, wished to ask hirri a question of consider able importance to a very respectable part of the carnmunity. At the present dine, it was well known.that the Select Committee, of that House 6n Foreign Trade, were directing -their inquiries to. the. subject of the admission into this country of Timber from America, and from the Euro peanTorti. He wished . to . ask the Rig-tit Hon. Gentleman whether or not it was intended to await the result of the deliberations of - that Com- Initt:-.e, before any proposition was made to Par- Ear/tent on the subject ? The trade was at present ir. great uncertaiuty respecting it ; and as the present was the period in which they generally opened their correspondence, that circumstance rendered a state of doubt still more inconvenient. It:iyould, therefore, b-e -a great satisfaction to the trade-, if the Right Honourable Gentleman would Lave the goodness to answer his question. .Mr. - WALLAdE was perfect aware of the great anxiety that existed on this subject, and ex tremely desirous that it 'should be terminated as soon as possible. It was certainly true, that the Committee on Foreign Trade were at 'present especially directing their attention to the ques tion adverted to by the Honourable Gentleman. It .would, however, be imposSible for his Ma jesty's Go . vernnient to offer any recommendation on the subject to Parliament before the expira tion of the existing law ; for it would be ex tremely unfair to subject any part of the trade to,the operation of a measure which they -were not prepared . to expect. Under- all the circum . stances of the case, it might be desirable to pro lw:g for a certain - period the duration of the ex isting law. In his opinion, however, the term of thc. continuance of the existing- law should be strictly confined to the necessity to which he had already alluded, Of acting with fairness towards these enr.taged in the trade. it. was not his in tention, therefore, tO'recommend to Parliament any • extension of the existing:law beyond the month of July. lie would give his reasons for fixing.on that period. He had already declared his disposition to confine the extension of the ex isting law to the stria necessity of the case. There•were two descriptions of trade in timber carricsd on with America'. That from the wes tern coast of this country, the individuals en whicl Ma - de two voyages in the year ; and the other part . of the trade, _the individuals_ enrged in whiel'confined themselves to one voyage. The object which he -had in view was to f-ive such notice to all those persons as might prevent their making arrangeinents, which, with out that notice, they might have contemplated. Nov, with respect to those who were in the habit of making two voyages in the year, the earlier of those two voyages would have been completed, and the vessels would have returned by July. With respect to, those individuals who made but one voyage, which was in the latter part of the year, it was not necessary that-they should sail from this country before the intentions of Par liament on the subject would be declared. General GASCOvNE said, he could not see why the existing law might riot be prolonged for six months, from the 25th of March ; the time of its expiration. That would be much more - satisfac- tort' to the parties interested. Mr. WALLACE adhered to the preference which be had expresied, for fixing the month of July as tho term of the continuance. Mr. ELTACF. seemed - toconsider that it would be very advantugpops if the COmmitte :now sit flak, on foreign Trade would .:ate a -short Re port on this subject, at as early a petiod as was consistent with their convenience. Sir I. COFrIN observed, that for the last 25 years, the British merchant had been in the ha'bit of importing from Quebec, timberwhich had been actually cut at Lake Champlain, and was im ported as British timber. He wished to know (as we understodd the Hon. Baronet). whether there was any account from the Collector of St. John's, of the quantity of.timber that pasi_e_d? Mr. IVALLAcE replied, that there was consi derable difficulty in ascertaining the quantiry; but that he did not believe the - facts were. so strong as they .were supposed to be by the lion. Baronet.—Another Hon. MEMnER rose, but the- Speaker suggested the, irregularity of pursuing the conversation, and it was dropped. Mr. BEN Er 'presented a Petition from a Li censed Victualler of the name of Samuel Meek, who had been deprived of his license by the Magistrates, and whose case had several times before been mentioned.in that House. It prayed that the Minutes of Eyidence Which related to his case in- the itepOrt of the Police .Committee might be printed. The Hon. Member gave-no tice, that on Friday next he would move that the prayer of the petitioner should be granted.—Me petition was brought up, read, and ordered to be printed. On the motion. of Mr. 147.4 E, a Return was ordered to be laid before the 'House of the Ex pence of Printing for the Houses of Lords and Commons, and forthe Public Offices in this King dom, and of the Expence of Paper, &c. for the last three years.-Also, an Account of the Va lue of Stationery furnished to the Houses of Lords and Commons and the Offices of Govern ment, for the last three years.—Algo, an Account of the total number of Shipping, British and Fo , reign, that have cleared out of all the Ports of Great Britain for the United States, the Cape of Good Hope, and New South Wales, with the amount of tonnage and the number of passengers for the last ten years. Mr. KEITH DOUGLAS presented a petition from certain Ship-owners of Leith, connected with the Coal Trade. The petition stated the Coal Trade in that district was nearly annihi lated, and the petitioners attributed the circum stance to the Legislative measures of the year 1816, concerning _the duty on Coals. Those measures, it was stated, promoted the Coal Trade of Newcastle by increasing its exportation, while that of Leith, from the admitted inferiority of, the Scotch Coal, had gradually declined from that period ; and the petitioners, therefore, pray-; ed that the duty on Coals might be so regulated as to restore. the. Trade of the two Towns to their I former state. The nom Member observed, that he could not state from his own knowledge that the failure of the Coal Trade of Leith had entirely originated from the cruse mentioned by the peti tioners; but as they were a respectable and , suf fering body of men, he trusted the House, would give their case its most serious consideration.— (Hear, hear, hear !)—The Petition was then brought up, and ordered to lie on the table and be printed. TEIE QUEEN. Colonel Woon - : - presented a Petition, nume rously and respectably signed, from the Free holders and other Inhabitants of the County of Brecon. AlthoUgh he did not agree in all the prayers of the Petition, he felt it his duty to pre sent it. It began by declaring the fidelity to the King, and the love for the Constitution, by which_ the Petitioners were animated. To the truth of this declaration he could bear since re testimony. A more loyally attached County than Brecon could not he found in the kingdom --(Hear. hear!). The -Petition proceeded to censure the unconstitutional proceedings which had been - pursued with respect to her Majesty, declaring, tfiat they consider the omission of hei _Majesty's name in the Liturgy as a condemna. tion and punishment before trial—(hear, hear!), They then proce . eded to express their disappro bation of the financial system, and their regret and astonishment, that after five years of peace, the _agriculture and commerce of the country should be' in a .state so ruinous —(Hear !)—The Petitioners affirmed that they were Making great efforts to restore the prosperity of the country. ,but_ that those efforts were rendered inelFectual by the enormous expence of contested elections, which prevented them. from having intelligent persons as candidate. He- (Col. Wood) was bound in gratitude to say, that in no county in the island Were greater -efforts made to return _Representatives with as little expellee as possi ble.. In conclusion, -the Petitioners- expressect their conviction of the benefits that would result from a change in the national councils,and there fore prayed the House to take such steps as might induce his Majesty to dismiss his present Ministers --(Hear,-hear!)—l tt this last prayer he certain ly did not agree with the Petitioners ; . for he could not help thinking, that to his Majesty's present Ministers the country was indebted for the'blessings it enjoyed.—(A laugh).—The gen tlemen opposite might smile ; but he was per suaded, notwithstanding the distress that exist ed, that that distress • - mould have been much greater, if they had been. the Ministers of the Country. Of two evils, therefore, he must choose the least—(A loud laugh).—Being convinced that the country would derive no advantage, but the contrary, fro'm a change of Ministers, he certain ly could .not concur in that part of the Petition. —The Petitiot was then brought up", read, and ordered to be printed. CONDUCT OF SHERIEFS Mr. Br:Arista:s'r Tose, in pursuance of his no tice, to call the attention of the Ifouse -to the conduct. of Sheriffs in refusing to call Meetings for the purpose of Petitioning, and to move that the Cheshire Petition op that subject should be referred. to the consideration cf a Committee. It, would be in the recollection of that House, that on Friday last, a Petition was presented by-a_ Noble Lord,.oomplaining of the conduct of the Sheriff of Cheshire in two points--the one, that he had refused to propose an Amendment moved by a Noble Lard to the original motion, and the other, that he had omitted to put the negative on that original motion. It was not his intention to advert to the conduct of any particular individual, with a view to draw upon him a vote of censure. What Le Complained of generally was, the un constitutional conduct of the Sheriffs of Cheshire. Northumberland,;* Gloucestershire,• Kent, and elsewhere; and' his object was to propose some legislative measure which should prevent the re currence of such conduct. I.le would not take the other course to which he had just alluddd; on account of the absence of one Hon. Member spe cially interested in the question, and also. as he was desirous to avoid.all observationslhat might. have ,a , iy tendency to aff e ct the character of Gen tlemen, in_ preserving a due .respect for whom, the Whole country was so much interested. He had already-stated that in the case of Ches-hire, the conduct of. the Sheriff had . been complained of on two grounds. . With respect to the first, his refusal to propose the amendment of a Noble Earl, it was obvious that,. by such means, a She - - riff might prevent all advantageous discussion on a public question. The other point was of still More importance. It would be, in many cases, impracticable correctly to ascertain ;the sense of a public meeting, unless the. negative 'as well as the affirmative - - of • a - question were put. He Would not trouble the House with the different cases in Which Sheriffs had.acted improperly—s they would be for the considerafrion of the Com mittee. With respect to the case of Northum berland, the requisition had been_ signed by a great number of persons possessing property to a great extent ; the object of the Requisitionists was per fectly legal. The SheriffobjeCted to call th e meet ing, not on the ground of illegality, he assigned no such ground, he acted merely on his own discretion. The object of the meeting which he refused to call was perfectly legal ; and, considering the rank of the persons who signed the Requisition,.nnd the general respectability of the county, not the slightest danger or inconvenience was likely to occur. The Honourable Member next alluded to a late - Act of Parliament, the' Act agiiinst Tumultuous Meetings, which took away the right of the people -to hold public meetings, and gave, to the Sheriffs an extensiVe and dangerous poWer. It was not the intention of.the Legislature to give so great a discretion to the Sheriffs; for he remem bered a declaration made byMinisters in thatllouse, when the Act in question was- under consideration., The Ministers de'Oared,that the meanin g o f the Act was to give the sanction of law to that which existed before only by sufferance. He contend ed, that the important right of Petition was, by the new power given by- the Act in - question, greatly endangered. He trusted that the House would take some measure' to limit • that power within certain bounds, either by amending or re peal;ng the Act altogether. He would willingly vote for its repeal, because - he was convinced that the - inconvenience and danger complained of was occasioned by that law. He hoped that he brought .forward this subject in a manner not likely to in crease the agitations of the country ; far diffe rent, indeed, Was his object. Ills object simply was, to correct what appeared to him to be an abuse of power, and to prevent the recurrence-of acts so irritating as those of which he complained. =The Honourable. Member. concluded by mov ing, C 4 That the Petition presented, on the 9th 'instant, to that House, from the Inhabitants of Chester, complaining of the conduct of theJligh Sheriff in refusing to call a County Meeting, should be referred to a Select Committee, toßxa rnineinto the matters therein stated, and to re port to the House thereon." Mr. DAVENPORT asked whether this motion was not in substance the same as that of, which notice had been' given by the Honourable Mem ber for Appleby ? Mr. BEAUMONT said, that the object of the two motions was very distinct. His (Mr. B.'s) ob ject went merely to prevent the recurrence of an evil. The object of his llonourable Friend went further—it went immediately to-the consideration of the Sheriff's conduct, with a view to have him censured or removed from office. Mr. CREEVEY said, he thought that.the motion of his Honourable Friend would have been for a general inquiry into the conduct of Sheriffs as to the exercise of their discretion in refusing to call County Meetings. Such, he thought, would have been -the object of the motion suggested by the refusal of Sheriffs in various counties—in Glou cester, perkshire, Kent, 4ncl other .places. - Th e motion of whiCh h e (Mr. Creevey) gave notice last night ; stood on different ground—that motion was suggested by facts stated by different Mein . .. 7 hers, from which it appeared that the Sheriff' de clined putting an Amendment, or proposing a ne gative to the Address. Ills object, in giving .the notice of last night, was to bring - the conduct of the Sheriff before the House, with a view, in case it should appear that he had 'acted improperly,, of having him censured by the House, It ap peared to him that the - motion of his ilonoUrable Friend was exactly the same as that of which- he had given notice. Lord CASTLEREAGH said, the object of the mo tion, as appeared to him, was to inquire into the conduct' of the Sheriff, with a view to ground some further proceeding. He begged to observe that it was by no.means a matter of course to put an individual, charged with possible misconduct, to the trouble arrtr expence of bringing up wit nesses from the,courto'. Ho apprehended that it would be better - if the lion. Member for Nor thumberland and the Hon. Gentleman behind him, would postpone the question until they had the whole merits of the case before them. Then the House would be able at one view to see the nature of the- delinquency charged against the Sheriff. It was a subject well deserving of at-, tendon, and before they came to the discussion ' of it, they certainly should have the facts and merits of the case 'before them. -lie threw out the suggestion, and not by - any means for throw ing any embarrassment in the way of inquiry. lie wished to have the matter put in the most distinct and intelligent manner, and with that view he suggested that the motion should be al lowed to.stand over until the is hole of the facts should he collected. Air. DENMAN said that a Petition had been put into his hands, which he would have present ed early - in the evening if he were aware that the , . _ _...._,...., motion was to have been brouKlit on. A Requi sition had been some time since presented to the SJe of Middlesex for . a County Meeting which they declined calling. Mr. Sheriff.Waith man, in case his conduct should. tie 'objected to in declining to call thatMeetiq, had certain papers to produce to the House which would justify his conduct. The question before the House was certainly very importantondhe was glad to hear the.declaration : made by the Noble'Lord ; but he thought that declaration was a little incorleisteut with the conduct. Ninisters,- partictilarly at .the Harnpsl4re Akettitig. - tend tilat'llreetii'ig and. openly . oppose the object for which it was held, but a number of them signed ,a counter-requisition. BEAUMOST assented to the suggestion of Lord Castlereagh,A4dthe motion was withdrawn for the present. • • SCOTTISH JURIES. Mr. KENNRDY, in bringing forwardtistshotion; said.that it was of the utmost importance to re move any blot that might casually appear on the administration of justice ; fie did not Mean to cast the slightest imputation on the conduct of the Learned Judges in S-cotland, fo'r en,-- tertained the highest possible respect-,and he felt he was only attempting to relieve them when he endeavoured to remove defects in the administra-, lion of justice. In the year, 1701, an Act was passed in Scotland which might be properly call= ed the Habeas Corpus Act of that country ; it was an act to secure the liberty of-the subject, by - virtue of which, any individual charged with an offence, might compel the prosecutor.tO bring him to trial within a limited time. Unfortuhate ly many persons were denied the benefit of that Statute, because the-expettce of 'seeking foe're- 7 dress under it was too heavy for those individuals to meet. Again, persons were only entitled to the benefit of the Act of 1701, - who .previously qualified themselVes by goihg to gaol, .persons• out on bail could not obtain the benefit ofthe provisiOns of that Act. Another defect to which he felt it necessary to allude, was Ors arbitrary jUdgments pronounced in Scotland, ,no matter, what the punishment, ft om the smallest' fine, up to transportation for five years, and Jot., life ; Judges pronounced arbitrary judgmentsee-peli tical 'offences also carne " under the cognizance of those Courts. .By a late Act,,,whiCh na turally excited alarm in this country, a man convicted of the, second offence in the -case of libel,' was m ad e su bj ec t to. t h e punishment of banishment ; but -in Scotland it 'is the law to transport a man for the first offehce ese (Hor„ hear !)—ln the course of the last-year, .an in dividual in that country, convicted, of a seditious libel, was transported_ for five years--. (flear,hear!) —That individual was. now, under,going 'that punishment —a punishment which he understood was considered rather lehient—(Hear, hear, hear D---Another point--to which he would allude was, the power assumed and exercised -.by; the Lord Advocate, of filing ex-offleioinformations, by which means he took away from the accused' the benefit of c. Jury, in the firSt instance. Ano ther grieVance on the accused, party was, that he was denied the benefit ef any informality: that might appear. Where such inforinality'appears the prosecutor " d e s er t s . the diet,'! pro loco et lempole, and the party_is sent back to prison, and . brought, up for trial a.second 'time, for' the same offence. Another crying evil was, the -mode of selecting Jurors for criminal trials,. The prae e tice was, that forty-fiVe persons were presented by the Sheriff, out of which fifteen pees Ons were selected as a Jury to try the csse: Iti Sq;otland there were . four Counties As ithie the' 'Circuit - I the -Sheriff returns at Edinburgh .4.5 prsonS'for each of those Counties, making 'OO persons. in the whole. Those names are deliverechti;the Judge, and out. of them he 'selects 45 perionSsathtis will acid _pleasure. lle was far from suPiAssing that the Judges acted improperly or partially, but he submitted that those were preliminary arrange mehts which ought .not:tteexist.' It-should be recollected, that in all cast*--sincaSes of murder or of robbery ee seighr Jusor.a , ohf; a fifteen were sufficient to cOnyict the accnsed...4n a country, where one matt might lose his life bylhe decision of another,-sthe greatest caution ought to be obs served in thesselection of Jurors.------(Hear, hear !) —The Hon. Gent. next observed,. that though Sir G.M'Kenz-ie stated that,the right of peremptory challengeexisted in Scotland, such right did 'not ex ist, and was not sanctioned by authority. The reatedyhe proposed was, that the Jury, insicad,of being norninatedas theseare, should be selected by ballot. He would alsogive touacif Orly theright to a small amount, of peremptory challenge. lie would give the prosecutor the right to challenge three J urors, and the right to the accused of chal lenging three also. He did not wish to go, ,far ther, though he thought that the right of peremp tory challenge might with safety be extended farther ; in a country where the life and .fame of an individual might depend On the voice of a single man, no party feeling should be allowed to exist. In England' the right of, peremptory, chal lenge, in cases of capital felony, was always exer cised, and was generally permitted in other cases as long as Jurors could be found., He'under stood that the Learned Lord (the Lord Advocate) intended to introduce some measure of ameliora tion with respect to the Law 'of Scotland ; he would be glad to find that the question concern ing the selection of Juries was intended to be em braced in that measure, but he was- not aware that such was the intention of the Learned Lord. The lion. Gentleman concluded by moving for leave to,bring in a Bill to regulate the Appoint ment of Jurors in criminal cases in Scotland. Lord BINNING said, that he regretted,- with his Hon, Friend, the absence of the Learned Lord (the Lord Advdcate). It was riot to be supposed, that he (Lord Binning) could be able to reply to the statements 'that had been made ; indeed, it was not necessary, for his Hon. -Friend•had gohe into matters which were quite extraneous'to the object of his Bill-e---,(Hear 'hear!) His Hon. Friend had alludesho what, he called arbitrary punishments; he would state the nature of those arbitrary punishments. Where an individual stood accused' of an' offence whiCh was death by the law, the Lord Advocate had the right of restricting the libel, which was', pro tanto, restricting the power. of the Judges in favour of, the accused. He:was not prepared to assume or deny the propriety of the change, proposed but in the abSence of . the . Lord Advocate, and in the utter ignoranee of the ,t(otte, with the exception of two or three Member s) he hoped ids- Honourable Friend would content himself with having the Bill read a first time, and letting it lie over. .. Mr. M. A. TATi.ort,,,,laid, it was rather unpar liamentary that his. Hoer', Friend should be as sailed because he brought forty d the Motio n in tlik absence of'the Noblr o l l e;r whose d u ty it nfai,,to be Arf :14 di qt g ee why, esenif the Lord Adv oc at e Ica absent, their tongues w e re to be tied ; th e Nob e Lord sh ou ld rat h er h ave IS( apologised f or th e L earned Lord than have inculpated his Honourable Friend. Hi s Honou rable Fiend- had broup,hteto .view the arbitrary ~ power exorcised by ,the C ourt of Justiciary', to '• instances of which he (Mr.. 1.,) had.happened,t6te be witness in ,a case, the details of which •weea • • printed,•and which was also to be. found in, the '. debates of that House; he meant the case of Mr.. Muir and. Mr. Palmer (Hear, hear, hear!)-----11e,-.. (Mr. T,) had been in the House in the time of - the debate,. as well as in Edi.nbarghr at the time . of the trial, and certainly, in common v:it'n... many others, he did not ,think the verdict vies that which would have been given hv an Englis;r . Jury.—(lleac l)---Ile had .on .this point the tes timony of a man of no mean authority,• who _was present the whole time, he m ean t t h e l ate. S ir S. Romilly. Mr. Erskine, a lawyer of the veil first eminence, declared, that on that occaiot the'Court of Justiciary had misunderstood the law, when they sentenced the prisoners to trans portation. The law. said, that persons conviettel of sedition should be - " banished from their pleae sant fields and native home's." But this never • had been understood, or could be honestly inter prete.d, as giving a power to transport the _prig sOner to a particular place, -as they -did those prisoners to Botany Ba v. The cage, was brought befee , e the Douse- of Commons by the present Commissioner. of the Jury Court (Mr. Adam) ; . the Judges escaped ce.nstire witli veil , great dila- . cutiy„ And no one who heard, that.debate, could suppose that the law gave the - power assumed a banishing . beyond the seas for,eedition and libel. But, , forsooth, they were ncrt to speakiof .Scots law, unless the. Loid Advocate was present. In the.liOuse of Lords, the Chancellor decided ()J.: ie Scots.law, though no Scots lawyer, and in that house, even if the Lord Advocate had been pre-- " sent,-he should take on himself to decide accord ing to his own judgment; Mr.- J. P. GRANT said,• the principles of the Bill had been laid..bY his Honourable.Friena en. • grounds which required no amplitication„ but h .., should rectify a mistake-of the :Coble Lord (Lord Binning), who supposced that it was only when a libel was restricted by the Lord Advocate that an arbitrary pOwer was exercised by the Court of .• . Justiciary. Within not a great many years, ill those cases ie. which by the law of Scotland they •• were enabled to inflict a punishment, of which the utmost extent was banishment from Scotland, the Judges had assumed the p ow e r to transport tne. prison er - t o a part i cular place, as under the Trans portation A c t s i n E ngland, and in a recent ca:sev, for one of theseoffences, in which banholunent was the utmost legal pnWshment, the priso ner wasfe -omi-trended by an unani mous jU ry to the leu,itf• of, the Court. a n d th at Court, in its le n ity, t r ans' ported him for fiv e years. I Lord Rtzvi.t. - cp._ explained. Tie had not said that ther . t.,ourt of St.sticiary never exorcised the 4 -- power of seniencing to transportanol,,, i nlia: where the oiunce was. capital one. What /le • had stated was, that what was caned " an arbi trary punishment" was hi fact a leniency, b e cause the puniihrnent was only so restricted, in pse*oL , capital offetice. 7 —Leave was then granted to bli4 in the Bill. nrwritl rLot7rt: CLI'IFc, after men tianin 9: that for sane' time a practice had prevaile.4 of supplying oa r garrisons - abroad with American in preference ta. English Flour, moved for an account of a.l - I•Lh° Corn and Flour,' the produce -of America ana Foreign countriecontracted s for by his Majc,;'..y*3 Victualling Office within the last three years. The CnANcEr.i.on of the ExcatEouE4-esl3" ed, that during the war the "colonial garrisons been-supplied as they best aught be,. but that the Commencement of the peace, the TreaslitT had issued an order that they should be supplica with British corn and hour. Daring two year 9 that- this system, had prevailed, a great part of the flour was returned unserviceable, an d .. the, strongest representations were made that Americam - Hour on ly might be sent out. American fiour had foi' two years been supplied. But on the repres?u tations of agricultural gentlemen, and on its being' t proved that B r iti s h . fl our might.boso prepared as to be egnai to A mer i can flour, the Lords of 'the Treasniy. lied chan g ed th e ir systeM. Mr. Cumw EN said, that the only ditrerence be tween American and English flour was, that tke former was kiln-dried, which of course might 1 ;° done -with the -latter when it was sent to climateS. , Mr. IftNE protested against a departure frPi,o' the principle that the Government ahould supplY' itself at the 0 - leapeo market. After a few words . from the CHANCFLT c' f die EXCHEQUER, the motion ‘ was, agreed to. • lONIAN ISLANDS... Colonel DAyrEs wiAed to know how long - tlt ° Inspect ors o f Mi l i t i a were be kept up in t l 'e lonian Nes, where militia (as appeared. by , etn rus) was embodied. Their salaries arnouut e :o about 40001.; they were nominally paid . out Q` he royenne of the Island, but While those rev" rues were, insufficient for the insular expences , bey were in reality paid by' this Country. Mr. Got]LeußN said the inTectors w e re 01 11- !ers on the Stall, 'and 'were appointed for no den" lite time. Sir J:Nllwroar wished to know whether anY more Reports were to be made from the Cora' missioners on . the Fees of English Courti of 3116 : tide, of which no t, one had 'been presented for by— _ years answer was given. 'Mr. Bitou - cHAm,'in reference to the i n spec!ov 9 in lonian Isles, wished. to know whether etc Y were continued when there was no militia ? Mr. CO,ULBURN said, though there was no ": litia embodied at the time of the 'returns; that did not prove that the militia did !lot exist. Colonel DAvrEs sajd, he could explain how thq fact was.. In rcality - there was no militia. Uncler X