The Sun. — London, England, 1822-02-28 00:00:00

PARLIAMENT, HOUSE• OF LORDS, WEDNESDAY, FEB. 27. CANADIAN AGRICULTURE. Earl BATIRiIiST said, that he begged leave to present to. their . Lordships three Petitions from the British Possessions in North America. One was from the inhabitants of the City of Quebec, and the others - Were from Hampshire and Hert ford, in North America, all which he laid upon the table of the House. After some coifsultatitm, informalities were discovered 'iii the petitions from the 'Counties of hampshire shit Hertford, but the Quebec peti tion was accepted. - • ASSIZES COMMISSIONS - , The CS.-\Nctrt.Ok then moved the Mouse to'go,into - a CoMmittee on the Bill enabling the Judges to open the Assize's on the day after that specified in the Commissions for holding the tame. Ainendnients were 'proposed by the Noble and learned 'Lord, and adopted by their Lord ships. The report was immediately made, and the amended Bill ordered to be printed for the of the ItotAe.—Adjonrned. HOUSE OF COMMONS. Mr. JAMES HUNTER BLAIR presented a Petition from. the Landholders of the.tounty of .Wigtown, in Scotland, com plaining of agricultural distress, and praying relief.—Laid on the table; and ordered to be pnnted. • ' Colonel DAVIES moved for Returns of the Total Expense of Colle.cting.the Excise .up.to. January,' 1822, distinguishing the West India Docks and the, Tower. Ile also moved for returns for Ireland.--:-Ordered. 11r. H U.:IIE . moved for. Accounts of-the application. of 40.4601., granted upon general warrants for the service of the together with the Names of the Officers 'of Counties, by , whom the money had been received, for the last 'year.— Ordered. • - . • . ..„ 111 r. HUME also moved for Returns of the.. Names of Places where there were Barracks for Soldiers, distinguishing the tem porary from the permanent Barracks ;_tegether with the Names and Salaties.of Officers attached to each, and the expence of the whole, distinguishing any money laid out in _repairs, up to the sth' Jan. 1822. -- Ordered. • _ _ _ Mr. RICARDO moved for 'Returns of the weekly supply of ,wheat at the corn-market in Mark-lane, distinguishing Foreign .from B - 6listi wheat, for the last year. Also for similar Returns for the-two preceding years.—Ordered. STATE.OF CANADA. Mr. HUME said he had been requested by an individual, named Robert Gourley, to present his Petition. to this House. ne- stated that 'similar petitions had been presented from him , iszi the 21st of July, 1820, and on the 27th of June, 1821. He stated that he had resided in Upper Canada • for several years, and he wished to call the attention of the House to the present situation of the Colonies there. He was of opinion that under 4v , different • system, these Colonies, which were now a great :charge, might be maintained; not only free of expence to this . ceuntry, but be made productive of a. revenue under proper management. The point to which he called the: more garden larattention of the House was the manner in which' the waste Tend in Canada was disposed of. In the neighbouring districts Of America the land was sold at so much an acre, and last year fhis'sale..produced upwards of• 2,000,00 of dollars; -whilst in Canada the distribution of land in the same time • cost this po rernrnent a round sum. A great objection lay to themanner in. which the land was portioned out. In most places large inter vening tracts were left totally unpeopled, whilst the emigrants were scattered about,: . and there . being no villages . , they were unableto give each other that. support which was necessary to ail Colonies. The consequences of this mismanagement were 'strongly marked by the contrast which Canada presented with the neighbouring districts. A line was-drawn .between Lipper Canada and the Provinces of the United States, and though the Mode of cultivation was alike, yet upon the Pritish'side the -land was of .small value and thinly peopled, whilst on the other •there.was a.dense population, and the land was five or six times mote valuable. This state of things was attributable to the existing laws. The revision of these laws was one of the pray ers .of this Petition. Petitioner also called the attention of the House to the mode in which the Government of Canada was administered, and he asserted that if some alteratien was not • made in these respects, Canada, in ten years hence, would not Jae a dependant. on • Great Britaib. He suggested that it was better to make it the interest of the Colonies to remain subject to • this country, than be - hereafter obliged, at a great expence, to retain them. The 'Hon. Member said, the Petition contained many other observations worthy the attention of this house, and as upon reading it over he found that it contained nothing ob jactiortable, he would move that it be brought up. The Peti thin was laidupon the table. • • Mr. MABERLY-gavenotice of a motion for Thursday; the 14tIr of March, for. an inquiry into the -state of the public Accounts. HAWKERS' AND PEDLARS' ACT. Mr. HUME seeing' the lion. Se zretary of the Treasury in • his place, said he' would. take that 'opportunity of moving for -.certain returns connected ,with the Board of Hawkers and Pedlars and Hackney Coach licenses, .to the production of which he 'expected there would be no objection. He would state very shortly what Was. the object of his motion. One great purpose which he had in view by the production of these papers was to spew to the public,' that even in this very small establishment, the Board for managing their li censes, there was apparently the greatest neglect of economy with regard to the collection of the revenue.. 'He referred 'the -House to the Report of the. Committee Of Finance of • 1797, - ia. which it • was stated that the office of Hawkers and Pedlars Licences was .one of great expense and little , utility, and they recommended therefore, that it should be entirely done away with,; and. its duties transferred •to the. Stamp •Office,. to be executed by. distributors .appointed by them with the same allowance of. poundage as. in other cases.— The ;Report stated that this transfer could be safely made, for that in •ten years only One contested; case came before the Commissioners. Another Report was made in the same year upon the Board of ,Hackney Coach licences, and it was recommended•that the duties of that board should be also 'transferred on the Stamp Office, The concluding-words of the. Report were..—‘ In • which .ever -way. Parliament would reform this, the present expenditure would admit of the most In/Aerial retrenchment."' If the suggestion of that Committee had been attended to, a great saving would be made. Instead of that, however,. the two offices were thrown into one. The whole expense of the Hawkers and Pedlars' Office was 4,6001. and of the two offices together nine or ten thousand pounds. The Revenue which they collected was got in at 16 per cent. The number of Inspectors in. the country, instead of being ' diminished since these Reports, had been increased from 10 to ,30, of whom 24 had 1001. a year- each. •There were still five Commissioners with salaries of from. 3001. to 5001, a year. These gentlemen were obliged to attend Only once a week, and some times for five or six weeks together they were not troubled.— Colonel Thornton was never there ; Mr. Wilmot was constantly engaged in Lord Liverpool's office, and Mr. Jesse hr..l a situa tion under the Board. of Works, where he was already .sufli eiently engaged. In addition to these officers, there were a re ceiver and three clerks.. From this statement the House would see that there were persons receiving the public money who per formed no services to the public. The total revenue col ltcted by these offices amounted to 55,7341., which, if cal culated at an expense of 9,3461. for collecting it, would .give a result..of .oixteen per cent. The duties 'on Stage ' coaches, which was more difficult of collection, amounted • to -256,5911., ',and the expense attending - their collection amounted but to 6,7001. a-year. He asserted that if these things Were permitted,. neither the Revenue nor the country could prosper. The Honourable . Member then proceeded to state that with regard to the thirty country Inspectors of Haw .:..keys and Pedlars, he had Ascertained ' that they had for the greater part sinecures in the places 'where they were stationed. One of these was said to be stationed at Coventry, but he lived fact at Birmingham. In Hampshire the Situation was filled by a ,Clergyman, who never was called upon to issue a license. Another individual was said to be stationed at Plymouth, who was the near relation of a Noble Lord, but he did not reside there, and in fact there was no instalice . of an application to .him. Another individual was in a state of insanity, -and had been so when lie was appointed to the office. He -would not, however, fatigue the House by going through snore details, •but he-would state generally that all the appointments were made by the Lords of the Treasury, and not, by the Commis sioners, who were the best judges left to fill the situations.. In most cases the :situations were given to persons to whom the Lords of the'r.Preasury were `friendly. But surely if it was im :.portant lo l give facilities to: thetaking out of licenses by placing Ilistributors in various.partslof the country, it was fit that these ..distribtitois; should bestationed in all the large towns. This bowel/AU', was not. the'. case. There was tot one in Sheffield or nearer to it than Xork, which was fifty miles distant., There was not tone at Manchester, whilst one was stationed at the .Leek, in , Staffordshire. In Hampshire, when the. Distributor should be stationed atSouthampton,he resided at Christ-church. He could name several other places where the placing or these Distributors was equally inconvenient. He contended that all their duties could be performed by the agents of the Stamp Of fice. tie saw no difference between issuing licenses to sellers of lace, and that of issuing licenses to pedlars and hawkers. If the Commissioners could collect the Coat duties, he saw no rea son why they could not also collect those payable by the haw-. kers and pedlars. He contended that the Hackney-coach Of fice could not be defended on the ground's of its being an Office of Police as well as,revenue, for it rarely. happened that com plaints against hackney coachmen were brought there to be heard. Perhaps this might be accounted for, by their sitting only one day in the week. .He mentioned a-case-within his own knowledge of a person making a complaint there, who was put off to the next I riday, when he was told that the Board would then be sitting, and they would give him redress., Under such circumstances, he was warranted in complaining that there . were five Commissioners. in these offices, whose situ ations were mere sinecures. He pressed upon the House the necessity of attending to the Reports of the Committee in 1797, and of transferring to the Stamp Office all their duties. It was most preposterous to be paying 18 per cent. upon the net of the Hackney;coach Duties, and 21 per cent. upon the Hawkers' and pedlers' Licences. .He was sure Ministers were not aware of the expellee of these offices, and that when the papers were presented they would be taken as much by surprise as the House. Ile trusted, however, that they would feel it their duty to adopt some steps upon this subject. If they neglected to -do so, he wished to take this opportunity of giving notice that lie would himself, when the papers were laid upon the table, move for a Committee to inquire how far the expences , of these offices might be diminished.. The Honour able NI ember concluded by moving for Accounts of the Esta blishment of the Offices for managing the hawkers' and Ped lars' Licences, and the Hackney Coach Duties, for the year 1822, together with the names, offices, and salaries of the dif ferent officers belonging to the same, with their allowances of house, or house-rent, by whom appointed, and what was the nature of the securities which they had given. Mr. LUSH INGTON said, he had no Objection to produce these papers. He agreed with the Hon. Member as to the ex pence of these offices; but the Hon. Member had understated the amount of revenue which these duties produced. The net produce of the duties on hawkers' licences and hackney coaches was considerably more now than in 1797. The increase was entirely attributable to the exertions of those insane inspectors whom the Hon. Member had been representing as entirely useless. . What proved this was, that the increase was wholly in the department of the hawkers' i and pedlars' licences, and not in the hackney-coach duties. The Hon. Member, by con fining himself. to the Report of the Committee of the year 1797, had overlooked what was done in 1810 with regard to these offices. At that time the subject was taken . up by Parliament, but instead of abolishing the officers, an increase of salaries to the inspectors in the country . was recommended. Since then, additional powers had been given to the Commissioners ' who now possessed a beneficial controul over three thousand hack ney coachmen and watermen, which they exercised with the best effect. Ile did not think it would be advisable to abolish the Commissioners for that very reason. The judicial func tions which they exercised could not be transferred to the Stamp Office—lt was, however, the wish of. Government to. submit the whole matter to Parliament, and it was his intention to move for a Committee of the (louse, with a view of inquiring how far reductions could be carried. When the papers were laid upon the table, he had no doubt he .should be. able to show, that notwithstanding the rise in the salaries, the returns of revenue from these offices had considerably increased, and that the additional powers conferred on the Commissioners for controlling the hackney coachmen had been exercised with the best effects. Mr. Alderman WOOD observed, that the increase of Haw kers' licenses arose .out of the distress of. the times, for many of the shopkeepers were converted into pedlars. It was there fore not true that the increase was attributable to the activity of the Inspectors. With regard to the Hackney Coach Office being an office of police, he contended that all that class of complaints which might be brought before them, would be as well disposed of at any ,of the Police Offices in London, or Westminster, and thus a great saving would be made. • Sir WM. DE CRESPIGNY observed, that it would be con venient if the loard of Commissioners held their meetings oftener than once a week. The motion was then agreed to. Mr. HUME then moved for returns of the persons employ ed in London as Inspectors of Hawkers' and Pedlars' Licences, and Hackney Coach Duties, with their names, salaries, allow ances, and the nature of their duties. Mr. _BENNETT in seconding this motion observed, that he was a little surprised to hear. the Honourable Secretary opposite state his intention of moving for a Committee of that House to inquire into the Hackney Coach Office. Such an inquiry was more particularly die duty of Ministers, and it was not to be borne that they should cast the labours off'. their shoulders, and saddle a Committee of this House with it. It would seem that Ministers intended to do nothing but take their salaries. Ministers ought in the first instance to make the 'inquiries, and then state the result to the House. Parliament was more properly a Court of Controul over N. i nisters than of inquiry in the first instance. There were, how ever, difficult cases, such as the question of Agriculture, when the advide of the Council of the nation was asked very pro perly ;. but in a mere matter of arrangement as to. a tax, it was a little too. much to ask twenty-one Gentlemen of that House to ininnire themselves months and weeks together in doing that which is - the bounden 'duty of his Majesty's Mi nisters. • • - - Mr. LUSIIINGTON said, that this house had already ap pointed a Committee to inquire into the best means of reducing the expence of collecting the revenue. Mr. BENNETT said that the Committee alluded to was ap pointed for a particular purpose. It did, not follow, however, as a matter of course that there should be a Committee to in quire into each particular department connected with the col lection of the revenue. _ _ Sir J. NEWPORT said that the labours of that Committee, which was appointed under peculiar circumstances, were con fined to Ireland. . Mr. LUSHINGTON observed, that he still continued to think that this House was the most proper tribunal to refer the consideration of any important question, and he thought any question connected with the revenue was of that nature. The motion was then agreed to. Mr. HU3IE then moved for returns of the persons em ployed in the country as Inspectors of Hawkers and Pedlars' Licences, and whether they performed their duties by them selves cirby deputies, together with the nature of the securities which they had given, and the . number of licences issued for the last five years, distinguishing those issued in each year.— Ordered. . Mr. "HUME also moved for a ieturn of the Penalties in flicted tmder the Hawkers' Act, and how these penalties had been applied.. Also for similar returns under the Hackney Coach Act.— Ordered. Mr. HUMP.: also moved for returns of the number of days on which Boards were actually held, distinguishing the nuipber in each week, and the number of Commissioners present at each. —Ordered. REVENUE OF IRELAND. Mr. LUSHINGTON brought up the report of the Commis sioners for inquiring into the expenses of collecting the Revenue in Ireland. Mr. WALLACE brought up the Report of the Committee for examining the State of the Irish Revenue, and the manage ment and application thereof. The Right. Hon. Member ob served, that the Committee had hoped they should have been able to state the result of their investigation; but they had not at present the materials for doing so with satisfaction either to the House or to themselves. The present Report was there fore a mere preliminary measure ; but the Committee trusted they would, at no distant period, be enabled to give an ampler account of the manner in which they had performed the duties entrusted to them by Parliament. The House was aware that the Act of Parliament, under which the COmmittee were 'ap pointed, directed them: to give their attention principally to the mode of collecting and disposing .of the Irish revenue.— The Committee, at the commencement of their inquiries, were much surprised at the great difference in the expence of collecting the revenue of Ireland with that of the same object in England ; a circumstance attributable in a ,_.'reat mea sure to the different situations of the two countries. But what ever defects might exist, or whatever abuses might prevail in the management of the Irish., Revenue, he was bound to say that the most able and intelligent servants of the Government in that country had shown every disposition to facilitate inquiry. The Commission had begun by examining the highest autho rities, and had proceeded but a very little way in their inquiry, when they noticed the great disproportion in the duties affect ing Irish commerce ; especially in 'those generally called the Countervailing Duties. By the Sixth Article of the Union, the principle of. a free trade had been established ; and it had become a question whether those duties could .be continued without the sanction of an Act of Parliament. The object in removing them would be to relieve Ireland'from the duty of 10 per cent. upon the consumption of an article in very general use. He should, however, forbear entering generally into the question, as the Committee would do so more satisfactorily :in their next Report. He should, therefore content himself with moving that the Report do lie upon the table, first hearing testi mony to the valuable assistance which the Committee had de rived from the exertions of, his . Hon. Friend : (Mr. F. Lewis) who had been principally, instrumental in originating the pre sent inquiry. . Sir J. NEWPORT expressed his satisfaction at the progress which had been made by the Right Hon. Gentleman and his Colleagues. He always thought that the Act continuing the Duties in question had. been . passed too hastily, and that they might have been abolished without disadvantage to either coun try. But whatever might be his opinion he should not antici pate the decision of the'Committee by offering any further ob servations upon the subject. The Report was then ordered to lie on the table and be printed. MR. HUNT. Sir R. WILSON presented a Petition from 1500 Inhabitants of Greenock in favour of Mr. Henry Hunt. The Petitioners, the Hon. Member said, considered the punishment which had been inflicted upon that Gentleman as levelled at the man arid not at the offence ; and when they found that this sentence had been aggravated by the rules of the Magistrates of the county jail in which he .was confined, they could not forbear express ing to the House their opinion on the subject. Sir Charles Bampfylde, the late Sheriff of Somersetshire, had considered the regulations in question as so harsh, with .respect to Mr. Hunt, that he had suspended them '; but on his going out of office they were renewed. It might be a very proper question to ask, why those regulations had been renewed, - and why Mr. Hunt had been exposed to unnecessary severity ; why he should be condemned to pass two years and a half of his life in a pestilential jail, and supplied with water tainted with the most loathsome impurity.—(tear, hear !)—This severity was exercised too after he had exposed the atrocities and .crimes committed in that jail, and had afforded Government an opportunity of punishing them. He really thought that if Ministers had either generosity or justice they would grant Mr. Hunt an unconditional release ; or, at least, remove him to a prison in which his sufferings would be somewhat mi tigated. Mr. WARRE said, he understood that Mr. Hunt had been placed on a level with the felons of the jail. No person was allowed to see him but in the common room ; and Mr. Hunt had refused to go there, because he was there exposed to in sult. The only persons allowed admission to him, except in this room, were an Attorney, a Surgeon, and a Physicians. He (Mr. W.) really wished that a distinction were drawn be tween the criminals and those who were confined for political offences. The jail of Ilchester, he believed, stood upon the bank of a river; and there was .a small aperture in the wall of Mr. Hunt's cell, a little elevated above the surface of the water. It was here that his son, by taking a boat on the river, was enabled to communicate with his father through the aperture ; and thus only could he obtain that communication. He (Mr. %v.) wished that this were otherwise. It was always a mis fortune to a Government, if a person confined for a political offence should come from his prison hailed by the people as a martyr ; and it was always better for public opinion to go along with the sentences of our Courts of Justice.—(Hear, hear, hear !)—On referring to the Act of Parliament, which had been quoted the other night as the authority for prison rules, he really could not say to what extent the powers given by that Act of Parliament might not be pushed. He re peated his opinion, that a distinction should always be drawn Ibetween political offences and those generally admitted to be criminal. . Mr. DICKINSON said, he had already stated that, when he saw the rules in question, he thought they pressed too se verely upon Mr. Hunt, and had mentioned the eircamstance to Mr. Justice Best, who, however, returned the rules with out any alteration. He (Mr. D.) feared, that as they were now signed by the Judges, they became a part of the law of the prison, aud.could not be altered. Upon this subject, which had undergone so much discusSion, he had to express his acknow leilp,ments to a worthy Alderman (Mr. Wood) for a, courtesy which was to be contrasted `with the conduct of the Honourable Member for Aberdeen. That Hon. ' Member had the other evenin 7, without having apprised him (Mr. D.) of his inten tion to 'bring the subject forward, presented a Petition relative to Mr. Hunt, and had taken that opportunity of speaking of the Magistrates of Somersetshire, as if they were the most unfeel ing of men. He (Mr. D.) did not behave in this manner when he had a petition to present personally affecting the Honour able Member himself, but had spoken to him on the subject; though he believed, in doing so, he had only observed that courtesy which was considered as due from one Member to another. Mr. HUME said he was not aware of any rule of the House, by which a Member was enjoined to refrain from bringing for ward any local matter until the two county Members were pre sent. It was their business to attend in their places. On the occasion alluded to, the other Hon. Member for Somerset (Sir T. Lethbridge) was present ; and if lie (Mr. H.) always waited. on such occasions for the presence of both the County Mem bers, he would have to wait long enough. Ue would repeat that in his conscience he believed the conduct of the Somersetshire Magistrates to have been unequalled. The other evening the Hon. Baronet had taken upon himself to say, that according to the information he had received, Mr. Hunt was not in soli tary confinement. He (Mr. H.) held in his hand an affidavit of a surgeon and of Mr. Hunt's son that no one was allowed to see him. A letter had been sent by the Sheriff of the County to Mr. Hunt, stating that he believed the Court had not in tended to inflict solitary imprisonment upon him ; and regret ting that as the rules of the prison had been signed by the Judges, he had not the power to relieve him. It had been said that the Magistrates were no to blame. He wished any one who said or thought this, would read the Report of the ' Committee appoint e d to examine the state of this jail.— The Committee stated the dungeon in which Mr. Hunt was confined to be dark, damp, and unventilated. If the trates were not to blame, who were to blame ? Not only Mr. Hunt, but other persons confined in the prison had been refused permission to obtain pure water from the river, and were com pelled to use water actually filtered through the common sewers of the jail. In every page of the Report the grossest neglect on the part of the Magistrates was evident. He ad mitted the general advantages of an unpaid Magistracy, like that of England, but this was not to exclude inquiry into abuse, for that were to give up , the very advantage of which we boasted. He should state but a very few words respecting the petition which the Honourable Member had mentioned as personally affecting himself (Mr. H.) That Petition was from an individual who had assisted him with some informa tion, and then demanded 251. of him as a remuneration for his trouble. The man knew very well, for lie (Mr. H.) had told him before hand that he made it a rule never to pay in any shape for information. No one would question the pru dence of this his rule ; for if lie encouraged persons to give him information, what taunts would he not have to suffer (and justly suffer) from the other side of the House ?—(Hear, hear !) —He trusted the Hon: Baronet would offer some explanation of the statement he had made the other evening respecting the confinement of Mr. Hunt. Mr. T. LETIIBRfIidE certainly considered that the Mem . - ber for Aberdeen had shewed a want of courtesy the other night in not having communicated to the County Member of Somer set his intention to b r i ng f orwar d a c h arg e against - the Magis trates of the county. In answer to the call made upon him by the Hon. Member, he had only to remind the House, that the other evening he hadi spoken from information, and upon that he had said he did not believe Mr. Hunt was placed in solitary confinement. .He. did not believe it even now. He had al ways understood solitary confinement to mean an exclusion from all communication with other persons. If certain indi viduals were excluded by the express rules of the prison, he did not consider that a solitary confinement. He believed that Mr. Hunt had received many indulgences to which he was not entitled. He was sorry for the sake of every one concern ed that Mr. Hunt had been sent to Ilchester. 31r. H. when he found himself sentenced to imprisonment should have been content with the same treatment as that which was borne by other prisoners. He (Sir Thomas) did not believe that in the present instance any case of necessity had been made out—if there had, he would have been the first to reprobate it. He had read the Report of the Committee alluded to by the Hon. Member, and had read it with much pain. He was sorry to observe the statements made in that Report; and he had only to say, that if punishment had,been deserved by any persons in Somersetshire, connected with the subject in discussion, he trusted they would be punished most severely. The Report in question had certainly exposed, practices which, he trusted he might say, were as repugnant to his feelings as they could be to those of any Member in the House. Before he sat down he could not but say lie thought the Committee had been very properly appointed, and had done Much good. Mr. M. A. TAYLOR said, it appeared the Honourable Baronet attributed no fault upon the present subject to any in dividual. Now he (Mr. Taylor), was not known to many per sons in Somersetshire ; but he would say in his place as a Mem ber of Parliament, and he cared not who was offended by the observation, that the Magistrates of the county were in fault.— (Hear, hear !)—They ought to have waited for no Committee to point out their duty. They, as acting Magistrates, should have taken care that water and every other comfort, not incon sistent with punishment, should have been supplied to the pri soners. lleagreed in every word which had been uttered by the Hon. Member for Aberdeen ; and he trusted the Right lion. Secretary for the Home Department, who had distin guished himself for his humanity in Ireland, would convince the . 31agistrates of Somersetshire that there was a power which could anti would notice this subject. Mr. BENNETT said, the Honourable Baronet had caught hold of the phrase " solitary confinement." The Honourable Baronet appeared to think that nothing was • solitary confine ment but four walls and thereceiving of food through a wicket. That, however, was but a degree of solitary confinement: and if a man were told he must submit to insult, or remain within his cell, it was not too much to call that also a degree of solitary confinement. He ventured to say that, except in 11- chester, there was no prison in England in which a man confined for a political offence was compelled to associate with felons, or submit to solitary confinement. This, however, had been accomplished at llchester by the regulations of these Magis trates, confirmed by the order of Mr. Justice Best. lie wished for the production of these, regulations, in order that it might be seen whether he was borne out in his opinion that they ware the most arbitrary and cruel that could ever be devised by the most arbitrary Magistrate, or the most arbitrary Judge. The' fact was, that no written rule of the prison had been acted upon until the other day. Under all the circumstances, he thought it was the duty of the House to address the Crown to remove these Magistrates ftorn. office. They had neglected their duty, and he sttonglksuspected they had done so criminally. There was a case ,referred 'to by the Report, in which it appeared that a-poor girl, with her infant in her arms, had been• confined in a season of severe frost and snow, within a cell in which for two days she' was allowed no fire. Her food was nothing but bread, and cold water from a bucket— her milk failed in consequence, and the health of the infant at her breast suffered in consequence. He knew that all com ment upon these facts was unnecessary ; he knew that they must strike every feeling man with horror ; yet this he con. tended had been caused by the negligence of the Magistrates.— It was them that he blamed, and not their, miserable tool the jailor,_ or his underling ; and if be had the power to dismiss them They never should discharge another magisterial office as long as they lived. Mr. Alderman WOOD, alluding to the observation of the Hon. Member for Somerset (Mr. Dickinson), said it was a mistake to suppose that the Magistrates had no power to soften the rigour of the rules as they applied to Mr. Hunt. Some of them were the same as the rules adopted for the regulation of Newgate ; and they applied to the admission of persons within the walls of the prison to see the prisoner. The Magistrates had the poker of taking him out of the walls without endanger ing his safe custody. This relaxation of the rule had been ob served at Newgate in several instances where respectable per sons had been ordered to be confined there. He could mention the case of a Noble Marquis and that of a Noble Lord. The rules in question, as they affected Mr. Hunt, had been most capriciously altered by the Magistrates, although no charge had ever been made against Mr. Hunt; and it was worthy of remark, that until Mr. Hunt had brought forward his own charges, he had not been exposed to his present additional suf fering. Mr. DICKINSON explained. The Magistrates he repeated had no power to alter the rules. The Hon. Member for Dur ham (Mr. M. A. Taylor) appeared to think nothing whatever had been done by the Magistrates; but the fact was, that on their first bearing of the abuses of the jail they set on foot an inquiry, and turned away the jailer and the surgeon who were complained of, and whose conduct appeared to have justified the complaints.' Mr. LENNARD said the Magistrates had done nothing until the abuses in question had been brought under the notice of Parliament. He fully agreed with the Hon. Member for Shrewsbury (Mr. Bennett) that great suspicion attached to the conduct of the Magistrates for Somerset, and that it would be come them to endeavour to disprove the charge against them.— He could not vouch for the fact; but it had been published and not contradicted that one of the Magistrates, on occasion of the late inquiry, had been heard to say " We must defend our gaoler." Yet this gaoler was a wretch discharged from the hulks, a defrauder of the miserable objects placed within his power, and one altogether as infamous in character as he was brutal in conduct. The Petition was then read, and ordered to lie on the table, and be-printed. - Mr. Alderman WOOD moved, that the evidence annexed to the Report of the Committee for inquiring into the state of the Ilchester Jail should be printed. Mr. PEEL said, he thought it was desirable that the evi dence to which reference was continually made by the Report, should be in the hands of Members, and he therefore did not object to the motion. The motion was then agreed to. Mr. Alderman WOOD wished to know whether the Right Hon. Gentleman had any objection to the printing of the evi dence taken before the Coroner on the 19th and 20th of Jan. last, in the Jail of Ilchester ? _ _ _ Mr. PEEL said, there might be a criminal proceeding issu ing out of this evidence, which would come on for trial at the ensuing Assizes, and he was anxious that the question should not be prejudged. lie, however, should not oppose the motion. Mr. Alderman Woon and Mr. PEEL mutually explained, and the motion was then agreed to. THE PENSION ACT. Mr. CREEVEY, pursuant to notice, rose to call the atten tion of the House to an Act of Parliament which had passed in the year 1817, called "An Act to enable his Majesty to remunerate the services of those who have held high and eilicient situations." It was an Act little understood by the Members of that House, and as little by the people of this country, to whom it was so grossly insulting. He was not in England at the time of the passing of this measure, which he understood had only lately been brought into action. The title of the Bill itself "was not correct, for the King had nothing to do with it. The . zeal ob ject of the Bill was to embody the traders in politics into a cor poration ; and he would proceed to state how the prof - I& were divided.—(A laugh.)—The joint stock of the company consisted of 42,0001. per annum, and according to the Charter it was di vided into four classes. The first class consisted of the First Lord of the Treasury, the three principal Secretaries of State, and some others, and these were to have pensions for life of 30001. a-year each, provided they remained two years in the Corporation. And here it was to be observed that it was no matter - ,vhethertheir two years' service was performed at once, or offand on in jobs.— (A laugh !)—lf the work were made up some how or other, the servant was entitled to his pension. Now one would think that this was enough in all conscience ; but it seemed that all those ' of the first class were to be entitled to 10001. a year for life, even though they did not perform the two years' service. The framers of the Bill seemed to have relented, to have thought they were too hard at first, and therefore two minutes' service would entitle the person in question to his 10001. a year. In fact, he might kiss hands for the, place and the pension at the same time. Tnis principle of the minor pension—the " one ever" ran through the whole of the bill. The second class of pensions was for another set ofnfficers, who had served five years, and was to be 20001. a year per man. The third was for a like service at the rate of 15001. a year per man and the fourth was for a service of ten years, and was at the rate of 10001. a year per man. Up to the year 1817 the King had the privilege of discovering merit in his servants and of rewarding it ; and if he were crippled in his pecuniary means of rewarding it, he applied to the House . for assistance. These old-fashioned practices had now been done away with, and neither the King nor the House would have any further trouble, for merit was regu lated by Act of Parliament, and vested in certain official sta tions.—(A laugh.)—Honourable Members might laugh, for some of them had very good reason. To be sure, the King's Sign Manual was necessary for the granting of these pensions, but the applicant for the pension was the constitutional Ad viser of the King ; the King himself was bound by the Charter. It really would have been more manly in the Corporation to have put their own seal to it and saved his Majesty the trouble of being; Secretary to his own servants. The Bill had been introduced by three Honourable Members whom he might name, as he took their names from the Journals. They were Mr. Davies Gilbert, Mr. Bankes, and Viscount Castlereagh—(A laugh, and hear, hear, hear !) —The Bill itself had been recommended by the Finance Com mittee : and it was worth while to observe what that Commit tee, on being formed, had been directed to do. They were directed " to inquire into the public expenditure, and to state the best measures to be adopted for relieving the country from some of its burthens."—(Cheers and laughter.)—To a superfi cial observer the present Bill might certainly appear a comical way of relieving the country. Three or four of the Committee were themselves to be benefited by this Bill. The Corporation say—" That it is necessary, and is consistent with policy and economy to devise this measure." He would try them upon thini own title. The first Act of Parliament given in ex change for the Pension Bill was an Act to regulate certain, offices in the Exchequer. This Act directed the abolition of some, and the regulation of others, after the expiration of the " existing interests," that is to say, not a hair of the head of the sinecurist was to be touched, and the public were to be touched. ,The Act went on to state that these office, should, ht the, expiration of those interests, never be performed by deputy. The patronage was to be transferred to the Trea sury, and the fees (if any) were to be paid to the Consolidated Fund. Honourable Members knew very well what was meant by the words " if any." There would be of course none at all.—(A laugh !)—This was a part of the benefit we received in exchange for the 42,0001. a year. The second Act was for the abolition of the offices of Warden and Chief Justice in Eyre north of Trent and south of Trent. After the expiration of " existing interests," the duties of these offices were to be per formed by the Clerk of Woods and Forests. Now, if their Clerk could perform these duties, what became of the boasted efficiency of the public servants ?—(Hear, hear !)—The third Act was for the abolition of some offices, and the regulation of others in Ireland ; and this 42,0001. a year was, he sup . posed, granted upon the principle of compensation ; a principle so utterly untenable that, if this measure were to be considered the work of any other person than Members, he would call this Bill obtaining money . under false pretences ; a species of Parliamentary swindling. In these offices, the thing was, as usual, a mere transfer of patronage to the Treasury, and to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland. The Crown was robbed, and we were to pay 42,0001. a year for the robbery. The next act related to certain offices in Scotland, and declared that the Keeper of the Great Seal should not be paid more than 2,0001. a year ; another of the privileges for which we were to pay 42,0001. a year.—(Hear, bear !)—lt was fit that the public should know what they had for their money.--(A laugh.)—The Act went on to declare, that the duties of these Scotch offices should be performed in person.—What a calamity !—(A laugh.)---And that the salary of each should not exceed 1,0001. a year—what a hardship !—(Laughter.)—The next Act related to the Board of Trade, which had been professedly abolished before, but which was now revived by an Act of Parliament, beginning thus :—" An Act to amend, &c."—(A laugh.)—And it pro vided that the duties of the office of Comptroller should be performed in person. The Scotch Mint was also sold up. The Mint of, Scotland sold! Here was another bargain for the coun try ! No wonder to be sure that we paid 42,0001. a year for it.— (A laugh.)—The last Act was for regulating the Exchequer in England and Ireland, and for providing " a more economical. Execution of the Duties of the several Offices belonging there to." The duties were again to be performed in person only; but the appointment of Officers was vested in the Treaz;ury, so that, as he had before observed, it was merely a transfer of patronage. This was the amount of the benefits for which in return we were to pay 42,0001. a year. He would ask, was any thing equal to this ; and were Ministers to be allowed to entrench themselves by Bill after Bill against all encroachments ? (Hear, hear !)—But he thought this same Committee of Finance had been making a little free with the statute of Anne, which declared that a Member of that House should vacate his seat by accepting a pension from the Crown. The accepting of a pension under this Bill would not he thought vacate a Mem ber's seat ; and if he was right, this Bill was in that respect a repeal of the statute of Anne. Mr Yorke, who some years agg vacated his seat under the Act of Anne, by taking a pen sion, and who lost his election afterwards, must surely regret that he had not lived under the reign of the Hon. Member for Corfe Castle.—(A laugh.)—ln that case he would not have va cated his seat, and could not have lost his subsequent election.— But the new dynasty 'tad not then taken place. Nothing,. he ( Mr. C.) thought was so dangerous to the country as a Fi nance Committee ; for they did that which Ministers would not do themselves. He was quite sure, for instance, that the Noble Marquis would never have come down to that House with a message from the Crown stating, " that his Majesty was most desirous to see a retrenchment in the public expendi ture; but he hoped the House would not forget high and effi cient public men just to give them a little corner in the Bill." —(Laughter.)—Had the Noble Marquis done this, he never could have shone again. No. It was t h e Fi nance Committee that had done the present thing.—(A laugh.)—These pen.- sions, however, were now given away witho u t c ons u lti n g the King. They originated with the Ministers, were given away amongst themselves, and altogether in a manner in sulting to his -Majesty. Thus the country might say with safety, that the Ministers formed a corporation of themselves, when the regular course of the Monarchy was departed from. Before the time of the Bill, the regular way of granting pen sions was by a communication from the Crown to that House. In 1782, when the Act which was called the Civil List Act was passed, it was preceded by a message from the Throne, stating that it was bis Majesty's wish that certain debts which were to be liquidated should be provided for, if possible without laying any new burdens on the people. How much more gracious his Majesty was than his Ministers.—(A laugh.) —When they had to state the existence of d e bt, an d t o ca ll - for means of providing for its payment, there was nothing of re.. gret in the communication, which was barely confined to the fact of so much money being wanted. This act was for the purpose of diminishing certain pensions, and abolishing places, and then, 40 years afterwards, when they had 600,000,0001. more of debt, they had a new Act for establishing more places and pensions. By this new Act the Gentlemen over the way had the power of disposing of 42,0001. in pensions to whom they pleased. There was another Act for the regulation of the Auditors of the Exchequer, and the Tellers, but three of these places, as they still remained, were worth more than all the reductions of the Finance Committee put together. But he might be told these were patent places, granted in lieu of compensation for services. He recognised the principle of bestowing compensation upon Clerks, but he never could at:- knowledge the justice of a plan of compensation for public men. And to come at this time of day, in the face of the recommenda tion of the Finance Committee to abolish sinecure places, was a most abominable outrage. He (Mr. Creevey) wished to see the power of rewarding the servants of the Crown in the hands of the Throne, which was the constitutional a nd s a f er way. Ever since 1791, they had been nibbling at this power, till at length Ministers had got it safe in their own keeping, and he feared they would retain it until that House was reformed.-- When that happened, he was sure this odious Bill, so calculated to degrade public men, would be among the first repealed. He was for the power going back to the Monarchy without the interference of the new dynasty. For that purpose he would very shortly move to repeal the Act, though he did not mean to ask that in the first instance. His present object was to let the House into a knowledge of the nature of the Act, not to take them by surprise ; and in order the more amply to en lighten them with respect to the nature of it, he should move for information as to the application of the power of granting pensions under this Bill, and of the amount of the money saved by the Abolition and Regulation Act alluded to. He wished that the House might see whether the public had picked up a few pounds or not of this transposstion. The Honourable Member then submitted two Resolutions to the following effect First, " That there be laid before the House an account of all the profits which have accrued to the public from the abolition of offices, or the regulation of salaries, by virtue of the different Acts of the 67th of his late Majesty, cap. 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 67, and 84, specifying how much in the respective offices." Second , " That there be laid before this House an account of all the warrants granting pensions that have been signed by his MY jesty in pursuance of those Acts." Mr. B - ANKES began by observing, that after the laboured invectives (Cheers) which the Hon. Gentleman had bestow cd on the Act of the 57th of his late after hearing . . Majesty; the principle of it stigmatized by him as a most abominable outrage. (Hear.) the House would, perhaps, be surprized I°, hear, what it appeared the 'Honourable Gentleman himselr had forgotten, viz. that the principle of the Bill he and other . Hon. Members who sat near him had assented to, and stir ported as much as the Chairman of the Committee or the Noble Lord who introduced it.—(Cheers.)—That he might convince the House of the truth of his assertions as be went on, he would take the liberty of reading the Resolution which the House had conic to on the 31st May, 1810. De" bates had taken place upon several resolutions emanating from the report which arcse out of the substaiice of the re" solutions of the Committee of which he (Mr. Bankes) had been Chairman its 1808. One set of resolutions bid been proposed by Mr. Henry Martin, another by Mr. Percival' another set by himself, and also one by the Hon. Baronet who was Member for Waterford (Sir J. Newport). On the day to which he referred, a division had already taken place, and the resolution was, " That the House do agree to the resolution of the Committee so amended." The resort' tion of the Committee was, " That for this purpose, in addition to the useful and effective means which Parli3 - ment has taken for the abolition of sinecure offic..!s, it' s expedient, after providing for other reductions, that sat' cient means be given to his Majesty to -recompenee civil - officers, in order that he may be enabled to abolish all offices without employment, and assign proportionate pensions, re gard being had to the existing interests in the offices so to be abolished or regulated."—(Hear, hear !)—Now the Hun' Member (Mr. Creevey) said he was absent when the Act 0, the 57th of Geo. 111. alluded to, was passed. They might re gret that they ; had not the advantage of his valuable assist ance; but on the present occasion lie could not plead the same absence, as regarded the Resolution on which the Bil l was founded ; for it so happened that on that very day, in the division on the previous -debate, the Tellers entered upon the Journals were, Mr. Creevey—(Hear, hear !)—and Lord Vis" count Milton. He wished that Noble Lord were then pre' sent, that be might say a word to him on the subject of hi s consistency of opinion with regard to this Bill. He would leave that part of the question, however, to proceed to on e of infinitely more importance, viz, whether any thing had oc; curred since the passing of this Bill to authorise its abolition • There were some parts of the Bill in which he (Mr. Bankes) did not altogether concur at the time it was brought in, al though lie entirely agreed with its principle. Mr. Burke Bill went to abolish a considerable number of places enume' rated in the preamble, which depended on the King's plea' sure. But that Bill left untouched the great offices of the Exchequer. With regard to these,. the 22d Report of the Finance Committee, under the head of Sinecures, observe° , that " there were many Sinecure Establishments which might be usefully employed in rewarding great personal services, so as to secure an honourable retreat to persons who have re ceived marhs of public favour, and who havesacrifieed their time to the public service, which they might have devoted to sours, lucrative profession." This was the reason why Mr. Burke left those offices untouched, on the ground that it was the policy: of every State to possess the means of rewarding services or this description. A resolution declaring that in the absence of sinecure places some other means slo,uld be placed at the disposal of the clown, to reward its servants with, was sub' sequently passed ; and upon that be (Mr. Bankes) had 104 excited himself to bring in a Bill, which bad finally passed in 1817. In the years 1812 and 1813, he endeavoured to per.; suade the House to it, and he would venture to say, that the Hun. Member for Appleby (Mr. Creevey) and the HO' Member for Shrewsbury, (Mr. G. Bennett) were then in the House, they voted with him on those occasions. At all event s they supported the Resolution of 1810. He (Mr. Banlie s , )• had heard various opinions expressed as to the propriety t supporting measures, or men in that House. He (:‘ l !,. Bankes) looked to measures, and not to men, and he di think that it was a specimen of outrageous adherence to we ll ' when an Hon. Gentleman having supported a Bill in 1 8 !• , ; specifically the same in principle as that of 1817, because was opposed by his Majesty's Ministers, should now tu t( ' round and exclaim against it as an abominable outrage.' (Hear, hear !)—That Hon. Gentleman was pleased to repre sent the operation of this Bill as causing the nation to p a y 42,0001. annually—an assertion which he used as• a sort. ° something to fill up every place in his speech which wanted cheer. He perhaps wished it to be propagated amongst the people of England—to be harangued at every public meeti n g ► that the nation now paid 42,0001. a year in pensions, and , supposed he (Mr. Bankes) would he held out as the promote 1