The Sun. — London, England, 1804-05-24 00:00:00

m =ke an, Amendment to a Turnpike Bill, to lengthen, to shorten,. cr to create exemptions from the Turn_. p kr Doty, the Reuse would not entertain diem, and, as the present Amendment would go directly to the same effeci, the same course should be adopted. He was sure the House would not receive any Ainend. ment that would extend the exemptions a single day. If the House conk' not agree to such an Amendment, then the regular course was to rejtet. the Bill alto gether ; for if the Amendment were to be altered by leaving out the rat of June, and restoring the ori ginal date of the sth of May, the Clause would be impratticable, that day having elapsed ; and if they were to rejea the Clause altogether, for the purpose of substituting another to the same eft - ea, or of extending the period of exesnptionS to a later date, suppose the ist of July, that would be to adopt the substance of the Lords' Amendment, and not to adhere to the old usage of the House. He . conceived that there could exist no doubt as to the principle. There were innumerable precedents on. the Journals, of Bills rejeCted on the same grounds. If this Bill were to be rejeCted on this ground, another might be brought in and carried through the House with all possible speed. It was certain, that there were many parts of the Eill which a consider able minorityo e in that House bad objected to, when in its progress through the House. What was the opinion of that respeetable minority, might now be the opinion of the majority, and undoubtedly, the Bill, when introduced anew, might be again dis. cussed. Though he was not very friendly to the Bill, this was not his motive for recommending this course, and he mentioned it only to obviate the objection that he was actuated by hostility to parts of the Bill. But so far from being a reason against reconsidering the measure, the probability that the majority would now coincide with the sentiments of the minority on a former occasion, appeared a stronger ground for reconsidering it. There might be other modes of obviating the difficulty suggested by Gentlemen who had turned the subjeCt in their minds ; but if the House should rejed the whole, the new Bill might be pass ed through the House, if possible, in a single day. He had a strong notion that Gentlemen (in allusion to Mr. PITT), had some time ago entertained senti ments not very favourable to this measure. At all events, he trusted the House would maintain those privileges inviolate, which, at all times, good or bad, they had faithfully adhered to. The CHANCELLOR cf the EXCHEQUER thought there could be but one sentiment in the House with regard to an infraction of its Privileges by Amendments made in the other House. But this was not the stage in which to consider that topic. The first question in this instance was, whether the House, consistently with its privileges, could agree to the Amendments of the Lords ? and the next, what measure it would be expedient to adopt in case it should not agree to them ? The Committee i n its Repo r t, and his Noble Friend (Lord CASTLE REAGH), had pointed out what Amendments the Hoto:e should agree to, and what it ought not. As to that which had been adverted to by the Hon. Geri. tleman (Mr. Fox), in his view of it, he could disco ver nothing in the Amendment, to which they could not, consistently with the privileges of the House, agree, and he desired to state the ground of that opi mon. In all questions relating to money matters, the . House never objefted to any Amendments designed to carry into effed the intention of the House.— From the time the Bill took up before it reached the last stage in the Lords, the original time for mak ing the first return had elapsed ; and as it would be impraCticable to make the return at that date, the Lords were under a necessity of substituting another dare. He conceived it to be perfeCtly competent to the House to agree to the Amendment, or to extend the ttrm still further, to the Ist of July. But, though that was his opinion, he disclaimed any idea o f rezommending to agree to the Amendment on the grew dof convenience. If it should be thought to trench upon the Privileges cf the House, and that it Was converient to adopt it in substance, the Amend ment might be (*fled in this instance, and the convenience provided for by a Supplemental Bill.— his appeared to him a better mode than that of rejseting the whole Bill, as had been recommended the. Hon. Gentleman, because the new Bill might lead to lengthened discussion ; and these were cu . - tiin parts of this Bill which it was of importance to have cm:a:A into a law without delay. This was not the stage in which to debate the matter, which more properly should be discussed in the Committee. .4s the Hon. Gentleman had not ob. irtted to the other Amendments, he looked upon it that lie felt no objection then. He thought, there fore, that the best course would be to proceed to the consideration of theAMendments one by one, and as the Bill contained in it a Clause empowering the house to alter or amend it during the present Session, any Amendments to which the House could' not agree in the present inatance, might be provided for by a Supplemental Bill. The Right Hon. Gentleman concluded, by recommending to the House to consider, whether it would not be more eligible to substitute the Ist of July for the Ist of June. Mr. T. ORENVILLE admitted, that it would be certainly competent to the House to agree to the Amendment, but thought there could be no doubt that they could not agree to it, without materially and essentially affeCting their Priviieges. If it were merely a question of convenience, he agreed that a Supplemental Bill would be sufficient. But it was not a question of convenience, but whether the Amendment infringed the P:ivileges of the House, 30 as to eall iron it' an assertion and vindication ()fits Privileges. The usual and ordinary course was, to defer the consideration of Amendments that trenched upon the rights of the House, not because this was the must convenient and praCticable course for the dispatch of Puhlic business, but because the House looked nut to Convenience but to the preservation of its privile g es, of which it was always justly jealous. The alteration of the date from - the sth of IYlay to the Isc of June, was a direa and unequi cal . vioLti n of 114; dearest and most valuable Priv ilvge' of the ' The Supplemental Bill ixisv.ter the purpOse of convenience, but Irvoulcl not cure the wound 'to the Privileges of the . House If :he'Stippietneptal Poll for :ourreaing the Amend. inenti made bvj the LOttls in this, were to be, as it ihLui4 ) C.0),i65'; - .)14i1f:u4:au,14 Oleg Liight c. , 4 I be a question, whether it would be likely to pass the other House of Parliament ? He thought the House should not only dissent from this Atnendtnent in a Clause of the nature of a Money Clause, but mark their dissent by the manner in Which they should get rid of it. He trusted his judg ment on this occasion was not warped by his Opinion of the value of the Bill, though if the measure should be lost for the Session, he should not consider it any calamity. He was long of opinion, that the attempt to establish the Volunteers on the same system as Regulars, could never succeed, and would tend to overthrow the Volunteers altogether. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER de nied, that he had argued the question nn the ground of convenience, as his Right Hon. Friend seemed, much to his surprize, to have misunderstood him. Mr. BATHURST (lace BRAGGE) having had the honour to lay the Report on the Table, requested the House would indulge him in saying a few words on the subject. The Committee had not passed over the Amendment under consideration,fur it was not with.. out considerable discussion that it had come to a re solution to recommend to the House to agree to it. The question had not been accurately stated, either by the Hon. Gentleman who had opened the Debate, or the Right Hon. Gentleman who spoke last. The Amendment went, not to alter the exemptions, but the date for making the return. In the second Clause of the Bill, all former Ads on the subjea were repealed ; but the exempti on s under them were secured till the day of the first return under this Bill. If the sth of May had been suffered to re main in the Bill, as the period had elapsed, the Ist of August would be the first return day after the passing of the Bill, to which the exemptions should necessarily he extended. The Amendment of the Lords, therefore, was designed merely to meet the intentions of the House. Mr. FRANCIS had but one observation to make. The Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. PITT) had laid it down as a principle, that any Amendments ought to be agreed to which were in furtherance of the in tention of the House, and that the Privileges of the House would be safe. Thts principle might as well be applied to the augmentation of Taxes, which would be in furtherance of the intention of the House, but he trusted they would be very tender of admitting such an interference with their dearest Privilege. The SPEAKER conceived it his duty, in a Debate on the Privileges of the House, as also that he might be expected on such an occasion, to state such information as he had been able to coiled on the subject. He took it to be the undoubted practice of the House, not to allow any Amendment to be made in a Bill respeCting the Supplies. In measures containing numerous regulations, the praCtice was different. In some instances the Bill was rejected in consequence of an Amendment. The most nu. merous class of cases, however, was on the side of rejecting the Amendment, and passing the Bill without. With respeft to the Amendments in the Bill before the House, a similar question had arisen in the case of the great Militia Bill, in 1757. The Lords had left out all the Clauses for raising a Re giment in the Tower Division, as well as the Clauses for making a provision for it. The House rejected this Amendment, and sent the Bill back to the Lords, with their reasons assigned for the re jeetion, on the ground of Privilege, whereas the Lords did not insist on their Amendment. A similar case occurred on the Militia Bill, in 1802, and was disposed of in the same manner. The SPEAKER then cited a number of other cases from the Journals, to shew the praCtice of the House to be to reject Amendments of such a description, without getting rid of the Bill. Mr. lIENDERSON , briefIy adverted to another instance of the same description, in the case of the Bristol Port Bill. Mr. WINDHAM . was of opinion, that the principle on which it was proposed to agree in this Amendment, did not apply stridly, neither was it conformable to the general pradice of the House ; for though some instances were adduced in support of it, instances on the other side were much more numerous. He wished the House to consider, that when the constitutional principle as to breaches of Privilege was departed front, and deviations were tolerated because they were in furtherance of the intentions of the House, a wide door would be Open to inroads on the custody of the Public Purse, which the House was called upon to defend with jealousy as its own peculiar domain. The very word of the intention of the House was of wide meaning, and admitted great latitude of construe. tion. For example, in the present instance, when the thing which was to be enacted could not take place on the sth of May, the Lords took upon them to fix it on the gth of June, and this was called furthering the intention of the House, which he thought would have been better consulted if the former day were left our, and the House left at liberty to - substitute such other day as it might think convenient, for the House may have reason to adopt a very different provision. The proper mode would, in his Opinion, have been, that the Lords should name no day, but have required that a new Bill be brought in, the day named in the first having elapsed. On the ground that was now advanced in favour of this Amendment, a latitude was given for invasion of the PrivilegesOf the House, which might become licentious ; for having once countenanced such a pradice, the House might creep on from re laxation to relaxation, till the Privilege of which it was once so justly tenacious, was entirely lost.— If convenience was not to be urged against princi ple, he hoped substance would not be urged in op. position to form. He hoped it would not be argued that there was little difference, whether one day was adopted or the other. But if this sort of argument was once countenanced, the general intention would be always pleaded for the abandonment of the stria principle. The safest practice was a strid obser vance of the principle, the preservation of which was, a more important consideration than either the convenience of passing the present Bill, or the duty of passing a new one. Mr. SHERIDAN would not have risen, except for . something that had fallen from the Right Fin. Gentleman opposite (Mr. BATHURS T ), which was not consistent wi t h his usual accuracy. The Right Hon. Gentleman had said, he could adduce cases in which' 2.a:es had been_ altefed in the commence. ment of Tax Bills, while it had been stated, no doubt, more accurately from the Chair, that in direa Tax Bills, the House considered any Anr4end. ment made by the Lords as fatal, and that the House would be wanting to itself if it did not.— The Right Hon. Gentleman had said, that the Committee had adverted to this Amendment, but that it was not thought right to notice it as a breach of Privilege, as it was in furtherance of the inten tion of the House. He did not like this argument. Could the House of Lords, or even the Committee, be sure that the intention of the House w a s such ? Then the Right Hon. Gentleman contended, that if the Lords had not made this Amendment, the day of the first return having elapsed, no return could be made till the day fixed for the second return in August. The fart was, that there was no mention of such a second return in the Bill. No man was to be entitled to the exemptions in virtue of the former AEls, further than the day of the first return, which was, as the Bill had passed the Commons, the sth of May, as it was amended by the Lords Ist June, and which was proposed to be amended by the Right Hon'. Gentleman (the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER), to Ist July. No further claim could be made till the second return should be made on the sth May, June, or July following, as it should be finally fixed in the Bill. He proposed, by way of compensation, that the word fifth' should be al. lowed to stand, and that the rest of this Amend. ment be omitted ; and then that a Supplementary Bill should be brought in to fill up the deficiency. By this would be shewn what the Bill would state on the face of it, that the cause of this proceeding was a just attention to the Privileges of the House. Mr. BATHURST explained. Lord CASTLEREAGH saw no cause whatever for rejeaing the Clause or the Amendment made in it by the Lords, as, in his judgment, the Amendment did in no degree whatever trench on the Privileges of that House, but was obviously adopted by the Lords in furtherance of that which was the un doubted intention of the House of Commons, namely, to prevent any fraudulent exemptions from being pleaded under the Volunteer Bill, to which, without this Amendment, a wide door would have been left open until the Ist of August next. The House would at all times have the right and The opportunity of vindicating and asserting its Privileges, without unnecessarily at this moment seizing the opportunity of a weak and trivial ques tion, and thereby materially to embarrass the Pub lic Service. Mr. GREY differed with the Noble Lord's opi. nion, that the House of Commons would at all times have the power of asserting and vindicating its own Privileges. In order that it might best maintain them, it would not be right to establish a precedent against those Privileges, by giving way, even in the most trivial instance, to any authority, however lightly assumed by another House of Parliament, to interfere with that which this House had ever con sidered and maintained to be its sole and exclusive right. The Noble Lord had endeavoured in this case to defend the Amendment, by stating,• it was made by the Lords in furtherance to the inten tions of this House. Such language and such an argument he held to be most dangerous and decep_ tious ; for, if once such a pretence was admitted, he should be glad to know in what Bill it was, that the Lords might not plead a similar Privilege, to overturn every right of that House, under the assumed pretence of furthering its intentions.— They might thus amend every Money Bill sent up by this House, and overturn every Privilege of the purse, which this House had hitherto maintained with the most scrupulous jealousy. He could see no inconvenience whatever likely to arise from the rejeetion of the Amendment, and letting the Clause stand as it originally did, the sth of May; more especially, as the Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. PITT) had proposed to introduce speedily a short Supple mentary Ad, in which this, amongst other defeds of the Bill, might be remedied; and as such a re medy was so near, he saw no reason why it should not be adopted. _ _ _ Sir HENRY MILDM AY allowed the Amend ment may be in furtherance of the intention of the House, but he considered it as of dangerous tendency. The preservation of the Privileges of the House was of the utmost importance to the Public, as well as to Parliament, and such a prece. dent was of dangerous tendency. The question being put, that the Amendments be read a second time, was agreed to. When the Clerk came to read the Clause just now debated, Mr. FOX expressed his hope, that from what had passed, the House would feel the necessity of rejecting the Amendment he had mentioned. The whole of the cases, so ably stated from the Chair, were, in his mind, decidedly in favour of the rejec tion ; and more especially, the case of the Militia Bill, in the year 1757, when the House of Lords thought proper to diminish, by Amendment, the number of the Militia voted by the Commons, and also the trim of money voted as the supply for the original number. The House of Commons, in that case, did not aCt merely by rejeEting the Amendment made by the Lords, but they maintained their own dignity, and vindicated their Privileges with be. coming spirit, by rejeding the Bill altogether, and then introducing a new Bill. But, as had been fair. ly and ably argued by his Hon. Friend near him (Mr. GREY), the most dangerous of all arguments upon which a justification could he attempted for such an Amendment, on the part of the Lords, was that urged by the Noble Lord (CAcTLERFAcH), that it was done in furtherance of the intention of this House. For once only admit that, and the business of exclusive controul on the public purse would be at an end, and the privilege of taxation Com pletely transposed to the House of Lords, who would then be perfealy at liberty to make what alterations they pleased in the date of commencing, or the period or terminating a Tax. Gentlemen had quoted precedents, to strew that similar things had been done ; but those precedents were of very modern date, all within the last nine or ten years. But why not aet by ancient precedents, in these times when the House had shewn a most scrupulous and dignified jealousy and vigilance to wards its Privileges In the course of this debate, 3 Right Honourable Gentleman, an experienced Member of Parliament, and one who had him se lf fir C a considera'nle time pre s id e d i n t h,!Cair as mittees of Ways and Means in that H u-6 ‘ l , l ;', 19 ,1 serted, as a precedent, that the Lords - , 6 1, l b , 'I, altered the date of commencement in ;t and that the Amendment had been adopte'' ' . 4 . ! l House, without any objedion. If there was precedent that could by possibility hi ve e'w tU the vigilance of this House, he wislled it be read, as the House could not be taught to re. fled too strongly upon a circumstance so t r f, Y l,icil proachful, to a negligence, an inadvertencyYlf Ssch it ought to be so much ashamed. But Ala, precedents were once admitted to have any a-iness h u city, this House. might as well give up.the sriri• of taxation at once, and abandon its claims of ' e d! lege as idle matter of form, and take its rel3—ills, in a mere rejeCtion of Amendments in Money t he as well as in all possible cases in which it has en o same power of disagreement from the Alpen a° of the Lords. „Is The CHANCELLOR cf the EXC 11 5 '‘ 1 4 0d felt it unnecessary again to go over the r de ly he had already argued. Ile must be w l „, c 3 misunderstood by any Gentleman who sof?" i t him to argue generally that a view of g 1 , i11 ,1311 furtherance to the wishes of that House wall° , ' c her cases, justify the alterations made by ril e j o so Douse of Parliament in Bills sent up by this 11° 0' Money Bills as well as others. He use d the argil ment specially, and in relation only to t il l ai r ilat cise case before the House, and cases of a s ijillsl kind, and by no means in relation to Milney . c oo, or any other wherein an Amendment could r de of for a moment supposed to compromise a the Privileges of this House. But the, alter'ple did' not hold fastidiously to every poss ible , ation that might be made even in a Nina e ,Y rc th; but applied'only to such cases as those 0; Sete obvious intentions of the House of Coniat en :Daent contravened. But conceiving the A T e e r o w ilc, i s ii l in the present case to have been made pu leges,and not he o f f e lc no o the intention of furthering the objeds of thi s nr ivi# sth Amendment, so far as leaving out the " r a be dat e contravening a ny whatever o f its ° o b i e r es cia7 the of May," with a view, however, to amen adopted by the Lords, to the ist o f -11 ' moved, and which was agreed to, Or the Ques t io n b e i ng p ut an d agreea je Mr. in Fox wi s hed th at a s p ec i a l entry b e PTl o use the Journals of th e H ouse , o f t h e re asons of the for, agreeing to this A men d ment , t h a t it might n al a wards be considered as a precedent. teat The SPEAKER assured the Hon. Gentlerl'a' c at; after having put the Question, he would tak e that a special entry should be made according l Y i . ,, Mr. PITT then moved that the ist of it'vro substituted in place of the ist of June, Whi r " agreed to. ea' Mr. WHITBREAD rose, and in allusion t° se r , tain clauses in the Bild respeCting Masters 01344, vants, inserted originally at his instance, but ° e e( ted by the Lords, expressed a wish that they trl,nosi had been introduced. He wished, h o wever, t c "; - to if it was the intention of His Majesty's Mi"i st , e ,: ri att revive any clause upon this subjed, because , he.should feel it his duty to make a specific M,°tol-01 for inquiry in that House, respecting the conna,cre the Lord Advocate of Scotland, which , if Le Ivo correaly informed, had been extremely o pp re99l unjust, and illegal. Oa t% Mr. PITT requested the Hon. Member to the circumstance to which he alluded. r Mr. WHITBREAD said, that he had a Letteocir his pocket from the Shire of Banff, in Sella' stating, that a respedable man there, name d rison, -had a servant, who, without his perli*urr or at all consulting him, had entered i n to 3 fie flC of Volunteers. Mr. Morrison had in covqroa discharged the man from his service. 1.'11 ,14a l applied to the Lord Advocate to know wh a. h'lll e redress he had against' his master ; and tho n g o af X‘ord Advocate gave it as his answer tha t II I ' : Pe" vent had no legal redress, he tO yet WtOte .R fr ool' A puty Sheriff of Banff, stating, that Mr. I ' A ° ; fret ties conduit proceeded from disloyal and principles ; enjoined him, as far as " cal : power, to prevent the people of P io °. f ri9°l holding any intercourse w•tlllnr instrutting him, that if an I Einem M r. s '',o )3l‘ r" ° ; - ,; in that part of the Country, to m Y 4lce r t f. if, a ; rison a close prisoner ; and adding, t' l- l' 1 ,;; the event of an Enemy landing, any pa rt ° orrison's property should be destroY" it oe• by the Enemy or the King's Troops to ic it e 4 e i i of the Enemy's hand, he would take care rison should have no c o mp ens ation. ve" A ' 03 The remaining amendments were re cei VO5 7, 3 / some rejeEled ; after which a Comm" 'TAO" pointed to explain to a Committee of t e „ the reasons for rejeaing certain Arneodn'en—,:,, bet', Mr.WILBERFoace brought in a Bil l for the bet'' ter preservation of the health and morals A ,nl.7 ° Apprentices.—Read a first time, and e r e read a second time to-morrow , The Orders fur goin g P Duty, an d , t he Petitions relating to the Irish Linen MAI E,STY'S Message relative to a provision foo'ffrill late Lord Ki LW ARDEN'S Family, were rut in to a Committee on 4: Wednesday.—Adjourned. ..,--'.--- MAILS. nut. ilamburgh 4I . W: 59. PRICE OF STOCKS, THIS DAY AT TWELVE O'CLOCK• 4 Red, Ann. - sit I Omniurn - THE SUET• SOL/M QUIS DICSRE FALSUM AUDEA.T LONDON, MAY 24., 180.4. eo the SEVERAL of our Cruizers that stood over Coast of France, in consequenc e of die firing W 4"i(-.11 was heard on Monday, have ret urned to the 1-)""4 an}' There was nor, as it was imagine d, ment between our Cruizers and the Enemy' I I iroo tilla, but the French were firi n g salutes their Batteries al on g the Coast,probahlY nn t I