The Sun. — London, England, 1804-02-03 00:00:00

~.1 {; ' 1,, , , ` '4*\ 1 ., .. 0 ~ 's", C .. . '7 l ` / , .........7,4_, J- , 4 ~-4 , . • 1 --•* %.—...44" -ii%- 0 ,-A 0 ~: • .... . : .....-: :,e x.... t , •••• - '‘Agk ot o l it--.1 .- r"1.61 ••,. - , ~. _ t , .5 • I ' s ~.N. .0 1..64 ....,o *. i ' . V..7 -5-- -,-...:- , 7;*. , ~,,,,1 k e...- „ -4:7 ',la' .. .10 N c — lf. " . .cri , % % in ~..- —. '-• 4,„, ''(/' 01, 1 \ tr, ~, - cp NUr4I3ER /551.] THEATRE-ROYAL, DRpRY-LANE. MO -.MORROW EVENING, Feb. 4, 1804, will be' performed, TWELFTH NIGHT. W/TR CINDERELLA ; Or, THE LITTLE GLASS -SLIPPER. Produced under the Diredion of Mr. BYRNE: Cinderella, or The Little Glass Slipper, will be repeated every Evening till farther notice. On Monday, the Comedy of The Country Girl. And on Tuesday will be produced a new Comedy, in Five Ads, called The Soldier's Daughter. THEATRE-ROYAL, COVENT-GARDEN. TO -MORROW EVENING, Feb. 4, I so+, will be performed THE CABINET. WIT THE FOLLIES H OF A D.W. On Monday, King Henry the Fourth, Second Part, with Oscar and Malviva. On, Tuesday, The English Tleet, with The Village Lawyer. On Wednesday, the Historical Play of Kins; John TohO, -1 . ;,with-St. P atriek's ' Da j Lath , Coubtaiu..e, Anti pit Thursday, The of *Fortune. , To WINE and BRANDY MERCHANTS. A N Old Establishment in the Wine-Trade to be disposed of, situated in one of the most pleasant and TespeCtable Cities, at a conveniant distance from London, the Proprietor tieing about to retire from business. For Partiaularsapply to Messrs. Robert Freebairn and Co. Abchulch-lane, Lombard-street. INVASION and the VO LUNTEER S. This Day is published, in one Vol. Bvo. price 45..6d. 110 EFLECTIQNS - on th e menace d INV ASION, AA- and the means of proteding the Capital, by pt%:vent tag tin; Eiu:iny troni landi ng i n any part contiguous to it A - .-tier to the Earl of Harrington on the proposed rications round London : A Defence- of the Voltinteer System, and the means of e ta Ploying it to the greatest advantage ; and, A correct Military Description at Essex and t ile Military R oa ds an d Strong Positions in those Co Kent ; with unties. By Colonel GEORGE HANGER. .Printed.for loten Stockdale, This Day was published, - In One Vol. Bvo. price 7s. in hoards, • the SECOND EDITION, of URAL PHILOSOPHY ; or: REFLECTIONS R. on KNOWLEDGE, VI RTDE, andl-lAPPINESS; chiefly in Reference to a Life of Retirem?nt in the Country. Written on occasion,of the late Dr. Zirurneriziaii's Di scourse an SolitUde. By 'ELY BATES, Printed for Longman . Esq : and Ree s , No. , paternoster-row. The argument entorced throughout 39 is this, That there is no solid happiness without religion ; and that the charms of retirement, unl ess they tend to improve the mind in piety _ and virtue, are unsubstantial and fallacious ; but that, if entered upon with a proper disposition of mind, it will b viously improve us in true wisdom, and quailty _us tor o t_h i a is t more durable condition in another , world to whieh all t are hastening. This important doctrine taughtis.. , 1- t the least the smallest tinEtUre ot fanaticism, and wit ip..l without language. 44 1 Se city ; but in g.•ave, yet simple and impress' v..vo. rie,style is, at, the same time, tbrcible and elegant; the . . lute, it is true, is no where enlivened by ancc.lote, but it in 14,0 here defaced' by-puerility ; and iri this, as ‘vell as in -44 etts is.deediy to 'be prefer Fed te' Zimmerman's r‘ , ll.4la r * Work.• We recommend without fiesration, Pe the his book to y• r i ' will ,ecseriptionot readers,. xy . , . receive bes t and fliensvters most Pleasing manner.,, aba ious advice, delivered in the B ritish C r i t i c s , Sept. Si ..........._____:._____ „.. „ JAMES and GEORGE BENNET, Nfa nufadurers to His Majesty, by Ap - tment pow , ~. T_T AVE great pleasure in announcing to the Pub .a..l. lic,a most important Discovery which they have made of a New Method of Felting the Pile of their WOOLLEN VELVET C ORDS,.• for, Avlnch they have obtained an additional Patent from His I‘ , la . • ' Process which -•• ' , 14 applicable only to Animal Wool or Fur, Jesty . This new e ornpletelyttnites the tires of the Wool, and forms the• Cord intO a compad body, incapable of being inj ured by the severest friaion, and possessing a neatness and durability in wear be-' Yiond that of an other fabric. The beauty and excellen L e of • this their new}MCture, previous t o its improvement, induced. many persons sylio were ionnant of the. principles 131 the Invention, to imitate. it, aihid bring into th e - market irnperfeel; unsaleable Goods, made from coarse materials, A...,._ to:unskilfully tniinuf.atired - t la-c me unfit for fur "ter Us e after a fe..,,y weeks, as to ‘ dz c .l ) ) ., s' wear, These spurious Artiele.s h 'byth e creak „ v s-. aye trequently been forced on the Public ontaine.4.,, .nteh Messrs. Bennet's Marmfatiiire had justly . :Messrs, 13411(14t4e even been solo -: C; 1 unit faCtured by • ted these:lll44ulitti order.that the" Pub c° lic s m n a ' y in future de &lined to mark their the words tom (•I;liP,llti°ns, Messrs. Bennet have deter. B ENN ET;9`4 l ,s ,at each end of every PieLe, ". il h : track selvage, at the (ii:t;eYAf,r- P ATEN'F," and on the '' BENNET's PATENT'cPI.9i about every yard and iLilf, For the better accommern6srodaltol.niti;ort,llNl;)Terech()2* en, and Drapers, , - e- the superimendance of their Aen, ':,e°Pened Sales ' u l n 11- ' l:Vareh ; ter etreet, London, on the same terms NO'S---," 4, Basing 1 1., as at their M:mu lac. for in. Manchester. .• 2rfanehester, Jan. 28, ISA. ............ . . VVINES (Dade from P ) r , ur" i Ls . el and other °r eigil Crap (I . a ' .--I','', , ma to be had , nly 0( I- A.,E, tile i r aEttiret, at Ins Vauesits, No. 27 Haymarket The above ktlgtof Z ee l attlei a.r-tietilarly Cl,ry and coiirel); divested . of that kind a, e-.s.co,!tinnon to English Wines, and are acknow -1,,,/ittio,yt,t.ne Connoisseurs in those Articles, to be greatly Vill2S I)‘icemtioartlYpc't,the Sherry and Madeira \Vines in Family Male ante"lir--‘t"l"Y•rtioncy, only 2.6'5. per Dozen. . Log_. peri oe to ' i orn zts. to '2„ls. One Dozn sent Ceßtutty Y Part of the Town. Fac . s resident in I e ~:naY he accommodated with a Hamper 1 free of to the amount rnitt4,ic;•o you Note, or upwards, on enclosing ,_ A eAPer-Post. • the Re ,tlrottgh --u.r1911. —Many Families having been deceived Dal thinTitellasing a Raisin Wine for the Foreign Grape, , tnunit, it an incuinbent,luty on him to caution the Corn_ ' 4Kain 'this - - fdeception. Its .. r u nei G st unwarrantable species 0 _ ,ii lie dare raPe Wine CantioVbe sold under zss. bd. per uozi. . of IMpostors. •• • • . . . 1 1 , - • GUERNSEY. l' - • ' Virtue of a commission o f. A ppraisement and Sale issued b Y ih High Court of Admiral!) , of Engl3nd, addressed to Chrisopher•Robinson D. L. and Harry Dobris . e„, • Esq. a , —4 Wed ziesdiY the Bth of and inst, will be exposed to • Public Sale; at the Island of Guernse!", HE following Articles, beini , . Part of 111 T 'CARCO of the Dutch Ship the H El HELENA CATHA 11111A, lob Ysbrandt the condemned as goOdand law— Jul Prize to liis Majest, taken by His Alajesty's Ship Alg 'llene, loon Stiles, Esq• Commander, prior to the Decl',.. ration of Hostilities against the Batav tan Republic :- to Pipes, SPAN ISH 13 RANDY, - . 60 Pipes 2 filogsheads i SPAN I SII RED WINE. And on Thurstia., pie 9th of Februirry, ILIULI f ` - - o toe said Ship HELENA CATHARLN ~ will _be A . Sold togetherthe the at her Sails, Anchors, Cables, and Materials. She is a ttrong Vessel, Dutch- built, about ‘loo eacedingly well-found. • Tons burthen, and • tiIMPER ILL PARLIAMENT. ,: : HOUSE OF , COMMONS, - THURSDAY, FED. Z. SIT& JOHN NEW P-OR T "moved for an account Of the monies levied in the different counriesin land, by virtue Of theorderS•of Grand Juries, and issued by the Ificasurers ois - uch Counties to Houses of Industrir for the relief Of:the Poor, tturilig the years 'Sol, z, and 3.=Ordered. lUIDDLESLX- ELECTION. .•• - , Mr. FOX said, he roseein pursuance of his notice of yesterday, to make some observations .upon the subjed to which he then- alluded. e The point, in g reates eimportanc e . Th at question one of t h e that House ought to obey a Statute of the Legisla, tore there could be no doubt, and indeed it was inure peculiarly incumbent upon them not to infringe upon the provisions of an Adol Parliament, and to be es::reately almost beyond any possible case that could be cenceived, as to what constriidions they put upon such Ads. The Act of the 28th of His present - 11/Leiestts, upon which he founded his ob. jeCtion to the Petition before the House, was found_ ed on the priaciple that as little discretion as pos.- sible ought to be left to the House io cases of Dee tion Petitions,, .and alter the passing of that An, there was scarcely any species o( discretion deft, for it stridly defined what Pekitions -of. that. nature should be proceeded upon and. whatnot. That An did - not - merely say that-such and such - Petitions should be received, but it did more, it told them what Peti tions they were-prohibited from receiving and refer ring to a Committee. Having made these preliminary observations upon the Ad itself, he should proceed to the consideration of the, point immediately in. question. And here he should put ertirely, out. sot the case all precedent, for to .say that. by pre_. cedcnt an Ad of only sixteen. .years standing was to be brought into desuetude, . would be mo n _ strous, and still more if by repeated precedents the eifed of the At was to be done away, as Any Ad might be rendered completely • nugatory by ,con qinually putting upon it construdions, in opposition to its original meaning and express words. There. was, perhaps, no clause, in any. Aft of Parliament more-clear and explicit than that upon -which he founded his objedion ; .it expressly stated,. that:no petition complaining of an undue Eledioo should be . received or proceeded upon, where the persons sub scribing -such petition did not state that they were Candidates, or had a tight to vote at such election. The Petition, before the House stated no such thing ; if it had - been stated in an implied manner, it would not have been .s,uficierit; because it would not-have been conformable to the, provisions of the Bill, butit was not stated to common sense. Free. holders forsooth ! we:e there- not Freeholders of Middlesex who had no right to vote ? Six months ago he himself was in that predicament. Had they said they had now a right to vote, it would not have been sufficient, because the.Ad expressly said that.they mtist,state that they had had a right to vote at theten.lt ehad•been said, that, they wire not. toccpresutne. a disqualification, but •he . thought,. on..the contrary, •that . they were not to • presume •a• qualification. Qualification, however, or disqualification, had. nothing •to do -with the question. 11 ;a..petitino had been signed at their doors by a - number of- persons, :calling themselves \ Freeholders., whom they knew .to be disqualified., yet if those persons stated -in that .petition,..that they had a right ..vote at the eleCtion to which the petitiod related,. the House.could teOt rejecl it, bu.t must send it to:. a Committee.. They had no thing, to .do • with the rights of. persons; because they could not know them e they had e nothing•to do with the fad, but merely with the, reeoed a The question was, whether this petitiort.was!conforma ble to the Ad of .Parliament.:.- did: these. persons claim a right to vote at. the. late election.?. if, not, let those who. had signed it be the most. tespeCtable persons in the-County, and he did , not doubt their respedability, still, from the want of such a Atilt] being inserted, the House could not. entertain it. It might be said that-the Petitioners had an equitable right, but that amounted to nothing : lie presented a petition in :784, complaining of a .non -return, and there could not be a stronger case of equitable right ; but it was 'nor. a case that--came .within. the meaning of the Grenville Ad, in consequence of which an . Aa was passed soon afterwards to attach upon such kind -of cases. .There was another Petition pre., sewed to the House which was not generally thought to be very decent, but as it contained. a complaint against an undue return, the House .could not do otherwise. than .refer it to a Committee. . The re verse of this- •was equally true—that if a Peti tion did.itot state what was commanded by. a peremp, tory law, it could not be received. In the present case 4te - could not conceive the possibility of a dif ference of opinion. He . had.heard.that Several Peti. tions- of a similar nature .had -been presented and proceeded upon, but he did not-care.; he knew that where neither. party took any notice,of the circum ,stancee such- Petitions .might go -by accident. to a Committee :;..but if an A-} of Parliament .enjoined that -certain words should be particularly stared in a Petition,.to say that .precedents. couid:cause.a feazance of that Ad, would be monstr,ous.. If there , was -any difference of opinion upon the Aubjea, he would take it, that.if.Petitioners respecting a County .EleEtion were to Tall themselves any other descrip_ tion of persons,, .suppose CopyholSers, they would •say perhaps that such persons had no.right to vote, .but.they could not decide that without hearing evi -dence at their Bar,- and then in some cases they might have to decide in this-way the very litigat_ ed point in question. He, would. suppose a Petition from certain House-holders of Westminster,. stating themselves -to be liable to be rated, Whe n i t had RIDAY, FEBRUARY 3, 180+. he'en determined, that to become Eleaors they rthist be rated and liali!e to .pay e here then would be a litigated point which would belong to a Committee, but 'nor to the 'HoeSe to decide. Person s mi g h t b e Freeholders and yet be disqualified from voting, by being women or minors, or possessing Freeholds under'4.os. per annum. In this Petition the .Peti tioners did not state that they had any right.to vote at the EleCtiOn, and therefore he was of opinion it could not be proceeded 'upon. He then moved, That the Order of the Day foi taking into consideration to-marrow the Petition of certain Freeholders of the County Of, Middlesex, complaining of an undue Elec tion tbr that County,..sho'uld be read—which .being accordingly read by die Clerk, Air. Fox concluded by moving that that Order should be . discharged. The ~CHANCELLOR of the EX , '-',WEQUER said, he had listened - with considerable attention to the speech ofthe Gentleman, but he felt it in cumbeot.upon him to sot', that the impression made upon his mind, when this. question was agitated on the preceding day,-rernained unaltered. lie agreed with the lion. Gentleman in attaching great im portance to the.prese.nt questitin, not only heeause it involved the constrwtion of an act of the Legis lature, but because it likewise involved that most important right of persons aggrieved to present Pe titions to the Legislature, complaining of those grievances, ..He agreed also with the Hon. Gentle man in what he had said with respeft to taking away a discretion from that House in the cases of Eleelion Petitions. Notwithstanding this, how ever, ,he must oppose tl e Motion of the Hon. Gen tleman, because it they interfered in the way pro posed in this instance, it would establish a principle wh;ch might be produCtive of the most dangerous consequences. The objen of the Clause was, to lay a restriction upon Petitions, and to prevent the inconvenience, which would result from Petitions presented by persons having no description cf in terest 10 ; the event of the Elettion of which they complained ; it was therefore enacted, that persons were not entitled to come before the Legislature in. that capacity, unless they had a right to vote at such ii:;eaion s . Was he to understand that the Hun. Gentleman meant, that the exact form of words mentioned in the Clause, tvas to be inserted in every Petition ? Mr. FOX, in explanation, said, what he con tended for was, that The Petitioners ought to state that they had a right to 'vote at the elettion of which they. complained. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER proceeded—He contended, he. said, that if Peti tioners described themselves, and stared their griev. ances in such a way as to be pettedly intelligible to the common sense of Englishmen, the mandatory words of the Aft were complied with. If they looked to the records of Pat;lament, they would find tltat the Aft was complied with in this instance, in the same manner as in others, and they should deal unfairly with people, if after thirteen years Con stant succession of precedents, the blot being now hit by such a proceeding as this, a considerable grievance should go without redress. He main tained, that scarcely any, or at least very fewthpte cedents agreed with the H on . G ent l eman ' s .con struaion of the Aft. 111 the year 1790, several ;ie_ titions were presented, some of which were renewed in 17 . 91 and,1792 ; one in the'case of Zetiand, and another in the case of Radnor, in which the parties described themselves as Freeholders, without ,stat. I ing any right to vote : there were others in which the Petitioners had called themselves " legal tors," in others " Freemen," but none averring, according to the Hon. Gentleman's view of the Ad, that they were Elettors at the time the eleftion took pliiee. All these peritions•were proceeded in :without objeaion. In the :year 1796 there . were no petitions from Freeholders, but there mils one from *the Freemen of Worcester, in the same pre dicament as the others he - had mentioned. From this review of the preeedenk relating%to this sub jett, a must result, if the lion. Gentleman's Mo. tion was. agreed to, tlrat these petitions •had.been improperly referred to Committees, and thatiotrf. 'lnittees had unjustly decided-upon them. ii, this. particular case, if the Honourable Gentlemat's!mot' : tion was agreed to; the greatest hardship would be: felt; the parties presented' a Petition last Session in the terms of learner Petitions of a similar, nature,' the Petition was renewed at the comtnencement of the present Session ; no notice Was taken of the in... formality, and new, at t h e ver y l ast moment, !his' disclosure was made, and the parties were to be told that they could not be heard at all. He was con. vinced that the House would not inflia this hard ship upon the parties, unless compelled to, it by the mandatory' words of the At ; but he averred thitt if• Petitions were drawn up in the order prescribed by the Journals, that in re:erring them to Committees the House only ailed upon them in conformity with its established usags. If the proposition of the Honourable Qcotletty;rl was adopted, it must follow that grievances complained of by a part "of the People of this Country cou ld not b e re dressed. Would any pia4tiealeinjury result from a continuance of what hadtbeen:the usage of the House ? Certainly not : Let the Petirriliin•go to a Committee, and. the Committee would decide; whether ,the par-, ties had o right to be before therro He contended, that in the present instance, -tLe parties had satisfied the forms of the House so far, as to entitle them to go be_ fore a Committee. If,,in any Petition there shouldbe discovered a fraud, or that the parties signing iiwere women nr Minors, disqualified from voting, nobody could doubt ' that the Committee had the power of rejefting theM. He contended, that the words of the Att were not imp -rative, in• opposition to the received practice of the House, .and he should there. fore resist the Motion. PRIC2 SIXPENCE: Mr. FRANCIS thought that the tendency of the Speech of the Right Hon. Gmt. (rhe CHANCELLOR of the ExwikkQiint) went to set the usage of the House, as exhibited in the journals, above the pasi. tive words of an Alt of Parliament. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER referred to several precedents, whiCh were read hi , the Clerk, in none of which did the Petitioners state that they had a right to vote at, the respeetive Elthions of which they complained. Upon that relative to Carmarthen, decided upon last Session, he remarked, that a question similar to that brought for Ward by the Hon. Gent. (Mr. Foxy was agitatedi but the Committee decided that the Petition was good, allowing at the same time the opposite party to prove, if they could, that the Petitioners were nut Freeholders, which was not attempted. Mr. T. GRENVILLE entered into some explana. tiori to . tite irlotives of passing the two Aft; loth an*i.tbth of His present Majesty. He believed it would be, found that previous to passing the formet or Grenville A&t, that the usage of the House with respeCt to receiving Election Petitions' was nearly the same as it had been of late years. That Act left the subjeCt open, and by the general u;e of the word Petition, allowed of the presentation of Petitions of that nature without restrietion. It was afterwards found nccesssary to place some restriaion upon th6e kind of Petitions, and the Ad of the zSch was pass. ed, enading that no Petitions should be received unless the Parties stated that they were candidates, or had a right to vote at the EleCtion of which they complained. This nearly brought them back to the former system. Heconfessed, however, he should have been better satisfied if the Petition in question had complied with the words of the Al of Parlia ment, in which case there would have been no degree of doubt upon this subjed, but as the case appeared doubtful, he thought they aught to give it an equita. ble construction, particularly as the Petition was con. formable to the practice of Parliament, and as such a construdion would prevent that wrong and injury which individuals would otherwise sustain. Mr. JEKYLL expressed his surprize that the present should be called a doubtful case. It seem. ed to him impossible to adopt words more manda tory than those of the Ad alluded to. With re spea to the Carmarthen Petition, which had been alluded to by the Right Hon: Gent. (the CHAN c E L i.ok of the EXCHEQUER) the Committee in that case were compelled to receive the Petition, it hay.. ins been referred to them by order of the House, and they could therefore only decide upon it as it lay before them. Precedents had been quoted, but in the cases cited, if any question of This nature had been raised upon them, they might have been of some avail, hut they had pftooed When the blot was hit, it was for the House to con. eider whether it was rightly hit or not. It had been Laid that the Freeholders had a prima facie right to vote, but it was considered that various disabilities might preclude them from the exercise of that privilege. Much stress was laid upon pre cedent, but how often had it been decided in the Court of King's Bench, where an usage had been set up contrary to the express words of a Charter, that it did not signify for how many years that "usage had subsisted, it must fall to the grouncl,•be cause it was inconsistent with the provisions of the Cl;'3rtet ; in this case they could not contravene :Le express words of an At of Parliamebt... Lard A. HAMILTON thought -tliey •-could . not contrary to the express words At of Parliament. Air'. TIERNEY said, it had been his - prat - tide, 'when any matter was doubtful, to,open the door as widely as, liossible for its discussion, and ht en.. treated the House to see what the hzirdship- would be, and it must fall on The Petitioners, if this ,Peti tion. was now rejetted: Ir.wat. , worth while to look at the course-which this proceeling+ had taken.; no objedion whatever was started against this-Petition when it was presented. What was 'the reason why the Hon. Gentleman, who now brought this moticin forward, had stilled all those feelings which he kneW behad:upon this occasion in favour of sub stantial justice, and to insist on the dry letter of the ? It certainly must be his superior sense of duty to support the regularity of the proceedings of the .tlouse, - But why had he not told 'these Petitioners of 1114 informality sooner ? If he had said at the 'time of presenting this Petition, - that the Petition could' not haite been received hecaus'e the words were not in it which the Hon. Gentleman contended the mt required should 'have'been in it; the-Petition might have been rejected without any hardship on the Petitioners ; ,so that the formality of the pro. ceedings of the House would have been' preserved, and 'substantial justice might have been done to the parties complaining at the same time,- for then ano ther Petition might have been -presented, and the words, now said to be.wanting, might have been But what was the consequence of being silent then and Intid now, if the House should adopt ,this tnotion . ;?. That of ,placing the Petitioners in a situation in which they could- never have tiYei ! ccOln. plaint heard at all -The House would recollect chat the parties were brought into this situnion by the at of the anise itself, in which the Hon. Gentle.. man had acquiesced, as welLas every other NI-ember. • No objeaion was made to this Petition when it was presented the last "Ses'3ion. 'The Petitioners,wo4& have been subjel to a penalty of zoo!. if they had not renewed it in this Session, that was,- in other v‘ords, if the Hon'. Gentleman was right in his mo f ion, there wyluld havr been a.penalty - of 2001. caching on these Petitioners if they did nit repeat th, offence, that of renewing an irre g ular, Pezitiort. It was said that the spirit of the Gren. Vile - Bill, as well as the letier of it, requirett it Should be stated in the Petition that the Petitioners had a right to vote at the eledion, which this Pal. • t•