The Sun. — London, England, 1822-04-25 00:00:00

7 3t:Nti • '~.~ ~. dro a , 6404: el ~ # ~. nrt h , 4 api tx•tit &ley- (1 49 V (70 -V; Gi-Y the inas. ed by great thei, di his -rob°. PRICE SEVENPENCE. NUAISER 9256.1 THURSDAY., APRIL 25, 1822. PARLIAMENT, • EAST INDIA HOUSE, Aprit24, 1522. THE COURT of DIRECTORS of the UNI'T'ED COMPANY of MERCHANTS of ENG LAND TRADING to the EAST INDIES, do tereisy give said to be invested in public-houses by brewers, and the loss of that capital was the great difficulty in setting free the trade. Mr. HUSKISSON, in moving that the Petition be printed, expressed his satisfaction at seeing the Hon. Member for Wey. month (Mr.-F. Buxton) now in his place, and asked him when the alteration in the price of beer which had been spoken of on a former Right would take place ? Mr. F. BUXTON said it was impossible for him to name the precise period, but it would take place in a short time. It might be injurious to those with whom he was connected, to state what the alteration would be, but he was sure that it would prove sa tisfactory to the Right Hon. Gentleman. It had been said, he understood, that it would be-injurious to the brewers to set the trade free. He could state to the House, that if the trade were to become open, it would amount to a confiscation, not of pro perty belonging to brewers alone, but of thiproperty of publi cans. This would, in fact, be the hardest measure which could possibly be contemplated. The petition was ordered to be printed. AGRICULTURAL DISTRESS. more attention was paid to the collection of the revenue they would be, he thought, most unnecessary. The petition was read, and ordered to lie upon the table. Mr. LITTLETON moved that it should I , e printed, and in doing so he observed that the evidence of one of the Solicitors of Excise taken before the Committee proved that Extents in Notice, That a QUARTERLY GENERAL COURT of the said Corepany . will be held at their House in Leadenhall-street, en W EDNESDAY, the , 19th June next, at Eleven o'Clock in the Forenoon, for the purpose of declaring a DIVIDEND from CIIRISTMAS last, to MIDSUMMER next, That the TRANSFER BOOKS of the said COMPANY'S S TOCK will be SHUT on TUESDAY the 4th June next, at Three o'Clock, and OPENED again on TUESDAY, the 16 th July following. And that the DIVIDEND WARRANTS on the said Com- P 4 ny's Stock, due on the sth July, will be ready to be deli vered on SATURI?AY, the 6th July next. JOSEPH DART, Secretary. . VICTII.II HMG-OFFICE, April 4. 1822. THE COMMISSIONERS .for VICTUAL LING His MAJESTY'S IVA VY do hereby give No ti", That on Friday, the 26th Instant, they will he ready to receive Tenders in writinir (sealed up), and treat for the ' 3 " I3 P I Y of what FRESH BEEF may he required for the use () r His Majesty's Ships and Vessels at the places under-men limed,from the date against each expressed, till the 31st De c,er nex t, v ie. inb t • p.-- . n fance 15th May N e ni l ucas‘le and Tinouth Haven 7 th June 1 ~;', , ernsey and Jersey 7 th --- k' , k 'neenock .. . 7th -- t arnphelton 1 2 5 1 1 r, -- t.— ~a lWa r e' 0 Belfast. Carrickfergus, Larne Harbour, . N trod N ewry !Ilford Haven St iaaraer and Loch Ryan ... I 2 Leith, Leith Roads, and the Firth of Edinburgh 10 7,, be . . th August , i paid for by Bills payable, without interest, sixty days afar date. The Conditions of the Contracts Taffy he seen at this Office; ors 7 / applying.to the Postmasters at Guer n s e y and Jerse y , to the Collectors of His Majesty's Customs at each of the other places. No regard will be had to any Tender in which the Price 4 h all not be inserted in words at length, or that shall not be delivered to the Board before One o'Clock on the said Friday, the 26th Instant, nor unless the Person whei makes the Tender, or some Person on his behalf, attends, to an swer when called for. Tenderimust also be accompanied by a Letter signed , 011 two responsible Persons, engaging to become hound with the Party tendering, its the Penal Sum of 5001. for the due performance LT each of the Contracts. OFFICE OF OBONANCE, ',tut APRIL, la2t. TO BE DISPOSED OF, _ _ The DEPOT and 1 3 1iEMISES, belonging to this Department, situated within a Quarter of a Mile of the Town of Derby. ALL those Substantial Well-built BRICK BUILDINGS and PREMISES, known as the ORD NANCE ARMOURY, with Trussed Barn Roof, Slated, and lined the under side of the Rafters; and contains two excel lent stories. 97 feet long and 30 feet wide in the clear; the ground story 17 feet high, the tipper story 15 feet (a little more or less,) with lobbies at each end of both stories, and good light, well adapted for a Manufactory or any other pur pose requiring light and roomy premises. Together with FOUR well-built BRICK DWELLING.HOUSES, consisting ,(Z! ,,.. Ground and one-pair Stories, and large light Closets ; good 'lt, with Privies and Sheds; two Magazines ; Guard house , with attached Offices, Sheds, and Work-shops at each end ; a Pump, with a Well of good Water, and Drains. The whole Premises well enclosed with, a Brick-wall, and with a Car riage -entrance and Gates from the Road. The extent of the Ordnance Land consists of one Acre and One Rood, the centre of which is covered by the ArinOsury, Magazines, and other Buildings contiguous; the remainder of the Ground is cultivated as Gardens. Also to be disposed of, all the Fittings-up of the Armou r y an d Accoutrement-room , and other articles ; Fittings - up of t he Smith's Shop and Furbishing:room, and other materials. Plans of the Premises may be seen by application at the Secr e t a ry's Office, in Pall-Mall, London, between the hou rs ri t° and 4 o'clock. file Premise's may be viewed by applying to Mr. S. D. "re, at the Depot, of whom particulars may he had. , •„ Such Persons as may be willing to make Tenders for the i - ur e h age of this Depot and Premises are to send their Pro posals to the Secretary to the Board of Ordnance , P a l l- M all, 4.°11611 , on or before the Ist day of May next, sealed and tidorsed. Proposals for the Purchase of the DePot at April 24, me. YESTERDAY' the LOTTERY FINISHED DRAWING. i BISH SHARED BOTH £20,000 PRIZES ! and sent them 0 tile following places : viz. Half 19,007 .. . . ,e 2. 0 ,000 ! London Sixteenth..LariCaster ight.ii - 3i ** xteentb Huntingdon Sixteenth .. Peterborough q ixteenth 19,3'2 - 3 . . . . t 20,000! Zia - Sixteenth..Frome ightli tiglith Si xteenth .... Driffield L 3 ISH also sold SEVEN other Capitals, drawn Yester da y , 4 lld Twenty-three other Capitals on the previous Days of D r aWing, making TWO PRIZES of 4'20,000, And Thirty-Two other Capitals, th All Sh are and SOld by BISI - 1 in the Lottery which finished 'awing Ye d sterday. %I' A new Lottery will be on sale in a few Days. LACON, A SECOND VOLUME, _ This Day was published, price 7s. THE SECOND VOLUME of LACON, being the Completion of the Wo rk. `; 11 ' 0 , the TWELFTH EDITION of the First Volume. by Meisrs. Longman & Co. and all other Booksellers. t i o • 13 .—As LacOn has gone through many Editions in Arne be any Agent inclined to treat for the Second Volume may ......... ! 4: 2l sulted with, on application to the Author's Publisher. To SHIP-OWNERS and CAPTAINS. SaperiOr Advantame both to SAILS and os _ STORES, of Prepared low-priced Brown Canvas, over C,:pensive Coker sorts, is fully proved by the following Eden, West India Docks, March 2Gth, 1822. GENTLEME N — ln March 1821, pits prepared some Scotch la wras of r a th er an inferior quality for the brig Eden, under Itny command.—l had a quarter deck awning made of part of Ir L w hiell was hauled out occasionally on the passage to Jo likewise four weeks at Kingston, and at the Horan -4h for near seven months ; during the latter period we ex rtienced very considerable changes of weather. The awn gis a good state, and I have no doubt will yet last sere ral "Yages. During the whole time at the Ilavannah it was I n te rl r ectla t n li va r s ic , e n f e o l4 r , a few hours only. part of the time, near four months, a lower studsail of .• on leaving England, was used as a main tr...„tet.kerlrng, when it wis founil . one mass of mildew, and so to be totally unlit for service. I forward a piece of Kith my seal annexed, fur your inspection, and beg you it'll make what use you think proper of it. vilcciikewise forward a piece of one of your prepared bolts, an .; h by some accident got wet through seven or eight folds, , t _u,was not discovered till - quite - dry, when I made a lower pe llsait of it, which has beets used the pas Sage home, and is uji r ,_ e ctlY good. Any other canvas, I think, would hate been, r similar circumstances, totally useless. wishi ng you every success which your d i scovery mer it s , I 11, Gentlemen, your obedient servant, (Signed) W. U. EDDIS. To Messrs. Browell ecCo., 23, Aldermaiibury. at all Ham- re was rtSt.- tat the inven is son. d by I the the ,find kited been Dll Se d on wick, ploy, had st on At in- e Mr. 'Mon ce, on me of acid, him, se' it. in ac- areet, t ; said some F,. and iating itirely berra ry. inesday rs - Hos some of than; height e worie, coin y no thatt itti his 7otziahl, -square, 3edford- 7ni . ichael , . gcsbcrt Strango, t Eiteer, 3siztiet 3A, near ifficer of Et of the of High ed Stags e Citi of htbr of ~~t~x- HOUSE OF LORDS, WEDNESDAY, APRIL 24. Mr. BKOGDEN and others brought up from the Commons, the Summary Proceedings, and the Irish Commercial Credit Bills, which were read a first time. Ihe Earl of COUR.TOWN presented a Petition from New Ross, in the county of Wexford, pray ing for the repeal of the Window . Tax.—Read and laid on the table. The Innkeepers' Rates Bill was read a third time and passed. The Duke of MONTROSE presented a Petition from the Provincial Synod of Glasgow and Ayr, against the Catholic Claims.—Laid on the table. General GASCOYNE, Sir E. KNATCHRULL, Sir W. W. WYNNE, and others, brought up several Private Bills from the Commons.—Read a first time.—Adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS, APRIL 24. - A Call of the House was fixed for this day, which was under stood to be disposed of before strangers wete admitted to the Gallery, by the motion of Sir J. NEWPORT for its discharge. Sir G. HILL presented a Petition from the Merchants of Londonderry, praying for an augmentation of the existing duties on imported butter and cheese.—Ordered to lie on the table. IRISH WINDOW TAX. Sir G. HILL requested the Hon. Member for Dublin (Sir R. Shaw) to postpone his motion; which stood now fixed for that evening, on account of the absence of a Noble Lord (the Marquis of Londonderry). Sir R. SHAW said it was a question which deeply interested the inhabitants of Ireland, and he would not consent to defer his motion, unless some particular day were set apart for its discussion. He was certainly desirous that the Noble Lord alluded to should be present when -the motion came on, since he had cause to believe that it would receive his support. A short conversation on the subject then took place between Mr. ABERCROMBY, Mr. HusKISSON, and Mr. CALCRAFT. The latter Gentleman suggested, that the Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Shaw) might fix a day for bringing on his motion, after con sulting With the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Or some other Minister. Here the matter rested. - Sir T. MOSTYN presented a Petition from the Owners and Occupiers of Land in Flintshire, complaining of distress, and pr4ing for relief.—Ordered to lie on the table. Mr. ELLIS presented a Petition from the Parish of St. Mary, Dublin, praying for the repeal of the Irish window-tax. The Hon. Gentleman made a few observations in support of the prayer of the Petition. Sir JOHN NJ WPQRT trusted that the House would not decide upon that very important question the repeal of the Irish window tax, without attending minutely to the details of the petition now presented. The whole of the assessed taxes of Ireland appeared to him to have been most injudiciously impos ed ; but if any one item were more injurious than another, it was the tax now in question—a tax which carried disease and death to every considerable city in the kingdom. Perhaps there was no boon so valuable that could at so small an expence be conferred upon Ireland as the repeal of the tax upon windows. Mr. ELLIS likewise presented petitions from the parishes of St. Thomas, St. Peter, and St. Weiburg, Dublin, against the window tax.—Read, and ordered to be printed. Mr. CALCRAFT declared that he should support the Hon. Baronet (Sir Robert Shaw) in his efforts to procure the repeal of the window-tax ; and he should'equally have supported him if he had moved to repeal the whole of the assessed taxes of Ire land. The whole amount of those taxes came only to 300,0001. ; and he would vote for their repeal, because he considered it the duty of the House to make the residence of the Irish gentry as easy as possible. Mr. C. HUTCHINSON presented three petitions from pa rishes in the City of Cork, praying for a repeal of the Irish window-tax. ,-One of the petitions stated an apprehension of typhus fever in the city ; and another declared, that out of 1,038 houses in a particular quarter, 527 were unoccupied, and falling to ruin, from the difficulty of finding tenants under the pressure of the tax.--Read, and ordered to be printed. Sir N. COLTHURST, in presenting another Petition from a parish in the city of Cork., expressed his concurrence with what had been said by the Hon. Gentleman who spoke last.— Read, and ordered to be printed. Sir ROBERT SHAM postponed his motion upon the Irish , Window Tax to Wednesday, the Ist May. OFFICERS IN CHATHAM DOCK. Lord BINNING presented a Petition from the inhabitants of Chatham and Rochester, complaining that certain officers'in the dock-yard, although receiving pay from Government, car rid on trade as shoemakers, to the prejudice of the trade of the Petitioners. After a few words from Mr. HUDSON GURNEY and Sir B. MARTIN, the Petition was withdrawn. Mr. HART DAVIS presented a Petition from the Church wardens and inhabitants of - Bedminster, against any farther concessions to the Roman Catholics.—Read, and ordered to be printed. BEER TRADE. Mr. HUSKISSON, in presenting a petition from certain in habitants of Reading, against the monopoly of the trade in beer, expressed a wish that some of the Hon. Members connected with that trade had been in their places. He was informed (for he had no local knowledge as to the fact) that the power of licensing stood, in Reading, with the Corporation ; and- the Magistrates, who really had the power to grant or refuse licenses, were themselves public Brewers in the place.—(Hear, hear !) His attention had been a goOd deal called to the subject by the circumstance of its having been stated by the Brewers of Lon don, that the reduction recently made in the Malt - tax would .produce no alteration in the price of beer. Now he understood that in the country the price of beer had been reduced ; and he wished that he could have seen in their places any of the Honourable Members engaged in the London trade, because, if the intention was to keep up the price in the metropolis, he should feel it his duty to propose some measures which should prevent the late alteration in the malt tax from tending solely to the benefit of the brewer. The Right Hon. Member concluded by expressing a hope that Parliament might yet receive an as surance, though a tardy one, that the price would be lowered in London. Mr. MONCK thought that the licensing system called loudly for the interference and revision of ??armament . The existing high prices, by lessening the consumption of malt liquor, in- jured the farmer, the public, the revenue, and eventually even the brewer himself. The system of confining licenses to build ings arose out of a misinterpretation of the act, the 26th Geo. 11. —Before that act, a man received a license, and was at liberty to set up in any part of a parish that he pleased ; and the in tention of that act (which, in effect, confined licenses to parti cular houses) was to apply itself to the then existing licenses only, and not to such as might subsequently be granted.— The correct and judicious regulation would be to give a license to any man who brought certificates of his good character, and to allow that man to carry on his trade (with reference to place) entirely at his own discretion. In some places Magistrates had carried their arbitrary power so far as to allow no public houses to exist within their district. Such conduct was in tolerable : the King himself ought not to have the power of interdicting the use of beer to a whole parish. The Honour able Gentleman concluded by censuring the strait-laced mo rality, which, by forbidding public-houses, drove the people of England from their ancient, wholesome, good, manly beve rage, beer, to drink that nasty, meagre infusion of foreign herbs, tea. Mr. GRENFELL rose merely in order to state a fact which was communicated to him from a quarter of the highest re spectability. A considerable brewer in the vicinity of 111aiden head served seventy-one public houses, and out of those seven ty-one houses, thirty-five were free. The beer trade certainly, therefore, as regarded the county of Berks, could scarcely be suffering from any want of free houses. Mr. LOCKHART deprecated the idea of having too many public-houses, as they produced coarseness and ribaldry. Mr. H. G. BENNET said there would be no difficulty in setting free the sale of beer, if, in the first place, sufficient secu rity, wgre required ;. and, in the next place, due punishment were inflicted where punishment should be merited. Beer might then be sold - as brandy was sold. 8uf1,000,0001. was Mr. RICE presented a Petition from the Sheriff and Free holders of the county of Carmarthen, complaining of agricul tural distress, and praying for a repeal of the Salt Duty.— Ordered to lie on the table. Lord EBRINGTON presented five Petitions, complaining of agricultural distress, from Witheride, Axminster, Chadley, llalton Hamston, and another place. Laid on the table. LEATHER_ TAX. Mr. DENISON presented a Petition from various tanners and dealers in leather in the neighbourhood of the metropolis, complaining of the severe pressure of the leather tax, and pray ing for relief. The amount of this tax, 600,0001., he observed, was net more than the half of the burden it imposed on the toirfumers. The labouring classes paid a tax for the leather they used, equal to the tax on the finest leather. It was cal culated that they paid 2s. or 2s. lld. of duty on every pair of shoes. This tax operated as the worst kind of poll-tax, and chiefly pressed on the labouring classes, whilst it was not felt by property. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he had no objection to the presenting of the Petition, but he could not agree that this tax was oppressive. Mr. CALCRAFT wished to ask the Right Hon. Gentleman what tax it was he did think oppressive ?—(A laugh o—Each tax, as it came to be considered, was palliated and commended by the Right Hon. Gentleman. Being on his legs, he would ask the. Right Hon. Gentleman a question on a subject, respect ing which many were anxious to have some information. Two years from next May, £1 notes would not be allowed by law to be circulated by country bankers. Was it the intention of the Right Hon. Gentleman to propose any alteration of that law, either for the repealing of any part of it or the extension of the period ? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that in a very *oft time, probably next week, he should submit a proposition on the subject. The petition was laid on the table, and ordered to be printed. 'THEODORE HOOK, ESQ. Mr. G. BENNET ga*ve notice for to-morrow of a motion for the production of a certain Paper, in reference to the case of Mr. Hook. IRELAND. Sir J. NEWPORT gave notice for the Bth of May, of a motion relative to Grand Jury and Parochial Assessments in Ireland and (as was understood) some change of the law as to Landlord and Tenant. EXTENTS IN AID. Mr. LITTLETON presented a petition from the Bankers and Tradefs of the Counties of Stafford, Worcester, and War. wick, complaining of the operation of the system of Extents in Aid. The Hon. Member observed, that this Was a subject of pelt commercial importance, and he should therefore indulge in a few observations. He knew not by what fatality it had happened, but certainly the .three counties from whence the petition had arisen had been more subject than any other part of England to the process of which they complain. In order to give the House an adequate idea of the operation of an Ex tent in Aid, he would read to them an extract from the Report of the Committee which had sat in 1817 to consider the subject. It' was ftimast unnecessary for tutu to say who the parties were who were entitled to sue out this process. They were collectors of taxes, bankers for the remittance of taxes, farmers of post horses, and distributors of stamps. The practice Was for the parties complaining to make an affidavit id toe Court of Exche ' quer,- swearing that by the non-payment of the defendant he was the less able to pay his debts to the Crown. The writ then issued; a Jury was summoned to try the cause, and on the mere evidence of the plaintiff alone, without any notice to the defendant, a verdict was recovred. The execution which followed was of the severest kind. The books of the de- Tendant were carried off, and his person was liable to be arrested and thrown into gaol, from which he could not he liberated by a commission of bankruptcy, or the insolvent debtors' act. He would ask, could such a process be necessary for the security of the debt. The second paragraph of the Report to which he had alluded said that in no one instance had the revenue been bene fited by the extent, for the debts due to the crown had been always returned without the necessity of such a process. The persons who, sued out the greatest number of extents in aid were bankers for the remittance of taxes. The banker gave the collector of taxes a draft upon his house in town, and although that draft was invariably accepted and paid, yet it was upon that that the pretence of a debt to the crown was raised. If a bankruptcy followed on the part of the debtor, the consequence was most injurious. An extent in aid robbed the other creditors and consequently destroyed all confidence. No person who was a bond,debtor was safe, or could be considered safe by others.— The effect upon commerce in general was not less injurious. The country bankers had the power of suing out these extents and paying themselves by the process. It followed, therefore, that other persons in the same trade had not a fair competition. He was surprised that such a system had grown up in a coun try so remarkable for the circumspection which it displayed in drawing up its laws of debtor and creditor. The prominent feature of those laws was, that no man should demiuid satisfac tion of a debt without first giving his debtor notice, but that principle was violated in the practice of extents in aid. He was sure that after the statement which he had made the Chan cellor of the Exchequer would not defend the necessity of this process. If that Right Hon. Gentleman valued the good will of the counties from whence this petition proceeded, if he valued their loyalty, he would do well to permit no longer a system of rapine under the sanction of the crown. Mr. J. S M ITH expressed his accordance with the sentiments of the Petitioners. He would ask whether it was proper that any practice should exist„ which put the whole property of the country at the mercy of the Crown? He hoped the Right Honourable the Chancellor of the Exchequer would consider their case, and afford relief to those who suffered under the pre sent system. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said; that the subject should receive every attention on the part of Govern ment, though his Majesty's Ministers would feel reluctance in trenching upon those ancient , prerogatives of the Crown which the wisdom and policy of our ancestors had provided for the security of the revenue. Besides, the evils complained of were not without remedy, for it was competent for the Court of Exchequer to interfere when circumstances required it. Mr. W. SMITH contended that no man who had read the Report of the Committee could persuade himself that it was necessary for the security of the Crown that extents in aid should remain on their present footing. Before he had made his motion on that subject, the number of extents in aid had risen from eight or nine a year to 220. They had then fallen to almost nothing, but during the last year had again increased to about 40. 'Upon what ground, he asked, was the extent granted ? If the affidavit were not true it ought not to be granted ; but if it were true, it only proved that the individual was less able to pay his debts to the Crown. Sir J. BOUGHEY expressed his hope that the matter of the Petition would receive the most serious consideration of Par liament. Mr. M °NCR.' also supported the Petition, and protested against the very pernicious consequences attendant upon Ex tents in Aid. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL believed that the process had been very much abused, but he still thought that it was quite essential to the collection and receipt of the revenue.— IN'o particular abuses were pointed out in the petition, and if any such were ever established, he should prevent their future recurrence. Mr. HUME, from the inquiry which it was his duty to make, undertook to say that individuals who ought to have at tended to the collection of the revenue neglected it, and thus Extents in Aid were frequently sued out, and the power was after arbitrarily and unnecessarily excused. MT. IV. SMITH explained. Mr. P.MOORE observed, that the first opposition to Extents in Aid originated 'with the people of COentry, and if a little Aid were quite unnecessary. Mr. DENMAN thought that the system gate such encou ragement to abuse, that it ought to be no longer countenanced. It was extremely pernicious, and tended in no way whatever to the protection of the revenue. The petition was then ordered to be printed. Mr. HILL presented 3 petition on the same subject from the Ironmasters of the county of Salop.—lt was read, and ordered to be laid on the table. TREATMENT OF HENRY HUNT. The Marquis of TITCHFIELD presented a Petition froni the inhabitants of Lyme Regis, complaining of the treatment 1 of Mr. Hunt. The petitioners dwelt upon the severity prac tised upon him, and they designated him as the victim of Mi nisterial vengeance. He begged leave to say that, though he concurred in opinion with the petitioners, yet he was guided by very different reasons in the formation of that opinion from those assigned by the petitioners. They thought that the pro secution of Mr. Hunt was not only unnecessary, but cruel ; and he, on the contrary, conceived that his Majesty's Ministers simply discharged their duty in ordering thet proceeding. There was no doubt, however, upon his mind, but that Mr. Hunt was treated with unnecessary rigour, and if he remained in prison during the whole period of his sentence, it would, he thought, be much more severe than was originally intended by the Judges. He was satisfied, from the defence of the gaoler, that great severity had been practised towards Mr. Hunt, and therefore, though he had no doubt of his criminality, yet he thought that he had •already suffered a sufficiently severe im prisonment for his offences. Mr. %ST. WYNN did not mean to anticipate the discussion to-night, but he could not suffer a remark in that petition to pass unnoticed, namely, the observation that a motion tnade concerning the mitigation of the sentence upon Sir M. Lopez had been withdrawn, upon an understanding that 'Govern ment would interfere, and remit some portion of that sentence. He denied that any such concession had ever been made. Mr. G. BENNET said, that the motion was certainly withdrawn, but that it was with an implied understanding that the case should receive the consideration of Government. He knew this to be the case, because he was a party to the under. standing. . Mr. PEEL said, that he too was present on the occasion alluded to by the Right Hon. Gentleman, and the impression upon his mind was, that there had been no such compromise. The Noble Lord who was to 'have made that motion urged very peculiar reasons for the interference of Government ; among others, that the prosecution had been instituted at the desire of the House, and that the great age of Sir M. Lopez entitled him in some degree to its humane consideration ; but the motion was withdrawn without any understanding that )he mercy of the Crown would be extended to him. Sir J. MACKINTOSH observed, that it was quite true that no distinct assurance had been given, but he had no doubt of this ; that, in substance, such an assurance was given, and that all who were present at that debate were quite satisfied that it was the intention of Government to extend mercy in the case of Sir M. Lopez. The' HOn. Member seemed to say, that had the motion been pressed it might have been rejected ; but it was thought right by the Noble Lord to leave the whole grace of the proceeding - to the Crown. Mr. WYNN added, that he distinctly remembered that the motion was resisted simply upon the ground that it was an in terference with the prerogative of the Crown. On the motion that the Petition should be printed, Mr. BROUGHA NI rose, and begged leave to bear testi mony to the recollection of his Hon, Friend (Sir J. Mackin tosh). Allusion had been certainly made in the case of Sir M. Lopez, n ot merely to his advanced age, but to the hardship which he suffered, for the commission of a very common error, to call it no 'more. No distinct pledge had been given that mi tigation of his sentence would follow, but at the same time there was not a single Member present who left the House after that motion had been withelrawnewith the least vestige. of doubt on his mind that the object of it was ,wined. The Marquis of TITCHF 'ELI ) in explanation said, that he had a recollection of almost the very words used by the No ble Lord on' that occasion. The Noble Lord stated, that he could give no positive assurance as to any mitigation of the sen tence on Sir Al. Lopez ; but he undertook to say, that if the motion were withdrawn, the subject should be considered. The Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Wynn) was not then in the se crets of the Noble Marquis, and had ,therefore no peculiar means of knowledge on this subject.—(Laughter.) Mr. WYNN—The Noble Marquis seemed to think that his (Mr. Wynn's) memory had failed him, merely on account of the alteration of his position,—(Laughter)--but he still persist ed in asserting that no pledge was given. The Marquis of TITCHFIELD had merely said, that his opinion on the matter of fact was just as likely to be correct as that of the Right lion. Gentleman, since it was before his change that he had formed that opinion.—(Laughter.) Mr. WYNN knew not to what change the Noble Marquis alluded.—(Laughter.)—He was ready to defend his conduct whenever it was attacked ; and he only wished, that, instead of vague and general allusions to inconsistency, some distinct instance of change should be specified in order that it might be refuted.—(Hear.) Mr. DENMAN said, that those most 'closely connected with the subject under discussion, the two Noble Lords (the Marquis of Londonderry and Lord J. Russel) could most satisfactorily state the circumstances under which the motion was withdrawn. The Noble Marquis, he regretted to say, was absent ; but the other Noble Lord had just entered the House, and was then at the Bar. His evidence therefore in the case would be important. It was then ordered that the petition should be printed. Alderman WOOD presented a petition on a similar subject, from 2,500 inhabitants of Halifax. Ordered to lie on the table, and to be printed. Lord J. RUSSEL rose to address a few words to the House, on a subject that a few moments ago had undergone some dis cussion. He was unfortunately not present during that dis cussion ; but he understood that it referred to the motion he had had the honour of making respecting the liberation of Sir M. Lopez. All he could say was, that the object he had in view was furthered by that motion ; and that al though his Majesty's Ministers had not made use of specific words to state what they . intended to do, he had gone from the House with the conviction that they were willing to pay attention to the subject of it, and that the imprisonment of the person for whose liberation it had been made would be shortened. Mr. W. SMITH presented a petition from Norwich com plaining of the cruel and tyrannical treatment to which Mr. Hunt had been exposed. He thought that the prayer of the petitioners for the interference of the House, in order to pro cure his liberation, was highly deserving attention. The con duct of gaolers had been defended by the Magistrates, not only in Somersetshire, but even in Middlesex, as far as he recollect ed, in the case of 'the gaoler of Coldbath-fields prison. The House was bound to give the petition that consideration which, as the free expression of the sentiments of people at a distance from the county of Somerset, it merited. The petitio” was then read, laid on the table, and ordered to be printed. - Mr. W. BEAUMONT presented a similar petition from Rothbury, which was read, and ordered to lie on the table. Mr. BENNET presented a petition from Salisbury, in which the petitioners expressed their approbation of the admirable con duct of Mr. Hunt—(A laugh)—and prayed for his release— Read, ordered to lie on the table, and be printed. REMITTAL OF H. HUNT'S IMPRISONMENT. Sir F. BURDETT then rose to bring forward the motion of which he had formerly given notice. After the numerous peti tions which had been presented to the House on 'that subject, not only upon that evening but on former occasions ; after the various appeals which the people had Heade to'the House in favour of the object of that motion ; after the succinct but strong representations of many Hon. Members, and in particular of the Noble Lord who had brought forward on that evening the petition from the county of Nottingham, when that Noble Lord had so strikinglylaid before the House all the grounds on which the question rested ; and after the effect which that Noble Lord had produced; he confessed that he felt some anxiety when he rose to address the House on that subject. His anxiety arose 'not from any fears that the subject was one which would not excite the interest and the attention of the House, that the sub. ject of his motion could be regarded by any individual in the country with unconcern or apathy ;—no : the people were interested in the result of it, and they exhibited to the world the interest which they felt ; the House too was interested in it, and the people of England, and they looked to the result of that motion with attention. The liberation of that Gentleman, whose confinement and whose treatment in prison had been the subject matter of many discussions in that House, was regarded by every impartial man in the kingdom !met desirable, not only on account of the individual himself, but also on account of the eagerness which every man felt to re lieve his fellow men from oppression. When he regarded the punishment to which that gentleman had been subjected—when he recollected the offence for which he had been subjected to thi:t . punishment—when he considered the gieat extent of that pu nishment=--when he reflected how that punishment appeared more than adequate to the offences of which Mr. Hunt had been accused, much less found guilty—he was willing to confess that, prior to his coming on that evening to that House; he had . entertained hopes that his Majesty's Ministers would have spared him the trouble of bringing the subject forward, by promising . the exercise of that prerogative of the Crown, by which the re mainder of Mr. Hunt's imprisonment could be remitted ; a • proceeding which' in itself would be productive of so -much se tisfaction to the country, by being not only grateful to but just to the individual in question. He thought that the delay of that proceeding had tended to defeat the object of his Majesty's Ministers, for they could not but perceive that it con tributed to excite feelings of sympathy and commiseration r the sufferer, while it cast upon them the odium of neglecting and refusing to extend to him any relief. Sympathy and com miseration could not fail to be excited in a most powerful de gree ; for where was the man who-could feel that the punish ment to which Mr. Hunt had been subjected was adequate. proportional, or commensurate, to the offence of which he ima been declared guilty ? He had therefore hoped that his Ma jesty's Ministers would have anticipated the object of his mo tion ; they had not dime So ; he did not, however, despair cif • being able to induce the House to agree with him in otreritio its mediation. He knew from personal experience, that an ap plication to the Right Hon. Secretary for the Home Depart ment was attended with beneficial results; and he could net help feeling, however much Ministerial adherence and Parlia mentary tactics might require a lineof conduct from each of his Majesty's Ministers, that he ought-not to despair of obtaining the assistance of that Right Hon. Gentleman inforwardingehe.• object of his motion. That Right Hon. Gentleman, when applied to on behalf of some persons who had been convicted of offences, not indeed of great enormity, in whose favour there had been stated several alleviating circumstances, as well as their previous character, and the general belief- among their neighbours that they had not been guilty of those offences. had granted not only immediate attention to the application, but had also exerted himself to procure them relief. Of • the conduct of that Right Honourable Gentleman he could 'net . but express his high esteem, not out of compliment to him, but from conviction of the regularity and punctuality in which the business of his office was carried on, as well as of the. in-• tegrity arid high honour of the Right Honourable Gentleman himself. T,Jnder those circumstances, he hoped that the Right Hon. Gentleman would grant his powerful assistance to .his motion. He should call the attention of the House to the sub ject on several points. First, as to the charge of which Mr. Hunt had been found guilty ; secondly, as to the punishment to which he had been subjected. Under both these heads, he hoped to shew to the House sufficient grounds to induce it to interfere. There was a third claim on behalf of Mr. Hunt, one which could not but be regarded as of great weight in the, con sideration of his case ; vie. that he had brought to light one of the most important facts in the regulations of the gaols of this country which had ever been laid before the country. As to the first proposition, what had been the charge against Mr. Hunt, he wished the House to recollect what that charge really was. He had been indicted on a variety of charges, or as they were called counts, containing a regular gradation f offences. Of the highest in the scale the Jury pronounced him not guilty; on the middle class of charges a verdict of acquittal had been pronounced, and the Jury, after five hours' deliberation, de clared him guilty of a small part—of a half of the smallest of fence in the scale of counts. One of the prosecuting lawyers then had declared that the Verdict should be considered as em bracing the extent of that count, .and upon that the . minimum of the counts had Mr. Hunt been found guilty. Thus upon a list of counts, each containing a variation of • the nature of the offence, the lowest was chosen, and upon that, had Mr. Hunt been pronounced guilty: "You know, Sir, that as this House frequently passes Acts for the purposes of preventing fishing in certain rivers : "that is, for the prevention of the use of nets calculated to take all the fish, the small fry as well as the large ones ; so the ,lawyers exert themselves, and frame legal meshes to catch delinquents even of the smallest species." In one of those legal meshes the lawyers had con trived to catch Mr. Hunt, and on his being caught; he had been subjected to a punishmentof two and a half years impri sonment. If he had been found guilty on one of the greater counts, to what punishment would he have been Subjected ? The offence of which he - bad been.,declared guilty had by Mr. Jus tice Blackstone been placed among the minora of crimes, and the Jury had pronounced his guilt to be of the smallest and lightest description of the 'counts of the indictMent—of the slightest crime--and yet he bad'for that offence , been sentenced to two years and a half imprisonment. Of that punishment, if it could not be said to be too severe, it could at least be de clared that it was fully sufficient to answer all the ends of jus tice. Mr. Hunt had been declared guilty of the Tightest of fence, and even it could not be 'said, according to the adage among the old lawyers, (taus nose facie ream, red - nicer rea, that, he was in reality guilty. If guilt could be associated with the attendance upon that meeting, for what reasons had not the magistrates, instead of allowing the meeting to assemble; prevented it altogether. Notwithstanding all that had been said on that subject, still he was at a loss to discover of what offence Mr. Hunt could be said to be guilty, and of that offence meriting a punishment of two years and a half im prisonment. Among the old constitutional lawyers the depri vation of personal liberty was considered a great punishment. If Mr. Hunt had been found guilty of one of the greater counts to what punishment could he have been subjecte d which would 'be proved equal to 'his offence, if two years and a half imprisonment was regarded only as adequate to the smallest; count ?. Mr. Hunt would require to live to the age of Methu salem in order to satisfy the • offended laws of England, nor would his living for that period be sufficient, unless Dr. Colston continued to exist for the same period. Mr. Hunt, on hearing . the court pronounce the sentence had, with great presence cf mind, asked, whether it was to be solitary imprisonment or not? The court had replied, that it was not. He reached the prison, when he was shewn Into a cold flagged apartment, in which were two truckle beds, and two of the prisoners had been ap pointed his attendants, one of whom, a half-witted miscreant. had been imprisoned for attempting to murder his wife. Mr. Hunt procured the removal of those wretches from him. ,How ever much it might be said that the magistrates were desirotis of affording accommodation to Mt. Hunt, they could not deny that the severities of the punishment to which he had been 'sett tenced had been highly augmented. He (Sir F. Burdett) had himself seen the apartment ; it was where the sun never shone for 5 months of the year, and when its beams were seen, they were reflected from a large white wall, to the great injury of the sight. That Mr. Hunt's eyes should for life be mate rially injure, he should not be in the least surprised to find. Mr. Hunt had called the attention of Sir J. Acland to the state of the place in which he had been confined, when Sir J. Acland had ordered that it should be made commodious, by having a floor placed over the flagging, and the Windows properly adjust ed. At first Mr. Hunt was allowed.to take fresh air in a small yard, of eight yards square ; and afterwards, by way of shew mg him an indulgence, he had been alloWed to go into a larger one ; but the Rev. Dr. Colston had interfered, and prevented the latter indulgence. Sir C. Bamfylde,' the Sheriff of Somer setshire, had been willing to give accommodation to Mr. Hunt; but no sooner had he ceased to be Sheriff, than the punish ment of Mr. Hunt became more grievous, and Mr. Hunt became exposed to all the severities which the gaoler and the Magistrates could inflict. Mr. Hunt had then inquired into, and detected, the gross mismanageMent which prevailed in the gaol ; and by his courage, his energy, and his determination, he had been successful in bringing to light a system of crueltiel which' was disgraceful to any place of confinement in the world. The gaoler had, by his hypocrisy and deceit and unaccountable cunning, procured the favour of the Magistrates ' • he had been considered by them as a friend, and as such had usually dined with them at table as their equal, and had been warmly defended by his friends the' Magistrates. An in vestigation had taken place, and within three days after its commencement, a compromise had been offered by the gaoler and by the Magistrates, but Mr. Hunt had refused to enter.— The gaoler had been proved unfit for his situation, and as such had been dismissed. In order to relieve himself from the seve rities to which he had been subjected by that gaoler, Mr. Hunt had made application to the Court of King's Bench ; the appli cation had been attended with costs. Soon after the dismissal of the gaoler, the Sub-Sheriff; who was in league with the associa. tion of friends, served Mr. Hunt with an attachment for th amount of them, 501. That was not all. Mr. Hunt, who had, without intending any injury to the revenue, discovered, recom mended, and e rnade use of, and sold roasted rye, as the means