The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1818-03-11 00:00:00

, only
matters of account were to be adjusted, that the
sulsject could be properly investigated.
Mr. cimpsay hard no wish, at this moment, to
press the matter nu the attention of the House:
but he Must my that he never, in the coarse of his
life, saw so false a 'statement as that of Alt. Beau-
ninon's; and for the atti.fartion of the public, es
well. es fur the public safety, he wished for au in-
tinily into the statements of the Petitions.
The' further discussion on the Petition Was them
adjourned until to-morrow.

BANK AFFAIRS.
Mr. GICIIFELL. iu the abortive of his. Non. and
Learned Friend (Sir J. Mackintosh), postponed his
motion relative to the expense of Bank prosecu-
tions until this day week. Ile also gave notice, that
on the 15th April he would move for returns of the
amount of issues from the Blank of Ireland. simi-
lar to those ordered from the littlik of England. It
was his inteutiou to frame the motion, so es to have,
the accounts made out iu the clearest and most iu-'
telligible manner.
REFORM IN PARLIAMENT.
Lord Foh.sseona presented a Petition from •
person stained %V. l'aul Rogers, who represented
himself so a respectable tradesman residing in the
parish of St. Luke's, Chelsea, and who had suffer-
ed a variety of iipories, into which he now sought
an inquiry, on reef eeeee t of his principles iu favour of
Parliamentary lteforan.—This Petition was laid on
the table.
The Noble Lord postponed the second reading
of tile Gaul Chaplains Bill until Tuestiy;the 14th
of April. .
Sir FRANCIS BURDETT rose to present a Piitition
from some tolialsitants of %Varrieigton, praying for •
Reform is Parliament, mi the principles of annual
Parliaments and universal suffrage. The Attorney-
Generul had List slight said, that such principles in-
volved nothing less than a conspinit7 to overthrow
the State. Now the precedent of ancient times went
to .hew the existence of annual Parliaments. Lists
or Nlembers were then published, sometimes more
than twice a year; and when Parliaments were
called, it was always understood that each sum-
moning was a new election to Parliament.—
From these circumstances it might be inferred, that
Parliameuts were originally annual—and, when this
doctrine could he supported by argument and rea-
soning, thaw who advocated it ought not to be met
by assertion and abuse. Now, with respect to uni.
versal suffrage, it was more difficult to prove that
it had existed than that annual l'arliaments had
formerly prevailed i yet, from • variety of ancient
decumenb. it might be coutended, successfully.
that universal suffrage was once the practice of this
country. If they looked to the old coronation oath,
they would find strong remain' to believe, that the
system of universal suffrage anciently prevailed.—
By it the King swore to defend the Taws--/egos qua,
VULCITS elegii—and it was not possible to translate
reigns as meaning any particularly.privileged
class of people. Again. Parliament was spoken of
as consisting of Renames. lawn texentes. et COM.
MUSICS TOTIUS 11161011, which expression had a most
extensive application. When he found words like
these in ancient instruineuto, he thought they had a
right to suppose that, at one period, universal suf-
frage was perfectly recognised. He should pursue
the subjeLt no further—and he wily took this op-
poitunity *f objecting to that course. now so much
adopted, of answering Petitions and Petitioners,
not by argunsent but by obloquy.
The Petition was then laid on the table, and or-
dered to be primed.
Mr. Lirrurrou presented a Petition from the
Twitters end Corriere of the Town of Waiver-
' !tampion praying for a repeal of the Leather
Tu.—Laid on the table.

POOR'S LA WS.
Mr. STURGIS BOURNS twought up the Report
of the Committee on the Poor's Laws, which was
ordered to lie 011 the table. The lion. Gentleman
then ga►e notice that he would, on Thursday stein,
mo►e for lea►e to bring in a Bill to emend the
said Laws.

STATE PRISON ERS.

Mr. BILOUGHAN;;seto prawttt• Petition from
James Rubinson, weaver, of Glasgow, complain.
ing of the hardshipt he had suffered during what
he celled '• the late enhappy measures of Govern-
ment." This poor man told his tale in u very
simple inaisner—and he begged to call the particu-
lar attention of the Horne to it. Many l'etitioris
had been presented on similar grounds, sod several
of them it appeared had originated with persons
osiwo►thy of credit, therefore it had become
fn.hios►able to treat them all as if Oily had no foun-
dation iu fact. Ile cusiceived this to be a ve►y
unjust proceeding. He could hot, of his own
knowledge, or from local information, speak to the
truth of the assertions contained in the present Petta•
boos, but, as a Alettilier of Parliament, he felt him-
self bound to present to the Hogue any Petition
merited its respectful terms. The Petitiouer's coon.
plaint was of a very sevious nature—and, if wholly
Iletitious and unfounded, so far from compassion
beingestended tuition, he deserved to be visits il by
the severest cens'ure of that House. But, even if his
distress hail induced him tOgive a tittle additional
colour to tine facte, should the fundamental paints
prove to Iss• true, he coaceived that he had a right to
'dettiattil an investigation. He stated that in the
month of Februrry, 1817. twill; to the ektreole.
dirtresses of the testes, he and hum, others were
obliged to apply to the Sheriff of the county for
parish relief. This nseo•esrarily brought many poor
prairie together, so devise plans fir their relief—
and one evening, when nineteen of them were as-
sembled) they wets interrupted by a person of the
name of Salmon, an individual, also, lie (lir.
11-migliam) believed, had been mentioned by fin
Noble Frieod the hl.u►her for Lanarkshire, On a
farmer occasion. Ile nod his tonatehle proceeded
to search the limn* far papers, lint not finding any
they took all the parries to prison. Petitioner wad
examined fair orientl times before the Sheriff
cal and S• 11 • . Witten he declared that he knew of
no improeer useetii►g, the Fs+e•sl told him lie would
l*liirsigt.d, if lie dcvsirJ the fact. but he said that

*ions of the penalise who _ been arrested with
his—who formed part 'of tire meeting. With re-
spell to the conduct of the Magistrote, it was rant
whin the Petitioner had represented. lie would
boldly affirm that—for he knew all the Magistrates
in the district. end there never were a more re-
spectable or V.uniane set of men.—(hear, hear)
Sir F. Durn:re hoped the House would not
take the assertions of the lion. Member. though lie
had given them so great ass extent. or absolute
proof.—(Hear, hear.)—The Ilan. Member dishes
[leved the allegations in the Petition. out only be-
cause be was acquainted with the circumstance's of
the case, but. 'that was a most extraordivary rea-
son, because lie knew all the Magistrates. Surely
sods a statement as that. did nut afford any ground
for withholding inquiry.
Mr. BROUGHAM asked. what did the argument
of the Hots. Member unionist to ? lie knew w-
ilting of the truth or falsehood of the present Peti-
tion. but, it seemed, he was acqiiainted with the
groundlessness of Petitions that h.:d been drawn up
by other persons, with whom the present Petitioner
was wholly unacquainted. The Hon. Member
would not listen to this Petition, because it came
from the saute quarter from which others had pro-
ceedesi. Certainly it was from a mass—a man of
Glasgow—e roan who complained of ill treatment—
end that was the whole similarity. Now, though
some Petitioners might have acted improperly. the
Petitions of all who complained of ill treatment were
not therefore to be looked upon as fabulous. The
Hou. Member said the meeting was for a very diffe-
rent purpose from that preteuiled—and this state-
ment he founded on the confessions of certain persons
who had been taken, But there was another sort
of evidence. which, be *as sorry to say, was falling
into discredit in that Rouge. namely, the evidence
of while's.s before a Jury. Why was not the man
brought to trial ? The Hon. Member said there
was abundance of evidence in the confessions of
the persons taken with him, and added to that, Mr.
Salmon might have given his testimony. There
was then abundant evidence to convict him if he
had been guilty of any crime—arid why was it nut
put to the test ? Had not this mats a right to say,
" You knew you could prove nothing against one
--end therefore you abstaiiied from bringing we
to trial." Surely this was not a fair. • humane, or
a decent Way of treutiog ass accused person.
Mr. FINLAY explairied. He could speak ems-
fidently to two points in the Petition—first, that
the Petitioner war not innocent, its he had repre-
sented himself to be—and next, that the Magi-
strates had not acted improperly.
Mr. BROUGHAM presented a Petition of a similar
nature' from John Keith, weaver, of Glasgow,
one of the persons arrested with the former Pe-
titioner.
Mr. BROUGHAM presented a 'Petition from Wil-
liam Edgar, of Glasgow, schoolmaster, who had
beet, arrested on the same occasion, in which he
complained that though wholly innocent, be was
shagged about like a felon, and three tinges tried
for the same alleged offence. That, as one of the
victims of ministerial vengeance, lie was.shut up
in a prison for twenty weeks, mid called before a
judicial tribunal, as often as the caprice of his pro-
secutors rendered it necessary. lie was, however,
acquitted, and covered his prosecutors with great
disgrace and confusion. He now prated the House
fur redress.
Mr. Boswait. said, those persons were trot ars
rested under the Suseiension Act,—and, therefore.
if the Bill of ludeinnity passed, its prdvisions
would not screen them front whom they alleged
they had suffered wrong. The Petitioners would
have redress at common law, but. he believed,
if they went into a Court of Justice, they would
not recover the smallest %

damages.
Mr. BROUGHAM observed, he had, on a farmer
occasion, stated his opinion, that the Members of
that House were by no means acquainted with the
provisions of the Indemnity Bill—and the speech
of the Hon. Gentleman was a complete illustration
of the troth of his statement. It was perfectly self-
evident, that the Hutt. Gentleman knew no more
of the contents of the Bill, for which he voted last
'tight, then the child that was not born.—(A
lattgh.l—He said it only ionleinnified persons for
acts cutntwittrd uuder the Suspension Bill—but the
fact was, it node ttttt died all persons, for acts done,
in arresting snit imprisoning his Majesty's sub-
jects, from the q6tio of Janurry last. If the Hon.
Gentleman's vote, on the second reading, depend-
ed on the justice of his supposition, that the
lu-
deotnity Bill only covered acts dune under the
suspension of the [llamas Corpus Act—if he would
vote again,t it, provided his (Mr. Brougham',)
statement was accurate—then he might safely
reckon on his support.
Mr. Isoswn.t. would not place his vote on any
such agreement. Ile co etsiotly thought the Indem-
nity 801 l only extended to things done under the
Suspension Act. But when ha recollected the be-

On net tele, ,10It he was cont. Ptficia rift ell wil.isii Scot Lana derived from the
ul e
gaol, where he t led fur dye mouthmeasures promptmeasures taken at the time wised the state
seised with i aim , and his physician de. *of affeirs wore a very threatening aspect, he shou:d
that, if he tesuat in prisms, he certai illy be goose ram plc tely to blame, if lie were not to extend
4,. His liberation was, however. refilsrd— to those Alagistrates, whose c loot w.. 4 so praise-
.s (Lays after, the physician drew up another I worthy. every possilile protection. lle did not
certificate, still more decisive. Petitioner was then before know the Bill extended to them—but he was
told that if he could procure bail to the amount of extremely glad to Lind that it did.
SOL he would be set at liberty. This some chari- Mr. BROUGHAM presential a Petition from a most
table Iversen enabled him to do, and he was Idle- respectable body of Merchants of the town of Li.
rated. His !liminess" being ruiord, and himself in verpool, expre.siog the strong feeling of indigos.
the deepest distress, he applied to a benefit society thou with which they viewed the intraluction of •
to which he belonged for relief. But the Justice Bill into Parliament. for the purpose of indeinni-
berme whom he went 'for that purpose objected to rb hug Ministers for their conduct last year. By
granting him any—observing, that, as the Petitioner their directions 30 persons had heen arrested and
was a state prisoner. he 'Could not be a good mein- placedin solitary confinement. They were after.
her of the society, um% Therefore, aid was refused. wards liberated without any trial, by the mere pro. ;
He (Mr. Brougham) feirril, that similar abuses of "cess au Secretary of State. The Petitioners pray. 1
authority had been committed by many Magistrates ed that the (lilt might be thrown out.
in their zeal to prove themselves active aupporters General Gascotorrx said, the Petition Was sign.'
of Government. Under all these circumstances, ed by very few persona, cowaileiing the extent or
ruined in his health, and deprived of his butiness, population of Liverpool. The signetures were,'
he had recourse to that House for redress. and laid perhaps (fur he had not seen them), those of respect.
this statement of his sufferings before it. able wen. But he believed the great body of floe.
Mr. Fitt Lair said, he had, od former occasions,; itiliaktaitts of Liverpool did not coincide in the seas-
offered has sentiments ass similar petitions. but he' timeline contained in the Petition.
did not intend to dwell on that winch was now be. Mr. Bitten said. the Petition was signed in •
fore the House ; but this he would say. that the very great hurry ; but the signatures compriied time
allegation of his innocence, which the Petitioner so • assumes of the promivii individuals comiected with
much ratted on. was wholly unfounded. The pre- the mercantile interest in Liverpool.
tended object Grille meeting was, he admitted, to These several Petit were read, and ordered to
devise some meaus of procuring relief—but the real lie on the table—and those relative to the State Pri-
one was of a very different nature. This statement tamers to be printed.
he founded on the best of all evidence, the codes. SALT DUTIES.
had

Mr. CALCRAFT soul, lie would not have to trou-
ble the Hinowr as he hail intended, with
any details
on the subject of the Salt Ditties. lie was extremely
hippy to find, since he came down to the House,
that a Comuottee on the Laws reining; to the Salt
Duties, fur which he meant to move. would be
con-
ceded without opposition.—(lleor, hear.) —I litisi7
haul a communicritiois with the Right Ken. tieutle-
num opposite (Mr. Vatisittart), lie Agreed that
Committee ore'. sl Id lie appointed, and he gave
him a list of incest respectable pet• 'there
were supine of those persons whom he would not
probably, himself. have mimed ou Ilse Coe ttttt
but still lie was by no weasel dissatisfied. 'flue
Hon. Member then moved—
" That a Committee be appointed to take into considera-
tion the Laws relating to the Salt Duties, soft the asteuts or
remell)isis she inconveniences arising therefrom."
Mr. CuRWEN, io seconding the motion, congers.
tulated the House tot the course adopted by the
Right Hon. Gentleman. He believed that the
most material benefit would be derived from the
labours of the Committee. both with respect to the
revenue and to the public morals. A revision of
the Salt Duty Laws *as the greatest boon that
could be bestowed on the people. He believed he
would •he able to p.o.e, that, between unit
3,000,000/. a year might be saved by a mitigation
or cow ttttt tattoo of the duties.
Mr. EGERTON was extremely glad thilt a C -
mitte had been granted to inquire into this subject.
The greatest benefit would be produced by it. 'Elite
county which he had the honour to represent
(Cheshire) suffered much front the existing system.
The mischief was great, in eu agricultural point or
view, but it was still greater, as tar as the rola
of the country were concerned—which were mate-
rially injured, in consequence of the temptation to
smuggling, induced by those high duties.
Mr. DAVENPORT was very happy that some re-
lief was about to be afforded from one of the most
oppressive taxes ever imposed on the country.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER would
not, after the manlier ice winch the motion was
brought forward, detain the House by many re-
marks. The subject, in every I • tof view, was
worthy of the most serious consideration S he hoped
those who would be appointed to inveetigide it.
would recollect, that those duties affirded a very
large revenue—mid, if they were withdrawn, it
would he necessary to adopt some other mode of
raising a sum equivalent to that given tip.
Mr. CA LCRAFT said, he could not be so indis-
creet as to interfere with duties that produced
1,500,0001. per annum. without proposing some-
thing that would balance it. He felt the severity
or the tax—but, in the present state of the cowl-
tty, that if it were removed, some substitute must
be found for it.
'Else Committee was then tippointed—lnd the
Petitions presented on the subject of Salt
Unties—the Report of the Committee of 1801,
and of the Rock Salt Committee of last year—
were ordered to be referred thereto.
ELECTION LAWS.
The Hon. J. F. CAMPBELL. after briefly nd.
vetting to the difficulties which certain freeholders
encountered, when they proceeded to vote fur
Members of Parliament. in consequence of errors
made in the entry of their laud-tax assessments,
moved. " fur lessee to bring in a Bull to repeal so
Much of the Election Laws as relates to land-tax
assessments."
Mr. 13iNeep cenceived that some alteration was
desirable. Bad, however. as was the present sys-
tem, it was better than isune—and he was glad' to
find that it was not to be silmoduised until a better
substitute was formed.
Leave was given to bring in the fill.
INDEMNITY BILL.

The A?TORNeY•UENEnAv. To; to move the
Order of the Dly for the second reading of the lie-
demnite Bill.
. Mr. LAM ITON observed, that there were, on the
paper, two orders. before .that now moved. which,
he supposed, ought to take precedence of it.
The SPEAKER said, he believed the understand-
ing of 'the House was, that no one order had Omer..
deuce of another. The individual who first caught
his eye, wits, he believed, entitled to proceed. But
the House would decide whether the lion. irinlier
was misled. as to his notion of precedence, or
whether he (the Speaker) misconceived the usual
Course of practice.
Mr. LAIIBTOX said. the order would take up but
little time, and might be disposed of at once.
Lord C AST ;ARE A UK observed, as the order now
moved was the most iinpurtnit, and as there was
no precedence with respect to Orders of the Day.
the IllonourableGentleitimi.wmild feel the propriety
of suffering the Indemnity Bill to proceed, and not
put it off till a lute hone in the ev • g.
Sir W.'llu Ram:lug insisted on the neeessitr of de.
lay. The Bill now before titem indemnified -Maw,
trates and others for havilig searched houses foe antis

—fur ivpisg seitesl the papers of individuals—iiii
fur having arrested sold detained persoiss coucer.ped
in tumultuous assembliss. Ilere there were th.v4
new heeds of inquis v sl..closed to this House, for the
first tissue, by the BM. It woe, tilers fo;.e, but rt„;Ppt
that some opportisity eantl,l be given to ex suespe
into them, sod i4ll illYtitig,itt the eirt•Usnst sor es that
occurred relative to the sletessiism of perSONS alit)
were taken in tisiuultuoiss Hbsemblies, &c. The
Susipensi 0000 Bill did not relate to any ouch pert so. ;
it did no snore than enable Isis Slaijesty's Govern-
scent to arrest persons snepected of 'cesium or I f
treasonable 'ffictiCes. Not one of three Seers t
Committees had the least opportunity of inquiring
into the circumstances under which arms were seit-
ed, or papers token, or pers:oies arrested, fur being
:hood in unlawful .assest4iftes. And yet tins Bill,
taking the flouts. by 'surprise, weld to grant ass in-
demnity to the indieitleols, Magistrates, or others,
who hail committed those nets. An account had
been prodeced this Session of persists. arrested
on suspicion of treason, or for treasonable
prae-
t►ces—but no statement had beets furnished of
those who were taken up for bring present at
tumultuous assemblies—or in whos•e bowies arms
were taken, or papers seized. He slid nut means
to sae, that grounds might not have existed
for committing those before they agreed
to indemnify those who 11411 perpetrated them.
time should be given to investigate the subject.
They were now its the tacistitiiissisd 5w uction'could
be brought by any ',Arty !sgaisust a Alagistrate or
other 'person, fir seizing ttrill!., Ake. with any degree
of effect. Until next term.
Lord CASTLEREAGH 1,441, what had fallen from
•the Hots. Baronet would bee good matter of sir-
gittnent its the Cosustutter—hut slid isot operate
against the second t ceding of the Bill.
Mr. TIERNEY Observed, thin the question had
notltiog to do with the second reading, or the
Speaker's leaving the Chair—it went inertly to
title. whether they would stop the progress of the
Bill. in order to give tune for inquiry ? If the No-
ble Lord woold take the sec I residing tiow, mist
post off' the Co tttttt ittrr, well mid good, that would
answer every purpose. But his view evidently was,,
to proceed with the Bab without enlisting any
information at all. The Noble Iron' recollected
his former success, us well he mtglit. amp
con-
ceived that nu man ought to snake any inquiry ou
the subject. The statement made by the lion.
Baronet was unanswerable, soil. was unanswered.
Here were three new beads of bidet tttt ity disclosed,
un which no information whatever hail beets given
--and they ought not to be 'parsed over without ior
yeasigatioes.
Sir C. MeNCIIC said, 'searching .hotioes for arms.
sod taking thesis away, was nu light matter. Mitch
discussion hail waken place in that House on the
subject of ol low Mg such a power to be exercised
in Ireland. Evesy mats knew, that, according lii
the constitution of the country, au individual
might not only keep *hat arms he pleased is.
Isis dwelling. for the protection of. himself earl
(musk—but, if he did not keep arms, lie ICI*
considered as deficient its his duty to his cows-
try, Isis Sovereign, and Isis family. At what time
was it the search for arms took place? In trouble-
some buses. Amid at what proud hail a Mats a
better right to ret:toi arms Ist his Is se' than iss
troublesome time*? Were they to suppose, con-
trary to every constitutional presumption, that,
because a macs had arias in his possession he meant
to do what was contrary to Isis duty? He was
alionished when heloaral over the Bill, and found
it iisdes tt t ified Persone se:sidled liar Hod took
away twins. Whets a 8111 was pr-temled to Ise
bwined on the Report of is Secret Committee, and
matter was isitrodueed into it, never thought of by
that Committee, lie conceived that time fur inquiry'
ought to be conceded. If this were r-fused, it was
no matter how quickly they sent through the other
stages of the Bill —for it was a mere mockery, and
the sooner they got rid of it the better.
Mr. BATHURST tititi, the observations of the
Hon. Baronet (Sir W. Burroughs) slid not apply
to the second reading of the Bill. They belossgell
.properly to the C 'tier, where he 'night move
fair the omission of those chsuses which he conceived
not to be borne oil by the Report of the Secret
Committee. •

On the q►►e•tion that this Bill be now read a
second tinn•—

Mr. GRENFIEI.I. mid, he had no intention or de-
toi JJ IJ kg the House lout oil like prewitit twee-. , hot
he could not let the motion pass with a silent vote.
He was one of those who, in the last Sessiott
Pairfitment, voted twice for the suNsesistots of the
Hubei. Cot pus Act—and lie did so in consequence
of the confidence sod reliance lie placed on the
Report' of the Secret Committee, 'ma JJ I 1111 l usly
agreed to by the Members of that Committee,
and to which he saw appended the names of
H Noble Lord, the Member fur Yorkshire (Lira
Khoo) who usually sat on that side or the
House—of the line Mr. Ponsoulty—und of oilier
Gentlemen, whom he considered great c
autheiitter. Now, although so far as
the disclosure of-facts 113 a been mad:, they were
not exactly of lb tt character cod suagiiiiiitle which
he imagined, from the Report, that they would
hove been—ikevertheleso, recollecting the temper
of the public mind, in the anetrooolis, in the
mom k of Decemlo r, 1816 —recnileeting the
roomier in which that Home, iu the mouth of
January, 1817, was assailed by petitions, some
of them a compound of folly soil mischief.,
while others seemed to aim et nothing shot
of insurrection kind revolutioa—tit a period too ei
-general distress, which bore hard on the I..wL:
classes of the community, on their an fat Niel,
cud labourers—recollectiog 01l thtoCciicum,tnuct s.
he did not regret the vote hr gaire nu the Sus-
pension Act in the lost Session or lratliawrut.—
lle
owed it to himself and his constituents to tm:,-
port the measure. lie did dose last aright, he unui:t
to-night, mid in every future stage.
Lord LAStal.t.Pg MSe to advert to a statement
contained in a Petition presentekl to this Unice
trout A person of the name of Riclond Lee. it
stated very stroitgly the hardships the Petitioner ei -
dured while a prisontr last year in You k Coady,
such as being obliged to dents *way with his es
hoods the blood of another prisoner, of the Moue e;
Riley. who hod committed suicide in the s..kite i•. It.
To .11 this he hail a strong contradiction in the stik-
davit of moot f!er prison, of flu" a biller tir C.kiter,
imptironed in the cell w ills I: e. Mr. ti enr t -
iititteJ himself initocent of t try tie' •g t.'

•
would rsievOliat this dioltiesioo'be edjeitned futil ienseen
tu.morrew, aiming.—/Hew.) ma"' 101
Mr. WM. SMITH agreed, that the limcsusibus He *Ns $e
ought to he adjourned. He differed fete tato aired. th,
from his Hon. Frieuill who had introduced this would die.
Petition. and was 'terry that he had not concluded and, IS d.
his motion by calling for a Committee of Inquiry. certificate,
It was only us such a Committee, where so massy told that