The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1824-04-07 00:00:00

IRISH HOARD OF WORKS.

Tteir Lordships went into a Committee un the Irish Dowd of
Work, Hilt, which was reported without amendments—A4Aurned.
FIOUSE OF COMMONS. TuEsDAY, Aram G.

The Sp:Deka took the Chair at four o'clock.
THLAI'RE AT CHELTENHAM.
Lord 0. S )M) prtmentetl a petition from a person of the
name of Walker, against the Bill now before the house fur the
erection of a Theatre at Cheltenham—Laid on the table.
SLAVE TILIDE.
Petitions against Negro Slavery were presented, by Mr. Legit
Keck. from Letterset:l%h in Leicestershire; by Mr. flontyruod,
from Tunbridge; by Mr. Halm, from %VeAt Uwe, and Callan, in
; by Lord A. Hamilton, trout 1.7,01111 tat the initabitanisof
Otago'', and from New Lanark; by Mr. Robert Smith, front
Penny Stratford ; by Lord William Lie:Mock, front Mansfield I and
by Mr. Buttermwth, from St. Leonard's, Shoreditch.—All of
which were ordered to lie on the table.
RECOVERY OF S3IALL DEBTS.
Sir W. LEMON presented a petition Iran Falmouth, in favour
of the Bill tbr the Recovery of Small tiebts.
Sir R I I/LEI' COLBORNE presemesi • similar petition from
ny.—Ordereal to lie oat the table.
TEST ACT.

Mr. DAWSON prerienttrd a petition from against the
repeal of the Test Ate. 7'he Iles. Member said, that, in con-
magnetite of the statements that had recently been made, as to the
IMMIX? is whichtietitions to that lionise had beer gut up, he
thought it but ri to observe, that the whole of the signatures to
the petition whin he then held in his baud met in the hand-
writing of one person. (Lmgliter.)
Some canrersation then took place between the Speaker and Mr.
Dawson. after which he bee/ed panniesion to withdraw it, and it
wee witlmlisun accositinglie.
EXLISE LICENCLS.
Mr. HONEYWOOI) presented a pcn two hem the i nnh older&
of tiravostod, against the Niche Licences.—Laid on the table.
DUTY ON SALT.

Mr. CIIRWEN moved for an account of the wet that was
Incurred in the collection of the Duty on Salt_oedemi.
T 1 I'HE COMPOSITH)N HILL.
Sir J. NEWPORT presented a petition from a parish in the
county of Meath, and Ire petitions trots, as many parishes in the
county of Tipperary, against the Tithe Composition 11111....4)edeeed

up
tx
iu
II
to

at
Iga
M
de

county of 11 ry, agatabt the Tithe uompusmosi 41111.---usamo Impose& ne woma Iv= mat smuggunA ana timer torracaana w any tinge nc. ?mammal' wawa se!, atm ap me eyes at ate no eon.necapn.
_in an criminal eases but. loony, counsel were by misty to the reign of Queen Anne, the pruior.er could not call wit- al
to lie ou the table. these laws were treated as misdemeanors, and made punishable as world, and would wipe away the guilt of his murder ; and that law allowed. he lion. and Learned Gentleman had referred to incises in his defence, nor have those sworn who appeared. That
COMBINATION LAWS. such- by that ill-tinted and indecent address he should on the credit of that branch of the administration of justice, the most remote I course of proceeding was vindicated from motives of tinder-
_snit
Mr. STANLEY presented a petition from the Journeymen The CllANcimunt of the EXCHEQUER said, that fines en orator and a man of talent ? Upon this ground it was moat de- from the law relating to trials tor felony, while he had judiciously nets and humanity to the prisoner. Wear, hear, bear). The In
Weaver eat Bolton, in Lancashire, against any alteration in the were certainly imposed, and it these tine. were nit paid. either sirable the practice shoal be done away. of prisoners defending overlooked the law in its neighbourhood. that relating to trials for authorities alluded to did not bear upon the question; parties!- at
law relative to the ea *ono( Machinery.—Rebored bathe Coln- front want of disposition or inability to do so, then the party was themselves ; for, instead of • defence being conducted upon sound treason and misdemeanour. if a foreigner, treating of the laws of ' tarty that of Judge Jellifies, which by no means bore upon this hi
impewwwed. There was a pustahog eonaiden,tion of the cases principles, by which a well-regulated Advocate would act, it was England, on the principles of natural equity,
to a=accuirt
oningtthoeth.ili
nonuteatthionen.miggesiNeitherm.duidertofhadt:prufbtLou:dlaNwotetxinctihnattihhe
jtud'ougensgeugeouhldt se
mittes on Artisans' Alachinery.
Mr. MANSFIELD presented petition from die journeymen where unpriseement was infloted, and in most eases the imprison- subjected to all the wild incoherencies of such a man as he had sense nfj 'nuke common to all nations, were di
cardinal:ten of Leicester, for the:TP*ll of the combination Uwe.— maw, ea peeper representation, was remitted. He was nut pee- alluded to. It was not the measure arthguilt.thet sow considered tuation which a person, stood charged.s' with felry this coca., the objection made. should
.be argued'. The law was not then as
Ltid e, the abk pared at that moment ta say that It mould be wise in the Lc- mow case* so much IS the 111)111(10 e puma and the line of try, condemned to a prohibition from taking his defence with the now but Mr. Justice }enter came to g conclusion directly at "14
•
• ,
•

at ce with the present system. The real question now was difterent
hem that sand. Now the ethanol law was fai,' cool, and impar-
%id. in favour of a peso. criminally unused, and evety effort was
made to protect the criminal. Free and impartial inquiry was in
his tarmac. And if an, what ultstation ass neeessary ? Or should
we not pause before we altered it--and, above all, before we fol-
lowed up a chimerical change ? At present all statements in cases
of felony--41 the opening, a as cool; if others die Judge inter-
fered, and the whole mattes was lett open to the Jury. But alter the
present hyaena' and we world have the activity, cage.-new, and con-
test found in noes of nisi prima. Even in casts of Nisi prints or Llnny
h: wished no change. In cases of Nisi reins. you had inflamed °beer-
neiors and replies.; and the Judge, in place of being the Counsel
tor the prisoner in cases of felony, as he now was, would change his
character altogether. In eases of Nut prima, the plaintiff made the
first and last impression, and the Judge could not always die It
away; but once bring that mode of proceeding Into criminal coo,
and the defendant would be preijudiced. An able speech or roil
detriee were almost equally against the felon, and made, In either
way, a case against him. It WAS said. however, that the notatio-
nal of truth should be tie object of all; if so, the chances were
against the defendant ; sometimes, no doubt, otherwise. But when
the counsel for the prisoner spoke, and witnesses were called, a re-
ply came far the prosecution, and counsel would not risk such a
proceeding. In iniedemeanors particularly, he Minot, ellen re-
fused to call witnesses, knowing what a reply would effect. But
between thy investigation of truth and the interest of a client, there
seat a great difference; and so fee an to practice. Thee: was spin all
the difference between practice and general foresight. On the side
of the prosecution there was generally wit and intellect; on the
other side a deficiency of both : and then came a fearful content,
an which the defendant generally suffered. The case of treason did
not apply in this cane, because a was one of passion, intellect, and
wit, and not applicable to misdemeanors. In felony the truth
on's, was regarded ; in mom popular inflammation was ought.
ands balance of feeling was also sought. When first the Member
tor Galway introduced this motion, he (the Attorney-(ieneral) was
struck and captivated by it; but, on mature reflection, he thought
this Hill would retard and destroy the due administration of justice.
Ile cared nothing about inconvenience if the proposed measure could
do good ; but be thought the delay and the expense, though minor
considerations, deserved some attention • and, for these reasons, he
opposed the motion of his Bon. Friend. This was a MIMIC of
pruthplz, not of detail; and, after what he had slid, he felt it his
tluto so oppose the modon foe in this Bill. (Hear, hear.)
Dr. LtneIIINGTON said hhbviareturable and beamed Friend
was so skilled in questions of this nature that he altogether threw
out of his view the general principle contended for. The real ques-
tion was. bow should the (doled laws be ime semaged as to
secure justice—not how the criminal eliould obtain acquittal. The
question WWI hew guilt committed was to be convicted ; and the
innocence proved was to be bound. This was met by Oconee-
rier.ce, and the employment of asunsel as leading to it; but after
all how was that made oat? Every one knew that defence by coun-
sel was least entertained and thought of; it was the felling of
every man attending courts of justice, and the* was said by the
hearers as well as the practitioners in all courts. It is said, how-
ever, that the judge was counsel for the prisoner. How, and why e
lie might make objections against illegal evidence, but he could
not eserase his ingenuity, and he ought not. In the case of
Patch, a judge had said of a counsel who argued against him, that
that was one of his laughing speeches. If counsel on the other side
were heard, such a speech would have been met, and perhaps the
futility and ingenuity of that mune: would have been refuted. In
that case there was manifest injustice. Talent, eloquence, and a per.
warted ingenuity, were urged against Patch ; and so it might be in
other cases. Persons accused- were often convicted for waist of
Counsel, and persons guilty were convicted for the want of Corned
also. Juries heard extraordinary, cases • they also heard the open-
irg speech of Couniel; and if the Judge yielded to it, the party
as w acquitted or condemned, without fa r play at both or often at
either side. He contended that at aid pries the heat and argu-
ment urged led to the truth ; but in misdemeanors the case was dif-
ferent, and gone so more then in felonies. The accused was staked
to make his Zefence• and if ignorant he asked leave to say a ward •
and when told by the Judge he might speak, he handed in a mise:-
Eable written paper, which brought no conviction, however, to any
man, because it is generally written before the *rein speech of
Counsel. The case of rape •aa full exemplification of the neees-
sty of the interference of Counsel: if capitally amused, the cm-
ployment of Counsel might probably sale the neck of the accused,
became. by nose-exanunation, he might reduce it to the lesser
offence; for which, if again accused, he might be sentenced to two
years' imprisonment- But still the life is awed—and owing to
what ? I'o the enaploynsent of Counsel. Even by the French
code the Counsel for the prisoner had the last word ; and he only
noticed that as showing that other nations looked upon it as neces-
sary to the defence of the accused. 'With respect to expense, that
could be no impediment, and ought not to be. The expense of
criminal justice was nothing in this country ; the Judges were
starved, aad they were compelled to wear out their lives before they
lind a iniseraLle plumose assigned them. He deprecated the sys-
tem, and he hoped the time would not be long before the Hon.
Gentleman opposite (the Attorney-General) would find the situation
Of Chief Joeuce of the Common Pleas worthy of his acceptance.
Now it was not. (Hear, hear.) Whatever might be the result of
the motion of this night, he thought the darkness of other times
would be soon tliapelkal, and that the light of modern science would
produce more just and proper feelings.
The SO LIC I TOR-GENE RA L was of opinion that if the motion
was agreed to, it would go to introduce an innovation inconsistent
with the jurisprudence of this country. None of the Committees on
this subject, and none of the most recent writers ever wished each
u thing as the introduction of counsel for defendants in eases of
felony. Stouttind and Sir Mathew Hale never recommended
such a course. If he was disposed to make any other alteration,
he would put the prosecutor and defendant on the same level, and
say, let coucsel be assigned to neither; let each go nakedly on their
own merits; but then came the difficulty of practice, not that he
pondered the practice wrong • but still came the dffileulty of re-
conciling the system under which men hail acted and become grey.
with the problematical chances of' benefit from the new reading of
Immo who knew nothinga principle and practice combined, whilst
ii.veighing against the fairness of principle as applicable to practice.
The Judge was bound by the duties imposed on him by this
statute to be Counsel fiw the prisoner. The Honourable Mover of
tide question had produced no example, had made out no case, to
thew diet men legally convicted would have been acquitted if
they had been allowed the assistance of Counsel, who would have,
by their eloquence and ingenuity, prevented the conviction. He
edinittnl that treason was an exception from the general rule of re-
legate, so also were misdemeanors : in these cases he could not be
brought to think that the accused should be pressed on by the
weighted' eloquence, and that he should not have similar &dem-
urs. Re did not agree with the proposition that the advantages
would, in these cases' beat one side. The acting upon the princi-
ple sought for by the Honourable Mover would be attended with
mischievous consequences to the prisoner. If the principle were
allowed, and the accused had a bad defence to make, a lawyer
*odd not notice it at all ; and it would come, perhaps, with
more effect from the prisoner himself. In the cases of murder,
forgery, and other felonies, it would, therefore. be much better to
leave matters to find their own level. It was well known to the Hon.
Member for Knaresborough, whose departure front the bar was a
Put loss—it was well-known to other lionourable friends of his,
also were still at the liar, that much mischief had resulted to the
prisoner himself, front the circumstance of a bad cause being de-
nuded by an able man, and this was often found to operate to the
cosines'', and not to the acquittal of the accused. The result of the
mat cod and dispassionate inquiry he could make in to the sub-
;en, was, that no lunge should be made in the present mode, and
unul the last year and a half, when it was agitated by the present
rinser, he never beard any complaint made respecting the practice;
neither wet any complaint made of the course of proceeding in any
work which he had ever read, in which the law of Eretland was
di.CUSSed or treated at He would therefore opose the Bill.
Mr. DENMAN lamented he was not sufficiently fortunate to
hear either the arguments used by his Honourable Friend below
Line, who had introduced the manure, or those used by the Right
Honourable the Attorney-General, who thought it his duty to op-
pote the principle. Health regretted much that he had not the
pleasure of hearing the arguments of another Learned Gentleman
who had also opposed the measure, (Mr. North.) who, about •year
and a half since, at the Irish bar, was mainly Muniments!, by an
exertion of energy and talent, indefeatinca most ill-timed and in-
judicious attack made on the liberty of the subject. Ile certainly
did not expect to find the Learned Gentleman opposing the present
measure, nor was he less astonished to find the question opposed
by the Honourable persons at present filling the situations of At.
tomey and Solicitor General, (hear,) who had, at no distant period,
in a cue of • prosecution for treason, defended the accused ; and,
upon that pccoion, the prisoner perhaps owed his life to the exer-
tipns and ingenuity of his most able and eloquent Counsel. (Hear,
hear.) After We knowledge of this he was surprised at the opposi-
tion of the lienortable Member, and instead of finding them hos-
file to the measure, be expected to have their example referred to
as the hest possible arguments in ira defence. (Hear, hear, hear.)
As to the Judges bung Couneel for the prisoners in the cases of'.
felonies and murders, he would not at present state his opinions, I
trom motives of respect to the !awe; but as far as misdemeanors
and political libels were concerned, he thought the arguments used
on the other side were a gross libel upon the Judges--at least they
were a libel upon than since the Act paned in the reign of King
William, when upon trials of a political ninon they were appointed
to hold the balance between the State and the accused. About a cen-
tury ago an argument was used in that House—he did not know by
whom, for it was s.ttributed to many—for the amendment of theA et.
It was asked, if, even in that House, a person, when surrounded
by his friends, and in the midst of those who would encourage and
*ppo.t bins, could not give a full and free expression of his
helm" What must be the case of a prisoner? How could he
he expected to make a full and satisfactory defence in the moments
et trouble and agitation ? The argument of the Attorney-General
teemed to admit that the defines by an advocate for treason should
not be abolished, and he alleges that defences for other felonies need
tut be pleaded by advocates ; and he gets out of his difficulty by
reminding the House of the calm, cold, and impartial manner in
which these prosecutions were conducted. Since the Right lion.
fieutletnan had given up sod. practice he must have forgotten the mm-
Me of the Courts ; to his own experience these cold and calm feelings
did not exist upon these trials: the warmth of feeling was much m-
ooed by the operation of the law as It stood at present; it was in-
'nosed by the circumstance of the counsel not being allowed to
uste the case fully and at length. This they were only enabled to
4, indirectly, either by cross-examination of evidence or mo-
tions as to the points of law. lie heanl of a case which took place in
Ireland, when an advocate was asked by the Judge to whom he
*reseed his observations, whether to the Judge or the jury. The
.._lulewer of the advocate was, he addressed the Court, but he hoped
:etry would hear him. (these) And it was by this circuitous
the lawyer was enabled to make his defence. Besides it was
"•„._▪ "1 u to all that every advocate was anxious to obtain a verdict,
~.'"lwtter what the nature of' the trial mien be: this could not be
A
....""L Evan the calmness' and temper of counsel conducting
Liellastuties was not to the advantage of the unfortunate prisoner;
'4'7 wee Pinosodicial to him. The SilWl3lll3lt3 nude with open.

nese and candonr were wow mischievous to hint ; they wo-e
considered to be extorted from an unwilling prosecutor; anti
they were. therefore. productive of the greatest injury to the
prisoner; and even this ealmnees, if it was exhibited by the coun-
sel, was soon lust by the conflict which ensued upon the craw-ex-
amination of the witnesses. Even in trials for lift and death,
counsel were, to a great degree, eager for a conviction ; and the
iuslifforence and calmness spoken of by the A ttorney.General,
were coo spent and died away, when the object was the obtaining
°fa verdict. :fO,ll the loss int which their professional character
was at ask. The result of these feelings would be that a ver-
dict would ho pressed for, and, therefiwe, the mlont and knowledge
used in the defence should be equal to those exerted in the ac-
cusation. He knew, besides, it was a received opinion, theel
talent• ant! eloquence of • superior kind and weighs were on the
side of the Crown. This was with hint a question. He had beard
at the bar se able and powerful defences made as could be made by
the Crown counsel, anti if the motion of his Hon. Friend were as-
seated tn. it amid. in his opinion, be the means of improving the
talent anti education of the bar. These would be certainly improved
tribe privilege were granted. As to the waste of time complained of
from the mode of proceeding, it was not to be considered as an ar-
gument, for it was not seriously put forward as such. It therefore
could neither be defended nor opposed as an argument. He would
nut go the length of the learned civilians, who maintained that giv.
ing the privilege of coined increased the prospect of acquittal to
the guilty. This was not a falr argument, even to those who were
really guilty. It was not fair to say generally that all who were
tried were guilty, and • fair investigation could not be given Ito the
innocent if they were not allowed every means of proving their in-
nocence, even though the proceeding gave the guilty a greater
chance of escape. As to the waste of time, if considered as an ar-
gument, it should not be forgotten how much was wasted by the
present mode of crows-examination, and by the address of the pd.
soner to the Jury. He felt obliged to make some apology to the
House for thus trespassing upon them. Ile had been but a few
hours in town, and was not able to collect materials fur this
discussion ; but font) the course adopted by the Honourable
Members opposite. he feared he would have no other oppor.
' tunity of expressing his sentiments. He wished to give his
testimony as a witness upon this occasion, and to assert, froat
his own knowledge and experience, that Judges would consi-
der it ass relief to their own feelings if advocates were allowed to
address furies on behalf of the prisoner. The present system was
defended upon this principle: it was asserted that the Judge, as
Counsel for the prisoner, would be as tender of his interests as
any Counsel could possibly be. This, he maintained, was int-
sossible ; it was impossible for him to consult those interests
whew he was to submit the entire mass of evidence to the
jury. The Judge could do no more than state all the evidence
to the jury, more especially if he had to go through the details
of a complicated case. It was now impossible fur him to apply
to the defence all the feelings of an able and zealous advocate.
The present system could not be supported by authority oe
upon principle, for the opposite experiment was not tried, and
the truth of the latter could not be denied; in fact, he knew it was
commonly said, the mathine works well. This was not a proof,
for the new experiment might work still better; it was tried as yet
but on one side, and if both sides were to be tried, the other mud.
might be found to be preferable. As to one mode M. trial, that
' which arose front circumstantial evidence could not, in his opinion,
be carried on, if the one party was not allowed to refute in the same
manner as the other party was permitted to accuse; it could not be
an act of justice, if the one was refused that which the other we • al-
lowed. It was proposed to deprive both parties of the power of
addressing the jury ; this would not be satisfactory to the prisoner
or to the public, as the accuser would come, especially in a trial
depending on circumstantial evidence, in a state of preparation.
and this mode of proceeding would evidently be not fair to the ac-
cused. He thought the power of addressing a jury should be
granted on the most important occasion, when it was not refused
in a cue of the slightest trespass. As to the idea that counsel
would give no great chance iif acquittal to the guilty from their
having the privilege, it did not follow that they would escape on
account of this privilege. He was anxious to hear some cases of
this description from the Attorney-(leneral. He could produce
some MAW in which the guilty, though defended by counsel, were
found guilty, and the innocent, though not naving Mis advantage,
were acquitted. He would state to tne House the case of E. Can-
nings, who, in the year 1732, accused two gipsies of forcing her
away; they were tried and convicted; the trial was conducted by able
counsel. A short time after them was reason to think the accusation
was false; she was tried for making such a charge, and convicted.
Here was a cue that spoke the two ways—it showed that the per-
sons defended by able counsel were found guilty, and the innocent,
though convicted,' were not punished. There was also a ease within
these two years. in which two persons were convicted of highway
robbery. The Judge was satisfied with the verdict, and took all the
pains in his power to sec that all was correct and nothing improper.
However it appeared to the Secretary for the Home Department
that these persons were not guilty, and upon inquiry their inno-
cence was proved ; and it gave him satisfaction to state, tsse.c an
order was issued relieving these individuals from the conseraences
of the conviction, and granting them a free pardon. Whet would
the feelings of the Secretary be, it' the inquiry had not taken place—
if the parties were executed, and if afterwards their innocence was
proved ? What would the consequence be, if the trial originated
in • case of derangement Of tenipovary lunacy (which was a 'natter
of the nicest inquiry), and when it was necessary to prove that the
prisoner could not be guilty of the crime from the pecu-
liar circumstances of the case and from thestate of his mind,
This, and similar eases, could not be possibly investigated with-
out granting the benefit of counsel ; and, as to the Judge throwing
into the scale all the feelings of an able and zealous counsel, this
could not be the case. It was necessary the him to divest himself
of his feelings. A Judge was not fit to hold his situation, who did
not divest himself of his feelings • and it was a practice of an op-
posite nature. arising frorn the idea that they were to be counsel
for the accused, that attached something like • reproach to the
judgment scat, and imputation was thrown by one side or
the other. Ile would repeat his apologies to the House for not
coining to the discussion with a greater stock of materials ; but
he would maintain, both upon the general principle and from his
own experience, as far as he himself was concerned, that it must
be the decided wish of every upright Magistrate and righteous
Judge, that the accuses: should be allowed the benefit of counsel
in making an address to the Jury, and for these reasons he would
give his cordial vote for the motion. 1
Mr. It. MARTIN supported the motion. It appeared to him
that the object of the Bill was nut the defence of the guilty, but
its intent was to tuake us as cautious as possible, lest the innocent
should suffer. As to the assertion, that the use of counsel was not
material to the accused, he would take an authority from his
pocket, an old Magazine, to shew that one individual at least was
executed in consequence of not being allowed his privilege. Mem-
bers would, perhaps, laugh at this old Magazine. but the case was
as fully and correctly reported in it as in any law book. I Here the
Hon. Member read an extract from the well known case of the Fer-
reous, who wercexezoted for forgery on Mr. Adair.) His object was to
chew that if one of the brothers had been allowed able counsel to
plead for him and state sonic points, he would have been acquitted.
As to the rule that Judges were always the counsel for the prisoner,
the case of Bellingliain showed that the J udge was sometimes counsel
against hint. In that case the Judge refused the postponement of
the trial for a few days. Another Judge refused a prisoner to delay
his trial even for a day, until 'witness arrived from London to give
him a good character. The Judge said he would grant him all the
advantages of a good character and would try hint instantly. 'The
prisoner was tried the Judge charged against him, but the Jury
acquitted him. in these cases the Judges were certainly not coun-
sel for the prisoner. He (Mr. Martin) should support the motion
of his Honourable Friend ; and he trusted that the humanity
of the Honourable Members would allow him to bring forwiud the
Bill.

Strangers were ordered to withdraw, and the House divided,
when their appeared—
Fur the Bill, 50 ; against it, 80.-31ajority against the Bill, 30.
On our re-admission to the gallery, we firma!
LAND TAX REDEMPTION BILL.
Mr. MAHER LY on his legs. He observed that, In the reign
of William and Mary, an annual Act was passed which placed a
tax of Ss. in the pound on all personal estates. This annual tax
had been continued to March, 17tH, when Mr. Pitt thought proper
to bring in a Bill to make it perpetual ; and he stated his reasons
fur a proceeding so unjust, none of which had now any weight.
By the 42d Geo. 111. nearly all the Acts on the subject were repeal.
ed, except the Act which allowed the purchasing of land ; that Act
gave& very large power to purchase, and, in particular, every faci-
lity was given to churzhes and corporations, and, by this means, a
considerable expense was entailed. The expenses attending the
tax was nearly 80,000 L a-year. Ile would ask why it had not been
redeemed ; it was obvious that persons gave more than the tax was
actually worth,—the stranger was obliged to rive one-fifth more.
To get out of this situation was the object of the present measure,
which he was anxious to have referred to a Committee, because, a.
it now stood on the Statute Bonk, it was better to erase it than to
let It stand as a dead letter. The Church and Corporation Com-
missioners had, in 1823, only redeemed :1231., and their expenses
had, in all, amounted to 2,20111. The sum altogether redeemed was
only 110,0001. He thought the House would agree with him on the
necessity of making some provision, and that it was better to repeal
the Act or to let it go on. If it were redeemed, and allowed to bean ,
annual Act, it would be of great ir.justice ; and if it were allowed!
to go on and end in the object proposed, it would he productive of 1
great service. He had nodou bt whatever, that if it were allowed;
to be brought into the market and sold, a very great sum might
be raised, which could be applied to the payment of the unfunded
debt. l'ublic credit would be thus raised to a great height, and it
might make such an Impression as to reduce the 3 per Cent. to 21.
He knew no proceeding which could be more beneficial than such
an application to the unfunded debt; that debt was very large fur a
umeof peace, and, in case a war should take place, a power would
by this means be given of continuing it for two years without any
serious injury. He hoped 'he subject would be allowed to go be-
fore a Committee, and, with this hope, he would not trouble the
Huse with any farther remarks on the subject, at that late hour of
the night, but merely move for the appointment of a select Com-
mittee to take into consideration the various Acts relative to the re-
demption of the Land Tax, and to report on the propriety of ap-
plying the amount towards the reduction of the unfunded debt.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he was sure
that if the House consented to the proposition of the Honourable
Member, there would no such results as the Honourable Member
appeared sanguine enough to anticipate. At the time the subject
was brought forward, and it was resolved to make that perpetual
which was before only an annual tax, the 3 per cents. were at 47,
and it wu done to enable the Ministers to Farrow money on more
advantageous terms than they could otherwise have done. There
were then greater inducements to persons to come into terms than
now existed. But if the object were accomplished, although the
burthen on the land would cease to produce money to the State,
they would not cease to pay somebody else; and although it might
not exist with a present possessor, it would be left as a burthen to
the next heir ; so that it would be only a transfer from one person
to another. It appeared, therefore, to be a measure not calculated
to produce any of those advantages which the Honourable Gentle-

' man (Mr. Maberly) anticipated. lie (the Chancellor of the Er-
' chequer) did not know what mode the Honourable Gentleman pro-
' posed to adopt to induce persons to come ieto terms. He (the
Chancellor of the Exchequer) would not say that there were not
some advantages attending it ; but if the system laid down by the
Honourable Gentleman were adopted, perhaps the only advantage
would refer to the powe of raising mone7 to meet unexpected
exigencies. lie (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) thought it,
however. a measure of very. doubtful policy indeed. He was not,
therefore, disposed to acquiesce in the mutton of the Honsuitable
Member for going into a Committee on the subject. But it the
Homotabk I%lentber brought in a Bill to alter or amend some
points in the Act, he should not object to it ; btwause he was nut
prepared to say but advantages might attend it.
Mr. IIIONCK was anxious that the subject should go before •
Committee, because he wished to do away with the Act altogether.'
He thought there could not have been anything more ruinous than
the reguistion adopted by Mr. Pitt. It could have no effect, but
was Minor, in the tin
tinstance, and would be mischievous if'
continued. _

-----
Air. HUME said that the Right lion. Gentleman ought to take
into his coiwilderation that there are GO collectors of the tall, receiving
a salary of GUOL a year, and this besides the other expenses- lle
thought if the plan of his Hon. Friend (Mr. 3laberly) were fol-
lowed, it would greatly contribute to the increase of the public
income. All that was *anted was, for the xubject to go before a
Committee, when the Hon. Member would take upon himself to
explain all the particulars, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer
would be then able to reject if he did not approve of it.
Mr. MA RERLY said he should now withdraw his motion,
upon the understanding that the Chancellor of the Exchequer might
give this measure a fair trial.
The motion was withdrawn.
SCOTCH POOR LAWS.

Mr. KENNEDY moved-
for leave to bring in a 13111 to alter the
laws respecting the settlement of poor in Scotland.
The LORD ADVOCATE obseted to the measure, since it
came unassisted by any prefatory explanation.
Mr. KENNEDY said that he had abstained fmm any introduc-
tion to the measure, merely from a wish to accommodate the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer.
After a few words from Sir 0. Cxtitx, Irate was given to bring
in the Bill.