The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1808-06-04 00:00:00

SUGAR DISTILLATION DILL.

Lord Bill MSG ;Lived the second reailiag of this
Bill.
Mr. BRAND olijected to it, as be had not beard
any grounds evtaliiislied, so us to render it neces-
sary. So far fano there behig a scarcity, be was
corn inced that-wheat, the great article of public
consumption, lied been ut a more fixed, stable,
and constantly tower price, than for many years
past. When a scarcity, was likely to take place,
the use of grain in distilleries might be stopped by
Proclamation, but to stop it thus, without auy evi-
dence, he could never admit could be for the
advantage of the country.
Mr. MaitatoT spoke in favour of the measure ;
and argued that grain was actually higher in price
than usual ; and there being no means of import-
ation, therefore this measure was rendered neces-
sary to provide against any approach of scarcity.
lie enlarged upon the advantages derived from the
West India colonies, which were the means of ern-

ployiug sto,ooo seeineu' and therefore a grand
nursery for our nes), ; and ha also stated the greet
quantity of sugar upon hand, and the necessity of
affording relief to the West Indies ; otherwise they
would be ruined, and then Lill a prey to Beidn-
parte. The measure proposed would aiso operate
to the advantage of the landed interest, and 14111
the farmer au opportunity or getting a fair price
for his grain. .

Mr. &ma spoke evillest the measure.
Mr. BATHURST spoke in iavoar of it, as it was
the only means of administering relief to the
Planters, without at all interfering, irregularly or
disadvantageously, with the lauded or agricultural
interest of the country. tilt:hough that inter:menet
was not advisable upon all ocuisions.
Mr. Dkrtss Glues objected to the measure, es
he thought the iuterference of the Legisluture,
upon any occasion, with the tc,,riculture or coin-
merce of the country, was highly injurious; except-
ing in eases of scarcity, of which at present there
was not the smallest appearance.
Mr. CORE spoke against the IHRRIIIITe. Ile
thought the distresses of the West Indians were
greatly exaggerated, and of their own creating.—
It would encourage gambling and speculation, and
so far from diminishing, would actually increase
those alleged distresses. if the, revenue were at
all to he affected by it, then taxes would fall to he
raised by some other means, so as to he more bur-
densome to the people. Grain could not pos-
sibly be monopolized, but sugar, might be so. If
the prices of barley and oats had risen of late,
it was owing to nothing else but the setting on foot
this inquiry. Ile was decidedly against fixing a
:amebae,* or minimum of price. The fanner must
naturally look to the distilleries to enable him to
procure a market for his grain, audit was the object
of every wise Government, who wished to en-
courage agriculture, to promote the consumption
of all sorts of grain.
Mr. Eva& supported the motion. us he thought
it rather tended to encourage both the agricultural
and commercial interests of the country.
Mr. ‘Vstazaroacs felt great satisfaction in sup-
porting the measure, us he thought it had been
introduced without any disposition being shewn

towards supporting one set of men more than an-
other; the interests of the fanners and the commer-
cial men being perfectly consolidated together.
Mr. N1E101.11015 CALVERT could not think it was
for tit, advantage of the country, as it would leave
the poor land to retuain uncultivated.
Sir Joint NEWPORT said, he had heard übthing
urged to induce him to agree to such tatujetring
with the agriculture of the country. If it were in-
tended to erevent scarcity, Ministers had chosen an
improper time and mode of bringing it forward.—
What they had already dune had only tended to
create alarm, and to induce people to distil snore
from grain in the intermediate period than they
would otherwise have done. This at least he was
sure was the case in Ireland. Enquiries us to scarcity
throughout the country should be conducted with
the utmost privacy, and measures to prevent it
should be adopted suddenly.
Mr. MANNINO spoke in favour of the measure.
Sir James Hatt., Mr. WEsToit, and Lord Wis.
severally argued against it.
The question being loudly called for, a division
book place ; when thew appeared—
Fey it
Against it ..

90

Moisrity.

LOCAL. MILITIA BILL.

Lord CASTLERIAGU. moved the further consi-
deration of this Bill. and that the House should go
into a Committee, to consider the two new clauses
of which he had given notice.
The House having gone into the Committee, the
Noble Lord then Moved—
" That emery peratm eiaisaine to be exempted from the
operation of the Act, by payment of the forfeiture for not
aNwuring to be enrolled in the local Militia, shall be sum-
moiscil to Kvrer bcfore the Deputy Lieutenants Or Justices
of the Pears, :out shall be required to sign &declaration, that
he boa not, direttlg or indirectly., insured himself against
any such tine sr penalty."
Mr. BANKLSobjected to this prohibition from in-
' sitrance, amid the principle of thus commuting ser-
vice for money, as it went to defeat the object of
the Bill, which was avowedly to prevent the ;torsi-
bility of substitution. It was obvious that by this
r clause the be.-den of the penalty would fall touch
more heavily upon the lower than the higher or-
ders ..f the community—to the former, the lowest
line, of iol. would in many cases prove ruinous;
while, to the latter, the highest fine, of three times
lob would prove no great lurdahgti lie could
no' reconcile this to the principles of justice, as it
took away from the pour the only :node by which

tlley could reasonably relieve themselves, and het
thurefave thougheit would he better to have re-
course to the principles of former Bills. If, how-
ever, it was to be persevered in, he thought that
a flue of 61 or 41)s. could be sufficient to be
leritsl from the poorer class of society, or that the
commutation 'tor money ought to be taken away
altogether.
'1 lie SiCRETARY et WAR defended the clause,
and said, that to take away the commutation from
the poorer orders of people, would be still more
grievous upon them, as it would go to require
personal service, under all circumstances, of Audi-
siduals. In opposing this clause, the lion. Gen-
' donna was in fact opposing the principle of the
whole Bill, which aas quite different from that of
former Bills, where substitution was actually al-
lowed,
Mr. WINONAII thought that a more objections-
ble clause hatLassrer occurred in any bill. It weut
to impose a great burden upon the public, by im-
posing a penalty tax or commutation, for it evi-
deutly appeared that.all that Government required
was a payment of money. It was surely much
better to allow persons to raise a small sum of
money amongst their friends, so as to insure them-
selves against the effects of the ballot, and thereby
to get substitutes for the service, than exact of, poor
people, a true er penalty of 101. which would
equally, in many cases, produce their ruin, as the
culling them out to actual service for twenty-eight
days. If personal service were the sole principle
of this bill, then why impose any penalty at all,
or admit of any commutation ? To the poor. a
fine would be the greatest evil, while it would be
the least evil to the rich, so that in order to make
any thing like an equality, there ought to be
imposed upon that latter class of society some
hundreds of pounds, instead of 301. ptisposed as the
risarimani in the bill.
Lord CArrLEREAeII then entered upon the de-
fence of his clause. and argued, that this mint ne-
cessarily differ materially from former militia bills.
The latter admitted a mitigation by sulistitutiou,
while the former went to admit it by commutation.
Former measures tended to make men completely
military,. and if a substitute were not provided, a
fine was imposed much more ruinous than iu the
present instance. Were the fine to be reduced to
40,. as the Bight Hon. Clen•lemaii suggested, it
would only induce the ballotted individwillosioter
upon • calculation end colnparisou between the
amount of his wages, for the time of abseuce. and the
amount of the line to be imposed. Insurance gave
rise to frauds upon the public, and, besides, it
mast be observed, that it would' not be the poorest,
but the highest order of people that would be ii-
(hived to insure. lu short, insurance was only
an attempt to disturb the scale upon which the
gislature had wisely adopted the measure.
Mr. Davits GIDDY opposed the clause, on the
ground that every person ought to have he right
of serving by substitution ; and there were a num-
ber of persons who would not enter into a regiment
of the line, that would be hippy to serve in the
Local Militia as substitutes.
. ,
Mr. BARINGYon spoke at some length ; and, as
far us we could understand, was not adverse to the
clause.
Lo d lIIENRY PEWS' said, the House haring held
out in 'opens:Mien in this Bill, the clause now pro-
posed went to do away with what the Legislature
had provided for. The resolution went to make
every individual feel the absolute burden that was
proposed by the measure. The Noble Lord was
mistaken, if lie thought to hold Out to the ptiblic
that it went to bear equal on the rich as it would on
the poor; it,went to affect neither; but it would
most materially affect the middle chase The
richer 'lass were willing to meet the danger of the
field, but it would bear hard upon men of the mid-
dle clam, professional men, who must be either
' taken from their profession, or suffer in their in-
comes, which they hardly'earned by their practice
in their different occupations, and in which their
youth had been occupied to make them competent,
on which account he opposed the Resulutiou. '
Lord CAsTLEREAGII spoke iu explanation.
Mr. WINDHAM rose to remark, that nettling had
be n said by the Noble Lord that went in the least
to support the clause. The clause went to bring
in what the Committee had expunged from the
Bill ; he meant the oath business; and by expung-
ing it they saved a filial of perjury ; bat the Se-
cretary at War now produced by his clause a vast
deal of declaration, which would in the end tend
to the perjury that the Legislature had provided
against.
.1 Mr. C. W. WILLIAMS WYNNE, in a few words,
opposed the clause.
The House then divided on the clause, when the
numbers were—
Ars

ls.-urs

106

On our re-admission the report was brought up,
and the SPEAKER informed the I louse that the near
question was, "That these amendments be now read
a second time."
Lord CASTLERCIGH proposed t clause, that
clerks of subdivisions shoutd give security foe
monies paid int* their bands. Agreed to.
The Noble Lord proposed another clause, imps..
rative on the Commandants of Volunteer Corps to
make specific returns of the attendance of their
men, and also that it sbould refer to she Cinque
Ports, together with the mode of apportioning the
force that is to be raised to each port. Agreed to.
Mr. Wtsuattam made some observations, in
which he urged the impropriety of precipitat-
ing the third reading, particularly since the
nature of the Bill was so changed by the Aine ad-
went* which were curried.
Lord CASTLEREAGIA and tte CHANCILLOR of
1 the Eiciteet:sa thought full time had been
granted for ample discussion, particularly when-he
(Mr. Windham) would have the benefit of the
adjournment to TO-consider its provisions. They
proposed Wednesday for the third reading.
Mr. C. W. W. We N tiE could not conceive that
the House would he able to discuss it oil that day,
es the Curates Stipendiary Bill was fixed for
Wednesday. He had many objections to make
to several clauses, particularly to the clause which
levied the alumna on the lauded interest.
Mr. TIERNEY wished tlizt it should come on first
on Weshiesday ; the Right Hon. Gentlemen took
up such time iu inakiag speeches, that he was ()it'll
reminded of the fate of travellers, who lost More