The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1825-05-14 00:00:00

~)

-7.-- -1

A.

v ~

ATU

~,

; .

' • s'•

I

,Y, I%]

AY 14

_ •

•._..r.

1A hi.

dik

V N 7 ~..'" /--

if

i' 5 •

sec additional dot the opinion of the public w optima the
,oltlytens by this petition; but to him it appeared s
11111111141 .taw of litatiittliff on the question. It came
e parishes in the City of hoodoo—
wita presented, u the petitionera
metillottof a different nature had been privately
signed. He was. happy to oaf that the petition lie
=oestained the signatures of the rector of the parish,
respectable inhabitants, amounting to nearly 2041 per-
sae veld Ns they were chiefly hototeholders, they had annexed
41111.1111 rd their residence to their names. The Noble 3larouis
illlMlebuleseultod a petition in favour of Catholic Eniancipetion, from
! of St. Luke, in the county of Middlesex.
•fiord COLC II ESTER presented a petition from the same parish,
dotted by WO persons, axsiost the claims of the Cetholics.
The elarquis of LANSDO preened a petition from the
borough of Bridport, in favour of the Catholic claims. Ile was
huh...toted to state that the petition would nut hare been presented
if • petition of a different nature had not been forwarded from this
town. The petition he now presented contained the names of many
wealthy and respectable persons, and among them of several of the
Corporation of that town.
The 1:1,71 of SHAFTESBURY said he had presented a petition
from the sante place, signed by 1.164 persons.
The Marquis of LANSDOWN did not allude so much to the
number as to the respectability of the petitioners.
The Marquis of LANSDOWN then presented a petition to the
same effect from the ishabitants of Kingston, in Herelordohire;
and another from the Dissenters of the town of Chichester.
Lord HOLLAND said he had to present a petition also from
Dissenters, and to the same effect. It was from the town and vici-
nity of S,rood, In the county of Gloucester, anti contained the sib
natures of most respectable persons. Their number certainly was
not very great, hilt he was instructed to say it would have been
greater. bit-that they rejected the signatures of all those who could
not comprehend the historkal allusions centaieed in the petition.
Tie peyrsoaere au saiimPliat they would have preferrejAgning
the petition of their britlitan of the 4'ilitereh of Eoghtntl. but tires
they understood it had been &incited that the Dissenters were ad-
ve.se to the claims of the Catholics; and they were therefore
anxious to exculpate themselves from what they considered an
aspersion. They declared that, as Protestant Dissenters and as
British subjects. tney wished to extend to their Catholic fellow.
subjects that civil liberty which they considered necessary to the
tranquillity of the country. The Noble Lord then presented a pe-
tition in favour of the claims of the Catholics, from the Dissenters
of the town of Stroud, in the county of Gloucester.
Lord 1101,LAND then presented a similar petition from the
Protestant inhabitants of the town and vicinity of New Rios; and
another from the Presbyterian Ministers, Elders, anti congregations
of the Presbyterians of Down and Antrim. The Noble Lord raid
that the latter petition contained the names of eight Ministers, and
many Elders of considerable respectability. The petitioners stated
that, like twiny other Dissenters in the North of Ireland, they were
favourable to the claims of the Catholics, and that their opinions
were in conformity to those formerly stated in a document which
emanated front the Synod of Ulster.
The LORI) CHANCELLOR presented a petition against the
CI tins of the Cotholics, from the parish of St. James's, Garlick-
hill.
The Earl of SHAFTESBURY presented a petition to the
same effect, from the Ministers and Lidos of the Presbytery of
Stirling.
The Duke of LEINSTER presented a vtition in favour of the
Catholic Claims, front the Roman Catholic Inhabitants of the
town of Naas, in the county of Kildare.
The Earl of CALEDON presented a petition from the Episco-
pal and Presbyterian Churches of several parishes in the county
of Tyrone, against the Claims of the Catholics.
The petitions were severally laid on the table.
DISSENTERS' MARRIAGE BILL.
The Bishop of 0 lOUCESTE It presented a petition from Stowe,
in the diocese of Gloucester, against the Dissenters' :Marriage till.
—Laid on the table.
ATTAINDER BILL.
The LORD CHANCELLOR observed. that as this was the
evening appointed by the Noble Lord (Holland) for the second
reading of the Attainder Bill, he felt it necessary to state, that as
circumstances had pressed that subject somewhat on his attention,
it isould be hardly consistent with the respect he owed the Noble
Lund the House, if he did request that the Bill might be read
Sensed time at some future period. If the Noble Lord had no
dionlon to such an arrangement, he should feel obliged by having
1.
bell.o lAA NI) said after the reqnest of the Noble and
lifiNissee%Lotcl, it was quite imperative on him to postpone the
oslisibenallbig of the Bill. lie would therefore move the order of
awl al# for the purpose of postponing the consideration of the
suestioe.
Tb. order of the day was then read, and the second reading of
the Bin was postponed to Thursday week.
EQUITABLE LOAN BILL.
The Earl of LAU DER DA LE moved for a copy of the feet*
for money, given by the Directors of the Equitable Loan Company
before the signing of the trust deed.
Lord DACIIE said he should not oppose the motion if the object
Were not to create delay.
The Earl of LAUDERDALE said that such was not the fact.
There could not be any objection to grant such copy, as one
could easily be procured.—Ordered.
Sir E. Knatchbull, and several Members of the House of
Commons, brought up a Message, requesting to be furnished with
such additional information as their Lordships might have re-
ceived relative to the state of Ireland.
The LORI) CHANCELLOR informed the Members of the
House of Commons, that their Lordships would send an answer by
a message of their own.
Mr. Egerton, and several Members from the House of Com-
mons, brought up szveral private Bills, which were read a first
time.
The Crosby. Divorce Bill went through a Committee, and the
report was received.
THE THELLUSON CASE.
The LORD CHANCELLOR addressed the House on the
Thelluson case, and recommended their Lordships to affirm the
judgment of the Court of Chancery, but said that it would be ne-
cessary for the case to go back to that Court. Ile would on Mon-
day produce some explanatory papers.
Counsel and evidence were heard at their Lordships Bar in Sul-
livan's Divorce Case.
The House then Adjourned.
HOUSE OF COMMONS, FRIDAY, Mai 13.
BRITISH GAS COMPANY.
Mr. A. CAMPBELL presented a petition from the Glugow
Oas Company, against the British Gas Company.—Referred to the
Committee.
NEW STREET.
Lord lOWTH E n brought up the Report of the Committee on
the New Street Amendment Act.—The Bill was ordered to be re-
committed on Monday next.
CLYDE NAVIGATION.
Mr. MAXWELL presented a petition from John and William
Dixon, against some parts ofsthe Clyde Navigation Bill.—Referred
to the Committee.
CARNARVON RAIli-ROAD.
On the motion of Sir 110 BER'e I,YI LLIA MS, the Carnarron
Rail-road Bill was read a third time, and passed.
CORN LAISVS.
Mr. BUR HELL presented a petition from the Landholders of a
parish in Sussex, against any alteration of the Corn Laws.—Laid
on the table.
JURIES AND TRANSPORTS TO COLONIES BILLS.
On the motion of Mr. DA ‘VSON, the further consideration of
the Juries Consolidation Bill, and the Transports to the Colonies
Bill, was postponed to Friday next.
IRISH PROVINCIAL BANKS.
Mr. DOHERTY presented a petition from New Rosa, in fa.
your of the Irish Provincial Banks Bill.—Laid on the table.
COMBINATION LAWS.

• PAR LI A MENTA l'IVI"E I. L IdE NCE.
I. HOUSE OF LOR , atinea, limr 13.
I ' CATHOL4I3LAIMS.
' -The Areftlilshon of 'YORK ' ted a petition from the Clem'
of the East Riding of the Co York, against the claims of
Use Cothelim.
lord RING said, that al tile petition was agreed to at a
'Ali; treats)" he understood was considerable opposition to
'that petition at the meeting, an I several sensible and eloquent
speeches were delivered on thijetwision. To him it appeared
slur so. few petitions a the Catholics had been pre-
rentedsira from the clergy of the 1 ' luceses, and that so many hat;
boos gut up by the clergy of the dioceses From York, lapin
asf
Canterbury, from Wioehester. (rout Durham, but few
proceeded ; while the contrary w e case with respect to
ter, Devoe, Susses. anti,Cheshi . .. he reason, however,ap
to him to be, that those small were possessed by ........
its tronaitts, who had their ow Ives in pressing forward du
clergyrs to petition, and which the other Noble and Rev.
had not. But for his part he preferred those venerable fix-
sores ofng the House to th_sse pia* 0 f furniture that were always
i changi
Lord HttltON felt it a roadie of duty to say, that' 'twig
!been uttered by the Noble Lint (King) relative to those ItiaW
.:who possessed Sees of the highe&l puler, was a downright calumny.
The Noble and Reverend Lor r ea
sought to maintain the purity
of the Constitution, and the ps who possessed the grater
uses were influenced by this f as well as those who possessed
OM law.
. Lord KING replied, that if du Noble Lord (Kenyon) meant to
say that what be (Lord King) Seated WAS not a fact, be world
give him a direct denial. But '
.. ii was or was not calumny,
he (hoed '' ) despised the a De bad examined the peti-
tions to their Loldith ,a)fl had, fork 14a; he pd
•fea to be correct.
Lord KENYON, in explanation, observed, that he did not re-
ply as to the fact stated by the Noble Lord relative to the number
of petitions, but to the argument that ihe Bishops were influenced
by the motives ascribed to then by the Noble Lord ; and he would
again say, that the ion of the Noble Lord was &downright
calumny.
The Bishop of EXETER said that from his diocese, which
happened to be one of the largest in extent, as great a number of
petitions had been presented as trout any other.To forward those peti-
tions he had not used any influence ; and he was surprised that,
after what he had stated on a previous evening, the Noble Lord
should be guilty of so great a calumny. The petitions were the
voluntary exp-essions of the feelings of the people, and the clergy
had not exerted themselves to produce them. Fur himself and his
brethren, he denied the charge of the Noble Lord (King), and re-
peated that he bad not used any influence to forward petitioning;
but he believed that petitions bad been brought into the Houle lo
consequence of what had at various times fallen from the Noble
Lord himself, and who had construed the silence of the people into
indifference. He (the Bishop of Exeter) knew that the majority in
his diocese, and he believed the majority of the country, were de-
cidedly hostile to the claims of the Catholics. As intimidation had
been used by certain Noble Lords who had spoken of the danger
to be apprehended if the Catholic Bill did not pass, he would
entreat their Lorel•hips to consider the danger of refusing the
prayer of the petitions of the people of England, and whether
they would not be as ready to come forward and assert their rights
as the people of Ireland were.
The Bishop of HEREFORD made a few observations which
did not reach below the bar.
hoed KING said that it was not to the size but to the re-
venues of the Dioceses that he alluded ; and he knew that where
the revenues were small, there the greater number of petitioners had
been found. One thing reconciled him to the Catholic Church,
that there were no translations in it.
' The LARD CHANCELLOR said he would take the liberty
of advising the Right Rev. Prelates not to oppose the observa-
tions made by Noble Lords on the other side of the House, as he
was convinced they were indebted to what those Noble Lords had
said for (he very large number of petitions that had been presented
to the House. Ile entreated the Right Rev. Prelates to let the
Noble Lord (King) go on, and he would venture to say, that if
that Noble Lord spoke day after day, there would be more pe-
titions presented between this day and Tuesday than their Lord-
ships' table could contain.
Lord ROLLE expresied his opinion that the number of petitions
that had hien presented to the House had been presented in con-
sequence of the observations of the Noble Lord (King), and other
Noble Lords.
Lord HOLLAND said drat he was glad to find, from what had
fallen from the Noble and Learriod.Lord on the 11'oolsack, and
from the Noble Lord (Rolle) on the gross benches, that the peti
dens had been presented in consequawae of what had taken place in
Use House; but he had some difficulty in reconciling that assertion
with the observations of a Right Bev. Prelate opposite, and of
the Noble and Learned Lord on a former evening, namely—that
the great majority of the people of Kra land were decidedly hostile
to the Bill recently brought up by ihe Commons of the Unitco
Kingdom of Great Britain, and brought up for a second time, and
which for a second time they bad solicited their LOTtiSill pa to give
assent to. But by this Right Rev. Prelate, and by the Noble and
Rev. Lord, and by °diet Noble Lords who reasoned as they did,
some new light had been thrown on the Constitution of England.
'he had been always told, by anti-parliamentary Reformers, of
the impoliey of touching the grand ark of the Constitution--the
British House of Commons. He had been always told to consider
that House as the legal and constitutional organ of the public
voice; he had been always told, and he had assented to it, that the
House of Commons was the true safety-valve by which the real
feeling of the pcooie Of England would have vent. It now ap-
peared, however, that lie, and all who had so argued, laboured
under a mistake—that they had been in error all the while, and
that the House of Commons, instead of being the engin of the
people, was a mere oligarchy, as it had been sometimes styled by
v:si "nary reformer. ft was with pain then that lie had been
forced to consider that the people of England had no organ in the
House for the expression of public opinion ; but he now found that
there were ways of making that public opinion known--that there
were organs by which democracy would have vent, and that those
organs were the Archdeacons, the Noble and Rev. Prelates opposite,
and the Noble and Learned Lord on theWoolsack,who were now the
tribunes of the people, and who came forward to state what the senti-
ments and the will of the people of England were. If the Noble
and Learned Lord' ad a veto on this measure, it was not to be ex-
pected that the he would have looked to Palace-yard and to the
meeting of the multitude to ascertain the course he was to pursue,
but rather that he would have 10-ikeil to his right hand and to his
left for his authority. Ile (Lord Ilolland) had still so much of the
leaven of Reform about him, that he was not prepared to consider
a vote of the Ilouse of Commons as undoubtedly a convertible term
with the will of the people; but he was not prepared to say that
the measure which had been brought up from the other House,
and brought up more titan once, and especially at a period when
there existed a more than usual degree of alarm on the subject—he
would repeat, that he wait rot prepared to stand up in his place in
the House and declare that the universal feeling of the country was
against the measure recommended by the House of Commons ;
more especially when lie remembered that a third part of the people
of that country were directly interested in its success, and to
know that this universal feeling had been shown by petitions such
as those presented on a former night by a Right Rev. Prelate (the
Bishop of St. David's), pe itions that looked more like a private
cotreapondeoce, and were no bigger than that Right Rev. Prelate's
right hand. He (Lord Holland) repeated, that the organ of demo-
cracy was now the Spiritual Lords on the other side of the House,
and the Noble and Learned Lord on the Woolsack. Ile was quite
satisfied that the question would be decided by the wisdom snd
justice of the House, without reference to the views of any one, and
decided in a manner that would be most consistent with their justice
and with the safety of the country ; bet their Lordships should re-
collect that the public voice, if it were not in favour of the Bill, at
least was divided on the question. Was it not surprising that those
Members of Parliament who were chosen by popular assemblies,
were those who had taken the warmest part in favour of the measure?
He did not mean to say that the popular opinion was clamorously
raised in favour of the measure their Lordships were called upon
by the House of Commons to adopt, but he did mean to say that it
was a disingenuous argument, and not founded in fact, that any '
thing like a warm feeling had been shown by the people of Ens-
land
against this great and most important measure. He was saris.
led, on comparing the expression of public feeling at the present
time with what it had been on former OCCARions, that there was in-
!tritely Ices of that feeling against the Bill. He did not mean to
say that the people were clamorous in favour of it.--at least not here
—but it would be necessary to recollect that she House was legis-
lating for the United Kingdom, and that its duty was to pay some
attention to that part of it rhich was united to us, especially as that
part was the most vulnerable, and where any wound must equally
Ware the stability and the greatness of the empire at large. l'here
=to hint to be nothing to justify the Right Rev. Prelate in
up in his place, and asserting that the 'intimates of the
pp* of Great Britain were decidedly hostile to the meoeuee__o
taimare which had a second time been passed by the House of
ought
RePr
t bealen foratheiair6Lordshves of
the
me°ll.ll.ll.llll:esirgraw.lbe kiN delconand thde
tints
enstibtruti
The Archbishop of YORK then presented a petition whist the
Claims oldie Catholics, from the Clergy of Cleveland, is treounty
of York- i
The Bishop of EXETER presented a similar petition from a'
parish in the county of Devoe.
Petitions to the same effect were presented by the Duke of RUT-
LA ND from the inhabitants of Latterwortit. I
By the Marquis of NORTHAMPTON, from the Mayor, COT.
poradon and Inhabitants of Northampton.
By the Earl of LIVERPOOL, frun Chatham, in the county of
Kent, and another from a pariah in theorem county.
the Bishop of LONDON, him -Du i= in
the county of IYarwiek t Illfttelholli Ike hi
long-sere; and another from Clergy of Xialla
College. in the City of London.
And by the Biahop of ST. DAVID'S, Atm Dimpopt, ha Poo -
brokreiret me IhiThandatiitvemiseissly.
Tutiviteor SDO
zteisA ial.
--ef eft tiTy Et it

Sir E. KNATCHBULL presented a petition fmm the operative
Sawyers of Dover, against any alteration of the Combination Laws.
—Referred to the Committee.
Mr. HUME presented a similar petition from the operative Ship.
wrights of Sunderland.—Referved to the Committee.
WINDOW TAX.
Lord MILTON presented • petition from Saddleworth, against
the continuation of the Window Taz.—Ordered to be printed.
CHILDREN IN COTTON FACTORIES.
Mr. lIORNBY presented a petition from the :Master Cotton.
spinners of Preston, against the Bill for Regulating the Employ.
ment of Children In Cotton Factories. The Honourable Gentle-
man said. the petitioners considered the regulations sought to be in.
troduced that Bill, dangerous to th- - and fraught with evil

14" -

gptrr... 3,11:1

J

~' ~

..~~.

7•""""4"'"'"" - 17: -
6111
•

I'l

Ice

• •
Control lied received any father communications on the subject IF
the Burmese War ?
Mr. C. W. WYNN replied, as we understood, that Ise abips
had arrival since his 1106 t 600.10UnICa'1.41 an that subject.
LAST INDIA JUDGErs' BILL
On the motion of Mr. C. W. WYNN, the Horse went late
goirenaiUse on the Card India Judges' Bill.
lir. C. W. WYNN said he had only a Gw verbal arneedmusge
14 introduce.
Mr. HUME begged to ask the Right lien. Gentleman • hy the
'Judges in India were tint pleas) in the utue ehusiion as tk.
Judges in England ? lie saw in one of the clauses that they some
still removable at pleasure.
Mr. E. W. WYNN said the law with respect
continued the sante as is had been since the
considered it right that it should be so, bees
Government to termnete speedily any disputes a
pm to arise among the Authorities, by remora
parties from the Colouy. The only alteration i
to the salaries of the Judges at Bombay. TI
Courts there had been usually paid in pagodas,
shillings each; but, in consequeoce of there be
coin as a pagoda, and less silver than formerly in
had been substituted for it, they had memorialised
for an increase of Wary. The Lill now before
• enable Grovermucat to great that increase e •
mined should be paid, as the better method,
'country.
Mr. HUME, understanding abet the Right lion. Gentleman
intended to continue the Judges dependent on the will of the Go
Tenor-General. protested strongly against vesting the whole orae
trol of the justice of India in any individual. It was common f
Ouveratnem to punish Jurymen who resisted their desire to rani
certain individuals, and he knew no ere:teal cheek to smelt
peactiee hut l'y interposing the power cf an independent Jude •
recollected when fair George Barlow had actually pitrlsh r
sorggiluremen wile pronounced a verdict contrary to his wishrs.
ffll*Fnikelan wrateii, altena—timacounitn_gioble to be puniehea
for doing their time, and Judges to be deported if they ofFeade,'
the Governor. it was impossille for either to do their duty, or that
the laws could be justly administered. Ths Hon. Gentleman then
alludes td the removal of Sir Henry 0 willimai and the impeachment
of Sir Elijah limper, declaring it to be a great abuse of po wor
continue such an arbitrary discretion in the Gavernor.Gencral. It
was a system of intimidation which was never suffered to as:
but under unqualified despotism. India wu at the present mo-
ment at the mercy of th- Cosernor ; proscription followed upon
proscription, banishment succeeded banishment ; ar.d there ac.
tually was practisalin two years, on that continent. more abuses of
authority than the Stuarts had ever been guilty of during the
whole of the years of oppression preceding their dethronement. He
had received a letter during the last month, stating that two
indigo planters had been removed from their properties, and set t
Out of the country., without the slightest previous notice. If such
proceedings were to be allowed, and individuals We've to be thes
removed from their busiuess without trial, lie must say that Inds.,
was placed in a state of the basest despotism. Their object show!:
be to conciliate India; but instead of tint the Board of Control re
jetted all memorials sent to them upon die part of the half.came
sit on Juries; and although an Englishmen was not allowed
hold an acre of land in India, and persons of the half-caste trig! .
he in possession of any quantity, Englishmen alone could sit Ofl
Juries, and the half-caste were wholly excluded. to Ceylon thry
had been admitted, and the results had been eminently beneficial.
No argument, therefore, that he could imagine, should prevent
them trom doing tbst act of impartial justice to the Dative babe-
bitants. Ile thought that under such a system they were bound to
make the Judges independent, and place the protection of a Jury
between individuals and the Government.
Mr. ROBERTSON thought that any change in the condition
of the Judges would not he attended with beneficial consequences.
Mr. C. W. AVYNN said the lion. Gentlemen had argued under
a mistake. The Judges were not removable at the pleasure of the
Governor, but by the command of the Crown. Every man who
knew the colonies, was aware that disputes were constantly arising
between the Governors and the Judges, and it had therefore been
deemed advisable to retain the power of putting a speedy termina-
tion to then dissensions. It might be mid they could be impeached,
but the delay, the bringing of witnesses. and vatious other conside-
rations, Eormed insurmountable objections to such a proceeding.
The lionourabla Gentleman might, if lie pie sed, bring in a ilia
upon that separate subject, but the present one related, as he said
before. solely to the payment of the Judges. As to the serving
upon Juries.by the Charter all persons were equally liable.
Sir C. FORBES objected to the removal of the Judges. fife
thought the natives of India were quite as fit to serve on Juries aw
British subjects.
Sir. SYKES thought it a great abuse, that such confusion ahou'.i
take place between the Executive and Judicial Departments ie
India.
Dr. PHILLI MORE said the Judges were not removable at tl
pleasure of the Government, and therefore not liable to the objec-
tions stated by the llonourable Slember for Montrose. That tine, -
tion, however, had no connection with the present Bill. It Ins
solely far the pay•nient of salaries.
Sir. HUME had no objection to the salaries, but he would mat
an extract moot a letter he had received on the subject of Juries,
which he thought worthy of the attentlo.. of the House. In cite.:
actions there were no Juries in India. These were the words of
the letter. Now he objected strongly to a Judge deriding ...ley
in cases involving the properties of individuals. The letter goes v.t
to say, " In criminal cases, tone of the natives are ever placed ea
Juries ; they are composed wholly of Englishmen." The Right
lion. Gentleman may say the native inhabitants are entitled
sit, but the fact Is none are ever summoned, 60 that the Judge ct -
rides solely both in civil and criminal cases in India, because he h: •
no Jury in thee one case, and a Jury wholly at his command in ,r
other. The Right lion. Gentleman ought to consider the dissatis-
faction which exists on this subject in India. lie ought to ceno
forward with some definitive proposition, which would place Ilse
no Judges independent of the Governor, and let any British subj A
have redress for his injuries in the t'ourts of Law. The transper_
tation of individuals without trial was a monstrous proceeding, a• it
one which would keep India dissatisfied for ever, if some alter*,
don be not made.
Mr. C. W. WYNN said the Hon. Gent. (Mr. Hume) seemed
to assume that the Judges in India were totally dependent upon the
Government. The reverse was the fact ; a more independent bo.ke
of men than the Judges could not be found in India. He 1... d
' never known any body of men whose condect was so littlesubject to
suspicion or complaint. The Judges were not the subservient slasoi
of Government. and the lion. Gentleman must know the Courts tit
Judicature in India were not under the influence of the local Govern.
SO it. As to transportation, it was a right siven to the Compeer
by Charter. and held for many years. IT was in return for ttim
right that India was opened to British enterprise more fully than
it even au before. In his ( )1 r. %Fyne's) opinion, without an infriwa
don of the Charter, the present system could rot be altered by OW.
urnment until the Charter expired. When that event occurs, it
will be fur Parliament to consider the propriety of withholding data
power from the local Government of India.
Mr. HUM E said numberless cases were known in India *We
the Judges had interfered improperly between individuals arid sbe
Government. Leaving this part of the subject, he would suggest
that a proviso should be made in case of the Oise •ce, illness, at
sudden death of any of the Judges, to empower the Government to
appoint a Barrister temporarily to fill the situation.
Mr. C. W. WYNN conceived that the lion. Gentleman's re-
pose! would create a strange anomaly. A Barrister should at se a
Judge, and then sink into a Barrister again. Since he (Mr. W.)
had the honour of filling his present situation, he had never heart:
any complaint urged against the practice of the Courts or the ce's.
duet of the Judges in India. lie (Mr. Wynn) had never befo a
heard of the case of the indigo planters adverted tee by the Hein
Gentleman (Mr. Hume) in a former part of this debate.
Sir C. FORBES moved an amendment to the clause mouthing
the amount of the Judges' salaries.
Sir C. COLE secrnded the motion.
Mr. W. IV YNN said the proposed amendment only coons.
plated an increase of about 2(101. per annum.
The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. HUSIE said it was the practice when a Judge died &ging
the first year of his arrival in India, the year had *nix-
it ipetpased
ruYager,olo

althi•ugh
pired, to pay the year's salary to his family. Nov ke
u an amendment, that when a Judge (lied upon the rum
same allowance should be made to his family.
Mr. BROUGHAM complained that ten years was toe lona
period to keep Judges in India. lithe regulation was altered. aid
the period shortened, Government would be much more !Allyn)
procure able men, and he had reason to think that any alteration of
this kind would be hailed with delight by that body, fear whit
the Judga were selected.
Mr. WYNN explained.
After a few words from Mr. H. Stunt* and Sir r. FOllll4l,
upon the suggestion of Mr. Wvwx, the House resumed, and to
Chairman obtained leave to report progress, and sit again on Fl..
day bent, _ _ _

by . _ _ ~them, ..... . _...
consequence" to the trade. They were of opirilots that tbe 8i....1i Sii J. NEWPORT tookDß
anMopYporLF;nity of acquainting the
of 18119 was quite sufficient to check the irregularities complained
tuabiettedanutsoionhiss.chhaicrgeh
haadlebetteernreoeimadreed in
Report of the Cons-
of.—The petition was ordered to be printed. House that an Honourable and Learned Friend of his had cow-
Bill was brought up by Mr.
CURRENCY ASSOHLATION.
On the motion of Mr. WALLACE, the evidence given by him, and to several pamphlets written by hire.
fere Irort;seD°leCieom, amd'hern.silt4iro the
rnitute on the Currency Assimilation Dr. Doyle said, that unless his language was mutilated are pes-
ELLts, read, and agreed to. Tated from its obvious meaning, he was confident no cootnotictsen
ROBERT GOITRI.Ar. could be made out between the evidence given before the Committee
Mr. STUART WORTLEY presented a petition from a pa. of either house, and the pamphlets written under the sir:nature
rich in Fife, praying the House to take into its consideration the of J. K. L. 1/r. Doyle further proceeded to say. that he had w-
aist of Robert Gourlay..—Laid on the table. ways exprew.ited his respect for the creed of the Established Choreh,
CONSUL AT HAVRE. and had endeavoured by writing. exhortation, and osampi e, to in-
Mark Shelton, complaining of the conduct of the British Consul at Sir J. NewP'irt) was desirous. on the part of his li we
i Mr. STUART NVORTLEY presented a petition fax's+ Mr. "kale loyalty to the Sovereign ard sutsmiss_ lon to_onthneulrases.
wll.l
Havre de Orate. ned Friend, to mention this letter to the House, in raid, t,i
what this able and ,•teemed !'relate considered as unfossesslad es
WESTERN SHIP CA NAT. calumnious assertions.
Mr. A. BARING presented a petition from Birmingham, in fa. WAREHOUSED CORN BILL. ,•
your of the Western Ship (..nal.—Laid on the table. Mr. HUSRISSON moved me Order of the Day for the OW
PROSECUTIONS FOR MISDEMEANORS.
ber whaaattlehschigh, anbdpeasyedscutorldeTe :::071,..
readingof the iVarelinused Corn Hill.
Mr. DENMAN gave notice of his intention to move for leave to Sir M. RIDLEY took this opportunity of expressing hie oat-
bring in a Bill which will prevent prosecutors for misdemeanors ments upon the measure. He thought the proposed Alit, fa 11.0
from removing the cases from the Sessions by certiorari into the
ssuhmerillin
King's Bench, on all occasions when they think fin. hiders. He thought that the %teetotal Om rower sag the Ilpr -
111.7 KM ESE. WAR. PooPueird qbuoathr te
Xr, aVIiZ begged W 141 4 OIT Pitsidglt ef the BOW of sbahnlist instead of Iwo la at Om. a. Imam rnsii „„
• - - -•- _ . .

respect to Ole Jo*,
the year 1744; and be
hecauce it mead lie
rtes which might hap-
emoring the offend";
lion in the law relalea
. The Judos of Iltt
elu, worth about eight
:re bang Low no soca
rly iu the rupee, ilikieft
ieliaed the Govertreiegt
dere the noose *as to
e which they had acts-
, in the currency of the