The National Register.
London, England, 1821-04-08 00:00:00

'slosh, Lord Castlereagh, and the Speaker, was put and
negatived.
Mr. CROKER objected to the Prote,tunt being called
upon to swear that the Pope had no autism ity in the king-
dom, while that authority was recognised in the oath pro.
posed to be taken by the Roman Catholic. With this feeling
he observed that he should move the omission of the worth
" Roman Catholic," from the clause which regulated the
oath, in order that the same oath should be administered to
all classes of his Majesty's subject..
Sir J. MAC IN TOSH said that Catholics might conscien-
tiously object to the words " or ought to have" (referring
to the spiritual authority of the Pope) iu the old oath ; but
he thought that Protestants could not feel the seine scruple.
Lord CASTLEREAGH opposed the amendment; nod
after a few words from Mr. Croker in explauation, it was
put and negatived.
Sir J. NEWPORT observed, that by the,bill Catholics
were excluded from eligibility to become churchwardens
bat is Ireland a great ioconvenience might be found from it
in many parishes, wh,'re it often happened that the Protest-
ant clergyman and his clerk were the on.y Protestant inhai
Intents. lie would therefore move that the winds," orbs
competent to become churchwardens be omitted.
Mr. C. W. WY NN said that the right hon. gent. (Mr.
Peel), in proposing the exclusion of Catholics from being
elected churchwardens, was—as far as respected England—
an abrogation of the present law; fur by that they were
already eligible Catholics constantly voted in parishes Is
Eugland, as well for the repairs of churches as in the elec-
tion of churchwardens.
The amendment was then put and negatived.
Several verbal amendments were subequeutly proposed
and agreed to, after which

ThiSPEAXER put the questiou—" that the bill do
pass."
Mr. HUTCHINSON observed that though he had felt it
his duty to oppose several of the clauses considering them,
as be did, penal clauses, and though he would out say yes or
no to the bill as it nuw stood with those clauses, yet if the
bill passed he would do every thing in his power to recon-
cile his Roman Catholic fellow countrymen to it.
The bill then passed, and was ordered to be carried to
the Lords.
The other orders of the day were afterwards disposed of,
and the house adjourned at four o'clock.
TUESDAY, APRIL 3.
Petitions against the Malt Tax were presented from
Hertfordshire, Northamptonshire, Essex, Woodbridge,
Great Grimsby, and Lincoln.
A petition was presented from Wiltshire, praying for
the repeal of the Wool Tax.
Mr. Alderman WOOD in..ved the second reading of
the Blackfriars Bridge bill.
Mr. SUMNER opposed the bill. This was a fresh at-
tempt to make a demand on the Orphans' Fund. He
could not consent to the importation of a fresh tax on the
subject to repair this bridge.
Mr. Alderman Wood, Mr.T. Wilson,and Mr. Alderman
Brydges defended the bill.
Sir J. GRAHAM opposed the bill, and moved, that It
be read a second time this day three months.
The gallery was cleared for a division. The numbers
were—Ayes 19—Noes 19. The Speaker gave the casting
vote against the bill ; it was of course lost.
CATHOLIC Discussions.—Sir J. NEW' PORT hoped the
house would indulge him with the opportunity, previous
to his carrying the bill to the lords, to return thanks for
the great indulgence lie had received during the recent
discussions. He was most sensible of, and most grateful
fur, the kindness of the house; and he added, that he
thought the house never had passed a measure more cal-
culated to produce the ;pretest aivantage to the empire.
Sir J. NEWroRr then took the bill, and prepared to
leave the house for the lords. The Speaker desired the
Louse to attend their message. Sir J. N. was followed by
several members of the house; and Mr. Canning, who en•
tered afterwards, immediately left the house to follow and
join the message.
Lord ALTHORP presented petitions from Retford,
Worksop, Doncaster, &c. against the Malt Tax. He
concurred in the prayers of the petitioners, and he hoped
the house would give effect to their previous vote. The
noble lord (Castlereagh) had very frankly told them, that.
the second reading of the Malt Tax Repeal bill slioald be
resisted; that the government could not go on without tha
Malt Tax; but he hoped that members would not be
operated neon by any intimations that the loss of the tax
would work any change in the administration. Such in-
timations had before been given, but they had not been
attended with may terrible consequences. He trusted
that members would do their duty, and consider the state
of the country alone. If the tax were repealed, he doubted
not that ministers would find the means of doing without
ie.—Ordered to be printed.
CARLISLE ELEmors.—Mr. C. W. WYNN presented
the report of the committee of privileges, appointed to
examine the Carlisle petition, complaining of the intro-
duction of the military during an election. The committee
had agreed to several resolutions, stating the facts of the
military being introduced on requisition of Drs. Lowry,
Heyson, dec.; that there was no reason to attribute cor-
rupt motives to the magistrate; that there was no proof
that the civil force would not have been efficient; that
there did not appear to be sufficient reason, from actual
actions riots, to call in the militany ; but that, considering
all the difficulties of the circumstances, the committee
could not recommend the adoption of any further mea-
sures. The hon. member moved, as a resolution of the
house, that they would always view with the greatest jea-
lousy the introduction of the military, but thut there was
no ground for adopting further steps in the present in-
stance.
After some remarks from Lord Lowther, Sir J. Graham
and Mr. Curwen, the resolution was agreed to.
The County Rates bill was read a second time, and
ordered to be committed on Monday.
Mr. CANNING presented a petition, praying for the
repeal of the protecting duties imposed by the Union,
from Liverpool.
MALT DUTY REPEAL BILL.—Mr. WESTERN moved
the second reading of the new Malt Ditty Repeal Wi—
llie ditty of Is. 2d. imposed in 1819, which was to all in-
tents mid purposes a war tax. The right hon. gent. had
held out the hope of peculiar relief to Scotland—but this
tax pressed alike on England, Ireland, and Scotland.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, he
had no objection to a fair inquiry of the operation of the
tax ou Scotland.
Lord A. HAMILTON had thought that the tax pressed
peculiarly hard on St attend. After the last year's discus-
sions he had thought the cause of Scutlaud was ilUlickati,
and he thecvluie atippottuti the bill.