The National Register.
London, England, 1811-05-12 00:00:00

DISTILLERY BILL.

The Earl of SELIXIitc presented a Petition from the County of
and the Earl of Mortoii,, one from the County. of Air,
against the Bill. Lord Holland also presented a Petition, and
the Earl of Hardwick e another.
On the moticn for the second reading, the Earl of Hardwicke
made sonic observic.ions against it. -
The Earl of Suer oex spoke at :Ozzie length in opposition to
th.• Bal. '
Earl BATIIVAST made an able speech in its defence, jn which
he entered into a great number and variety of calculations •to
- shew the propriety of its adoption. His Lordship argued, that
assuming the price of barley at 33 shillings, and sugar at 70 shit-
hogs and nine-pence, the ezpence of the use of either would in
effect be the same.
The Earl of AIIiADZEN opposed the Bill, as did the Earl of
Rosslyn, in. a long and argumentative speech, in which he en-
tered into and controverted the calculations of Earl Bathurst,
and contended, that the principle of the ineast.:e 'to give
a preferencL houoLy to sugar, and to takeaway the just ad-
vantages of corn, by which it would lay a tax of 690,C)031. on the
people for the bent it of the sugar-growers. "
The Earl Of DARN LEY spokeilgaittst the Bill.
The Earl of HARDWICK E moved, that the second readingbe
postponed till that day six months.
I De Earl Of WESTMORELAND spoke in favour of the Bill.
Lord HOLLAND argued very ably in support of.the Bill. He
thOught the ideas of its evil results greatly exa?gerated. It was
not a question of a broad speculative nature. If it were, it would
be better to go into a consideration of the whole system at.d
principle of our Corn Laws, which required great revisions.—
The mode proposed, he thought perfectly fair; for both the
West Indians and the corn growers cumplaite:d that their in-
terests were not sufficiently consulted. He likened their case to
that of tli.ontlicap. He contended, that it would be most un-
fair. to giveffie benefit of competition to the farmers of Fiance,
*slid refuse all irs advantages to our own ruined and starved
West India colonists. This was the 14ht in which the question

WEDNESDAY, MAY S.

Their Lordships were engaged several hours in (=mining
evidence in the Banbury Peerage Cause• ; and afterwards heard
Counsel on Loveden's Divorce Bill.
The Bills on the table were forwarded in their retrective
stages, amongt which were the slave Trade Felony Bill, the
Customs' Bill, and the Revenue Laws' Bill.—Adjourn:.d.

THURSDAY, MAT 9,
DISSENTEP.S.

Lord SIDMOUTIT, pnrsuant to notice giver, moved for leave
to bring in a Bill to explain and amendthe Toleration Acts of
the Ist of William and Mary, and the 19th of Geo. 111. His
Lordship said, his motive for submitting this Bill to the House.
was on account of the monstrous abuse that crept into these
laws by ssiecies of Preachers who had set themselves up as
Ministers of the Gospel in almost every part of the Kingdom,
among whom were classed the most illiten:te, as well as the molt
vulgar persons of the human race. Coblers, Tinkers. Pedlars,
Mountebanks, and Chimney-Sweepers, fin med the motley
gronpe. He did not mean to say that these men were the worse
because their orisin and occupations were lowly; the presump-
tion, however, was against them, that they were unfit to teach
the Ereas.doctrine of religion to others; they were out of theit
places as Ministers, and there was no liberty fi r them by the
Toleration Act to take upon then,F.elves the functions of reli-
gion. The magistrates of the counties of Devon, Buckingham,
and Ncrfolk, had d-clnred that no one could qualify unless he
:Lai taken holy orders, or tattl;ht a congregation it was, there-
fore, proper to declare at once that the lave was, that the ma-
gi,trates might be guided by it. He should also propose that
those who were not •ttotchers, but who applied for licences to
be tome so, should prochice the evidence of sit respectable and
religious persons, in proof of the sober, regular, and moral lives
which they had led. .1-le should also suggest that the number of
establislied places of worship should be increased.
Lords Ho t.t.Asin and STANKOPE acknowledged that some.
thing ought to be done to p: .)mote pure worship, but they did
like the principle of chit 'Bill It was, however' brought in, and
d reaa first tl.r.e, ordered to Lein intedi and to be read a second
time on Friday se'nnight.
The House. went into a Committee on Lord Redesdales
Vexatious Arrest Bill, whin, alter a conversation between Lords
Ellenborough, Holland, \iolra, Stanhope, Redesdale and the
Lord Chancellor, it was agreed that the principle t:f the Bill
should be, that 151. should be the lowest arrestable sum, and
that the Bill he continued for live years.
On the motion of Lurd STANHOPE, that Bills of Exchang,
and Promissory Notes (which are excepted in the Bill) be aW