The National Register.
London, England, 1822-06-03 00:00:00

THE NATIONAL RE( ISTER

Lord HOLLAND did not wish to eject the petition in con-
sequence of the signature of an old wt:nian : it ought u. be taken
as the petition of a number of perwns whose signatures were
regularly affixell.—The petition was withdrawn.
SALT TAX.—Lord SUE El v.t.r) wished to ask the noble Earl
a question on the subject of the ealt tax. He understood 13s.
of I Ss. duty was to be repealed. There would then remain Ys.
and the object of his inquiry was, to ascettain whether the report
was true, which stated that, with the abolition of 13s. out of 1.55.
there would be the abolition of the right of search. It was well
known to all connected with the fisheries of the country that this
right of search had defeated the object of the legislature, namely,
the prosperity of the fisheries. There was a necessity for the
repeal of the right of search. In some ca-es large quantities of
salt imported had been 1118.40 subject to confiscation. under cir-
cumstances of extreme hardship. If the right of much was
withdrawn he had ne doubt the fisheries of the country would
rise superior to the Hutch. who employed 56,0/0 men afloat,
whilst we had ha more than votio employed. The noble Earl
suggested the extension of fishing on the coest of Ireland, as the
means of relieving,diatreases in that country.
The Earl of LIVERPOOL said, with respect to the repeal of
the ditty on salt, the subject would be brought under the con-
sideration of the other house, and he could not say how far it
a ould he modified, but certainly the difficulty the noble I.ord
alluded to would be obviated, because there would be a drawback
with respect to the fisheries. regulations would be adopted re-
moving other regulations which hsd been Mund inconventent.—
I t was intended to accompany the repeal of the duties with regu-
lations beneficial to the fisheries.
The Earl of LIMERICK did not consider the fishing employ-
ment likely to affind effectual mild to Helmut'. The distress was
owing to the want of money to buy provisions. The House then
adjourned to Monday.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
THURSDAY, MAY 30.

Petitions against the Navigation Laws Amendment Bill were
presented from the silk throwsters of Macclesfield, Hinckley
Coventry, and London.
Petitions against the Poor Amendment Bill were presented
from Gloucester, Preston, Oldham, Rochdale, Birmingham,
Stockport, Greenwich, &c.--Severally read and ordered to he
printed.
Mr. WALLACE postponed the third reading of the Naviga-
tion Lawn Amendment Bill till to-morrow.

Sir R. WILSON wished to know whether the Treasury
really intended to propose any measure to protect vegetable
powder, &c, from the visitation of the Excise, &c.
Mr. LUSHINGTON said, that the " hon. officer" would
perceive on the orders for a future day, a Committee on the
acts connected with this subjeet. There was a Bill prepared,
but he had not yet received it from the Excise.
Mr. S. WORTLEY, in presenting a petition against the tax
on foreign wool, spoke of the injurious tendency of that tax. A
worse measure to raise money had never been devised ; it had
been most prejudicial to the trade. We could not make wool-
len goods without mixing foreign with our wool. The difficulty
thrown in the way of the British manufacturer had affected the
trade; so much so that the Americans had gone to the Siberians
and Russians for articles that used to be obtained from England.
Mr. COK E said, that the price of English wool had decreased
ever since the infliction of that tax, so that the produce of the
tax was not a just criterion.
Mr. BENET (of Wilts) congratulated himself that the ma-
nufacturers of Wiltshire bad not petitioned for the repeal of
this tax; indeed it would came with a very ill grace, while
the agriculturists were exposed to so many difficulties, res-
pecting English wool, Sc. Besides, he was persuaded that,
if the tax were to be removed i aaaa neoliately, it would not have
any advantageous effect on the English manufacturer ; and he
thought it would be much better fur the Yorkshire manufactu-
rers to remain quiet till they began to sutler what agriculture
was now suffering.
Mr. S. WORTLEY observed, that his constituents, who
petitioned on this subject, maintained that the repeal would he
beneficial to the agricultural interests. If they could not show
that fact, he admitted that they failed to make out their case.
Ile knew that the reason for keeping up the tat was, tloat it
produced so mady thousands a year to the Exchequer. What
lie would ask for now was a drawback.
Mr. ABERCROM BY presented a petition from the corpo-
ration of merchants of Edinburgh, in favour of the So pelt Jury
Bill, in criminal cases. The petitioners made no complaint of
the laws now existing, but they thought this bill would introduce
a great improvement in the mode of administering the criminal
laws. Petition read and ordered to he printed.
Mr. COKE presented petitions from Gildercrosa and Dias,
Norfolk, complaining of agricultural distress. Read, and
ordered to he printen.
GENERAIJILD TAXATIOV.—Sir T. LETHBRIDGE pre-
sented a petition from Mr. Pitisentt, praying for the House to
appoint a committee to ascertain the value of the several British
interests, in order that accurate duties might be imposed on
those various interests. The petitioner had endeavours(' to get
his plans placed before atinLders.
The petition was then read. It particularly desired that the
several British interests might receive proportionate protection.
Ordered to be printed.
COUNTRY BANKS.—Mr. P. GRENFELL gave notice, that
to-morrow he should present the petition fthtn country bankers
residing within 63 miles of London, against the renewal of the
Bank Charter ; he should not present it now, because none of
the Ministers were present. lie should move that serious re
turns respecting country banks be printed. According to those
returns, there were in England and Wales 552 country banks,
carried on by 1673 persons, which was an average of three
persons.—There were only 29 banks that had six persons each.
To renew the Bank Charter now, on the ground, proposed,
would be to renew it absolutely lot no consideration.— Accounts
ordered to be printed.
Mr. BRIGHT presented a petition from Bristol, for the
total repeal of the Salt Tax. If the proposed partial repeal
were to take place, the Fisheries would he greatly iujured, i;
not ruined. lie approved of the removal of the tax as far as
regarded the internal consumption.
Mr. GRENFELL also spoke of the injury that would resnit
from the partial repeal.
Petition ordered to he printed.
Mr. JONES moved for leave to bring in a bill to extend
the powers of the Judges holding Sessions, in Wales, and to
amend the laws relating to the same.
The other business having been disposed of, the House ad-
journed.
.'IIIDAY, MAN 31.
Petitions against the Poor Removal Bill were presented
from Gateshead, (Durham) Macclesfield, Leicester, Wolver-
hampton, Liverpool, Northampton, Manchester, Whitechapel,
St. Peter's, ( Nottingham, Exeter, Swansea, Lincoln, St.
George the Martyr, (Sooullow ark ) Halifax, Beverley, St John's
and St. Margate esuninster, Sze. Read aid ordered to be
printed.
rethiona against the Nee igation laws Amendment Bill were
pri Armed front 31nuebtstcf. the Webt of Leslaotl, Cornwall,
stud Taunton.

..%.

The Haverrordwest Jail Bill wits read a third time ■nd
passed.
ENTENTR IN AID.—Mr. LYTTLETON to know
whether there was any measure in contemplation respecting
extents in aid.

The ATTORNEY GENERAL replied, in a low tone of
voice, that he had sonic remedial measure in contemplation.
Sir T. LETHBRIDGE postponed till the 11th of.lune nest
his motion regarding taxes on agriculture.
Ts x ETW VN D presented a pet;tinn from
Stafford in favour of the repeal of the leather tax. Ile had
seen and talked with farmers on the ma hit et of agricultural di,-
tress, and he found that all of theist complained of rents more
than of any thing else, lie believed it would soon brconie a
question lit tween Landlords and tenant.. ( I lear, hear.) The
next auhiect they complained of was the poor rates. Petition
ordered to be printed.
Mr. P. GR EN FELL presented a petition against the proposed
renewal of the bank charter, and of excluding the suggested
privileges from banking concerns within lis miles of London.—
The charter did not expire till It't3, and he should tale every
opportunity to oppose its renewal. He was surprised that mi-
nisters should think of proposing such a renewal, especially
alter the tyranny the bunk li td exercised over the government.
The negociations he had heard had been closed.
Mr. itI.INN IN G had known the conduct of the bank for the
last thirty years, and he denied that in any instance they had
conducted themselves in a tyrannical manner. They bad not
inb rfered with the politics of the day. As to the charge of the
Bank having made profits, he wished to know what was the
object of the company being formed. But he believed the be-
nelita conferred on the country were great ; Sir T. Baring, in
a pamphlet had been of that opinion, and lie was higher autho
illy than the hon. member.
Mr. RICAI4 DO did nut complain of the Bank for making
profits ; he condemned the government fur making improvident
bargains with the batik. Ile was not of opinion that the batik
was so useful as Sir. T. Baring and others had imagined.—
With the view of preventing the government from forming fur-
ther improvident bargains, lie should be for the deferring of the
renewal of the bank charter.

Mr. MONCK said, that the government had been blamed for
making improvident bargains. It seemed to be hirgotten that
the government went to the bank as spendthrifts ; the bank ap-
peared as money-lenders : the former were obliged to submit
to any terms, being thankful that the terms were so moderate.—
Petition ordered to be printed.
SOUTH AMERICAN INDEPESDENCE.— Mr. LENNARD en-
quired whether the noble Lord (-mild now give any definitive
answer respecting the course which the government had pur-
sued, or would pursue, regarding the South American go-
vernment ?

Lord LONDONDERRY replied, that he could not state any
thing in addition to what he had said on this subject on a former
evening.
Mr. CANNING presented • petition from merchants of Li-
verpeol trading to the East Indies, complaining of restrictions
in regard to the tonnage of vessels. In moving that the peti-
tion ie printed, he said, as he understood the govumnient in-
tended to make some concessions or this point, he should re-
serve kimstli for a future occasion.

Mr. C. WYNN saki, he should on an early day hare to bring
in a bill to wake these concessions. Petition .ordered to be
printed.
State TRADE. On the presentation of a petition respecting
the West India Trade, _

Mr. BROleGil AM Miscued. that the great cause of the dis-
tress of the W est India planters, was the encouragement that
had been given to illicit trading in slaves. It was carried on
mainly by French and other vessels, but, he regretted to say.
that it was some way encouraged by English merchants, un-
knowingly be believed. It was accomplished by interchanges
of cargoes on the African coast with French and Spanish weasels,
those cargoes going to the purchase of negroes.
Isrcrus.cg or TUE CRO \I N.—Mr. BROUGHAM gave
notice that, on the Halt June, he should submit a motion to the
House on the influence of the Crown.
Mr. SCAR LETT, in moving the second reading of the Poor
Removal Bill, said that it had been touch misnederstood. It
would be useful irk was adopted in preventing litigations t,c
(wren parikhes, and the expence of removing the poor list were
denied the right of settlement in the parishes in w hick they
might be found :—the hill was to compel each parish to pay the
pauper poor that might be found in it. Much opposition, how-
ever, had arisen against the hill, and if he perceived that the
sense of the House was against the bill, he should out press it
to a (141,41131.
Mr. MANSFIELD strongly opposed the Bill, and moved
that t he read a second time this day six months.
MI. Illoack and Mr. Coart.ney also opposed the bill, urging
that in many instances it would be ruinous to 'wishes in whirls
a good deal of casual poor at times resided, or in which ahoy
make temporary residence.
The Marquis of Lontloneerry and Col. Wood wished the
bill should be allowed to go to a committee.
M r. SCA R LETT said a few words in reply.
Tice gallery was then cleared for a division.--For the second
reading 6G—for the amendmect, b3—Majority, against the
bill,
The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the
House adjourned.