The Sun.
London, England, 1808-06-24 00:00:00

MR. PALMER.

The, Resolution .of the 14th of June, respeaing
Mr. Palmer, having been read,
The. CII4NCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER Jose to
.move for a separate Bill on that Resolution, instead
of allowing it to form a part of the general Appro—
priation Bill. He would state his reasons for malt-
ing this proposition, of which he had given due no-
tice; ,that it. might not appear,to be a sudden mea-
sure. The ordinary course of the House wai to put
all the grants of the year into.the.Appropriation
Bill ; but in adopting the course which he was about
to recommend, the House would not et in an un-,
parliamentary or an unprecedented manner. If there
ever was a.ease in which the ordinary course should
he deviated from, it was the present, fur very strong
reasonS, which he would distinctly shew. With
respea to the precedents on this subjed, would
submit_ to the House a great variety of them. • In
the iirst place he.would state a number of cases of
grants voted in the Committee of Supply to private
individuals, with conditions annexed to them, some
of which had been carried into riled, solely by a se.,
i-trate 13111, -while others had been incorporated into
the Appropriation AO. The tint that he v.'ould
mention was a' voe. of the House in a Commit tee .of
Supply, on tbe loth of April, 17?9, of 50001. to
Mis. Johanna Steele, on dm conditiuo that she
would with. a#l conveMent speed make discovery of
her remedy for curing the stone; tin, vuie wai car-
ried into eff,,et by a separate Bitli and (lid not appear
it! the'Applo,inaiiou Act, - Another vote was on the
tt It of Jatioary, 173 t , of 14,0001; to Sir Tilomas
.ai a rei.v.rnpenee for the.intl-gda.tion of or.
ganized bilk into tLis Country, on the euedition
that lie should, nrodOce the otodels of his mills.

Note c.-..as ca; riei inte mile::.` li' sejarste.Bl;;; 41It•,;
did make its appeaninee in the Appr.oprnitiou
50001. had been voted in a committee-of SopplV,,
tlie.fainily of Mr. Hiltrison, fur ails tioae-pieee,
the contlitioa that lit; Executors should, as speedily
as possible, explain its coustruZtion.. Thi3 yoke Wa
carried iiiro effed by a separate Bill, and wa=s
incorporated ha the Appropriation Wet. :3`.i001.. had
beep voted in. a Committee pf
tiff; ,cov t - cOi*npo• • •
sition of a powder for destroying insects.: 1:11i;
was carried into eifed by a. separate Bill, whit[! Was
lost in the Lords and it did not appear io the AP-
, proprialion Aft. Two. or three )ears afterwards
Mr. Phillips renewed his app:ication, and the liow,o
• of Commons in. a 'Connitttee of Supply voted, Will
10001. This vote was carried into efreel in a serh•
rate Biel, which Bill was also lost in 'the [louse of
Lords; and it did not appear in the Appropriation
A&. Thus it appeared that out of these rive ca-rei the
mouse adopted ;one course in three itistai...e.;„ ito4;
another course in the rentainin,4( tee. ITh.e slWer
variety of proceeding would appear upon alt
nation of different grants that-had be(-11
public purposes. In some cages 'these vows h.act
been carried into erred solely 'by sepaiiite BillS';
others they had been incorporated in the Approri-
ation A. For the construdiOn. and' i.oproycnierit
of Westminster Bridge various sums had ii,-yen voted
at different periods. 04k the, 13th of May„
`40,0-001;.- on the ,?.-4th
both these cases the vents had been cal heti int6o.'
fed in separate Bills, and had nut appeared 1111['°
Appropriation Act. 27th of J .1.',7•P
une, 4
25,0001.; in 1743, ..a."r 5,0001. is i 74-,4., e2„•001.,
which had been carrtcd into efle,:t by sep.iiate
but had at,o been ineuri)urated into the 4iiP()Plll.
- ation Act. It was evideot, therefore,, tl)atnattl444l
instances, all-relating to lhe s,anie ttit ,140-1":
had teen hitlueeced jolely convenietive.,':Al,l;.
were variptts' -other sioriiar • erant.,„
of 17;6,
.1,),C)(jo,
streets of , Westminster; - ail Zl3y,
40,000 i: for repairing I\ollll-Ord w"t`i'"- •
votes were. carried two cdect by O:L'-atj 131!15,
although' they. appeared iu the. AarOplaatiQn:
Ads.' In 1759, 10,0001. for Mdloid• I Wt.-1i 00
the gth-bf May, 1759;
,various SUMS OS conit-,wP'";
tion for.tlle purchase of inds at 'Pertstuouila. 304
15Yruduth on the tad of iVitiel); 176 c, 500(4.4i!
paving Westminster, and Ott" the 14th of AP,Ot
1767, 20001. addaional for the same purpose. ~4% • •
these votes were carried into,effeet by separaw
And did not appear in the Approprial'•ou 4et•
these various cakes it was clear that not only an Net' •
vate but on publice grants- the<House had abs'O''.
exercised its own option on the mad; of
.0•01;ce7
ing. .But . there was, another class tit cllbei 111011 A
• nearly resembling that under consideration. '.'bets
were the grants ‘vhien had been made without and,
condition atinexed. On the '3d at Decettllvr, 1104
tfivol. dd. had been voted in a coenlii"" '
Supply as due to Captain.Jaines Roach, for the Ar,
rears 'of rent of forfeited estates in lielitad, gr'luter
,to him by Act of Parliament. This v°l°
te
tied into effed by -a separate Bill, and
pear in the Appropriation Mt. ' 01)
January, 1752, 112,1431, .was voted to tile African
a
Coi-way cotopensation for- the-lasi -ut their
chartered lands. This" vote had :been • earr;.cd into
effeet by scPrate Bill, and . was tiotltdid not aei
icerneralca
into the Appropriation Att. But one of the 11101
martial cases 'to which the House ought to, :We t+ •
was. that of Rye Harbour, .0n the vfith
bruary, 1745, .the Committee of Supply vote" a
grant to.his,Majesty 2:3,2fi01: out of time Siiillrz;
Eland, to enable the Commissioners of Rye Pub"!
to complete the works. The Appropriation
was sdbseqpernly brouglit into the House', I't
grant was not t"..teltided in it; and the CoMtirittett
luioPoutir,
flot
rottliltehp-tuarptloi
seutu'At %1
aUow;131:i.11
for Itj,e Harbour to be made the .stibig'ct ":
rata e 8.11. Another.ca..e had occiarr,el in 177 Y, -iK
a giant u, on the Petitioe of Dr. Smith, as
tor his In.ving atten.ed sick prw)oeis 10 Load" all'
We. mil Ste. . That P:tition -lied—liven with -4ial,*
ceuitter Petition! referred to a Cuinori..tee,
made no Report. In the year 17e) • the ret;'if
was renewed, a id on' the Report of a Cottawits',
a Bi,l b.-owg it ;n and the ilotise°'
Commons tear gra alit I vow, to Smillk4,"l”cas
B!livis never re4l.'titti frotn the Lords. w"
possible, :dm: what Ire. h !Ll,stated, tu °Wend/ I'l'
it %%lei. not perisctly competent to the [loose fq
carry its vote into effect, either by a eiyarate
"e Pr_
ty ins inserli in l'h'e Xnprirpriahjoi),
*OO,, been siot;.l •on grounds not satth:Wtorf
and though. he still refained his fortrier
Ilion, it was not upon that be, proposl the '
.course. The House had. a discretion, z+;'(4•
mained to.be considered under what circtuDs'aac,i;
the HOLM: would be disposed to proceed by a teeo.o
rate Bill, or by including thegrant iti the
Ad.' lino other motive would app 00
ly, I
that would be mosyconvenient, wonid
sirable. In ordinary.cast.s, where there wag 11( 111K.(:rt
to be anyditlerenee of opinion elsewhere,' 'At'-'l.OO
be proper to. insert the grant in the APPr°Prtosa.
_Att. But, it there should be any reason to suP5l4
such a difference of opinion ,to exist. 10 th4t
tlittg't
:quartet, that woitldhegoodground for.taking cciof
out of the Appropriation Act. The vote pllOO,
upon an asumpnon of an agreement bets eutiliog
Pitt and Mr. Palmer, and then assumed that t' flat
had.happened to ,defeat such contract,
Bill should be brought in to carry the cuetrat,.lvi,
effea. That House knew that the other 119.a.'!". re
the matter under their consideration, by havP'4..3,. •
mintina,
e.eived a Message from it, requiring a , it,sed
non of the evidence Upon which they
.haa„P„l,,a,r,
the Bill for granting the annuity .to Mr• ry.;„,,,,,
ler,
Having, by sending up that Bin to the °tl.
eirro
given it an opportunity .-of exercising Y••
strained judgment upon one
aot, 1119';
they should: net, thy insertipg this , titt
Appropriation, Bill, reduce the other tiquse,
alternative of either acceding to a grant, 01,
it :disapproved, or, of rejecting the apPr.",f)!,41.1.:.
part
of the Supplies of the year. TI111:1,11;i',,
noniable Gentleman then ,elunted- the 31.1, , -tot:
,
of Mr. Hatsel, • VOl.lll, pac'e ios, Ar.'•
-
tacking one measure to another Act tur:.p
to
forcing another her hianch.ofpi ll
to it, was highly irregular. awl breach • ku4'4/'
tuss %% Ito ~,,
tice of Paltament ; but that to
ledge that the part so tacked was disagree bleat
other bragcla.of the Leg,i4l4tuN; etas btOly oa' P.
thel:egislaturei
the

s • . • •
you aho tracOntilulional. admittea that this
doctrine had
,bran applitd by Mr. Hatsel to the
tacking to money'bills measures uncoPileated with
the supply, but &mended that the principle inetende
el to preclude the. Housd from any 'course.
would reduce the other House to the altereative he i•
had scat-d. If, therefore, the House should set,no
reason, founded upon Parliamentary usage, for de- i
clining,the course he had to propose, esbyeinsert the
grant in the Appropriation' Adt, why doe the sup- 1-
plies of the year with a measure that would endanger 4
their passing the other House ? The proposition upon
which the grant rested, was one on which not only
the present House of Commons entertained a differ-
ence of opinion, but a former House of 'Commis.; •
bad rejthed. And • there was as much reason to
think-that any other assembly would differ from the
resent House of Commons, as that the former
ouse of Commons had differed from it. If ever
there had been a case in sirhich the grant should be
carried into effea by a separate Ad, it was the pre-
sent. He should ask any Hon. Memher to shew any ,
case in which two votes founded on die same princi-
ple, had been carried into effed, one by a separate
Bill, the other by insertion in the Appropriatiou Act.
if there- was no similar case, then this was a new •
.cases and it was competent to the. House to-exercise
its discretion upon it. The House would theretbre
decide whether,-under all the cheumstances of the
case it would prefer the separate Bill or the genersl:
Appiopriation Att. He should Wove that a Bill be
brought in pursuatiete the Resolution-of 'the Com-
mittee of Supply. -
Theeßesolution was entered as read, and on the
question being parr—
• Mte -P,eesielt observed,. that the late Chancellor •
of the EXcliequer: had consented to have the claims
his relative refereed to a Cominittee, though in
consequent; 'of the chatter: of Administration no
Such Committee had been appointed. It had there- ,
fore been a disappointment to his father to find that
his claims had been resisted by the present Chancel-
los ofethe Exchequer, :When he was returned to
parliament he had waited on the present Chancel-
lor of the Exchequer-to- ascertain what course he
' was to take, and that Right Hon. Gentlewan had ,
candidly informed him of his intention to oppose
••. the claims, On his complainihe of the hardships of
•► his father's case,. in being denied-aelair hearipg, be-,
fore the only tribunal to which he could oppeel, the
Chancellor of the Exchequer had assured hint, that
the case simuuld be fairly heard, though he• would not
flatter him, that the weight of his opinion would not
be exercised againat him in the House.•• He thank-
ed the Right Hon. Gentleman for hie candour,
- lamenting, - that the weight of an opinion, high -as it
must be with the House', shoUld be thrown into the
scale against .him, audon applying to him foe asiviee
respecting thescoerse he was to take, he had' been
' referred to the Speaker. In consequence of 'the
press of public business, he had been, induced to put •
oft his motiorr so hag es lie had done,-especially' its
be was assured that he could not accomplish his oh,.
jed till a latestage of the Session., The Right Hon.
Gentleinan had given the consent of time Crown for
referring time business to a committee, which Cons- •
thittee had sanctioned the. claim by its Report. He
bad been blamed-for bringing this Bill forward, but
in that he had only followed the course pointed out...
by the House. When so large a majority of that
Rouse had decided for the claim, he had every ex- •
le&ation the Bill' would pass quietly through the
'Lords. He thought, the arrears at least •woeld not
Ism opposed. •As soon as he,nnderstood that an op-
leettion was intended its anetlier place, he hadaban-
dolled the Bill by omitting to move the 'third read-
big. The Right Hon. Gentleman had taken it then
op, and sent it to time Lords. resped to the
' Present Bill prbposed to be brought in, he was not
concerned in it, and he would leave to the House to
a& upon the subjeet as it should think proper. • He
otily begged to be spared the, expellee of a measure
-*Which could not succeed in the other Hobse, though
be should bevels() apprehension upon the subject' it
Le was Sure of a lair heating its the Lords.- Here
Time SpEnitHaTeminded time Hon. Member that it
. • wits not in order to advereto the proceedings of the
Otheietionseeiti such a manlier.
A short conversations ensued on the point of order;
after which
, • Mr. PALMER concluded by deprecating the Bill,
and the 'unnecessary and ineffeetual expence that
mould' attend it.
. .
Mr. WII4DIiAM bore testimony to the Candid and
manly Manner in which the Honourable Member
bad conducted this business throughout. But it wad
neither that nor the effect the present proceeding
-have •upon,the •interests of his relative that
made him rise, but to remind the House of time
situation in, whick it was to be-placed? The Right
Honourable Gentleman, in the pains he had taken
to search for eases, resembled time Wan who built 'a
costlY edifice upon another man's ground. He had
altesen course time House might take if the mat-
les was now intitd, viz: that it may carry its vote
jets) effect either by a separate Bill, or a Clause in
the Aepropriatien, Act. -That would be correct in
• point of form, but would it be so in point of justice.?
Ihe House had already decided upon the course it
• \vas to take. It lied beets :tensed atter a division in -
the Committer, that the vote should be carried into
'effect by a Clause in the Appropriation Act. What
bad since happened' to change that course ? A num-
ber of time Members wile) had voted for that course,
hatt left town,- upon' a .supposition that no al teratioh
• Would take place., The House was precludedfrom
resorting to any other conies.: The effect of all time
llight Honourable Gentleman's libout 'was • to pro-
duce five cases which' did not apply, being'grapts
Upon conditions : several other of his cases were irre-
levant, being grants for pUblic works, and the only
Case that did apply, that of Captain Roach, the
House knew nothing tit'. All the Right Honoura-
• ble Gentleman' stated was, that the House might.
adopt either. of two courses, but he contenda,that
they were injustice hound itot to take the business
out of the coerse that the House had decided upon,
and particularly as time case was no longer betbre
the same judges. As to what had been said;
respecting the impropriety . of not, giving the•
Lords an opportunity of exercising their seder-
ineet open this as upon the other • part of the
-ease, he would ask was there any grant on
which a differee-Ce of opinion may not prevail ?
There. was no greet in which the Lords ought so
,
teatilly to.Cencer.ese grant- of money for public ser-
vices. • Time serrate of the House:had in no instance
Letts more strongly or deliberately expressed.. The

. ,
case rested' tOnn:the truth, the argument, and the
arse
It had been carried by Do undue Milo-
pace, and could not be called a party question, un-
ess‘ the Eight Hon. Gentleman should call that a
'iOarty question on which he had been beaten. He then
vroceeded to condemn this system of reconsider-
ritiort at the end of a Session as a dangerous prac-
tice. It was not an appeal from Philip Drunk to
Sober, not Iron) a thin Hansa to a luil House,
-but from a full House to a less full'House, and con.
eluded by expressing his dissent to the Motion.

Mr. HAWKING BROWNE observed, that this ap-
peared to him a qUestion wholly-independent of the
Merits of Mr. Palmer's ease. Aeis of appropriation.,
he thought, ought not to be loaded with any ek-
'traneous votes. If the Resolution had passed unani-
mously after discussion in this Home, there would
be reason to suppose that it would be Viewed in the
same light by any of the enlightened Assembly. But
great difference of opinion had not only prevailed
upon the subject of this vote in' that Hotise, but out
of dOnrs ;, and it was his -opinion, that the other
branch of the Legislature should not be deprived of
the opportunity, or unrestrained judgment upon the
measure. The Hon. Gentleman then entered into a
justification of the grant to the Duke of Athol, and
concluded-with expressing a wish that the business
shOuld und&ge every proper discussion.

Sir THOMAS TURTON agreed, that in the preSent
Case the-House was not to decide upen the merits of
Mr. Palmer's claim, but upon the condat 'of his
Majesty's Ministers. The chaticellor of the Exche-
quer had referred to the authority of Mr. Hatsel, but
that Hon. Gentleman had given the asscut of the
Crown. to the proposition, and, the same au-
thority,
he would state, tat 'to give such assent,"
when he meant to oppose the proposition, was un-
parliamentary. He should at least. have remained
neuter, and not have requested the support 'of his
friends. The: cases produced ,by the Right :!Hon.
Gentleman did . not apply to this case. He defied
any man to slew any case of a debt due from the
public to an individual, that was not'included in the
Appropriation A'&. He had not been long in Par-
'lament, and, though he may not.be thoraughly ac-
quainted with its usages, he knew enough of Par-
liamentary courtesy to. say, that it was not proper,
in Parliamentary view, when any individual brought
forward a Bill, which was read a.first and second
lime, to 'take that Out of his bands without any
cam -tunic:llion. with him.

. Mr: G, JOHNsTosc defended his Right Honoura-
ble friend (the Chancellor Of the Exchequer) from
the iniputatiOnS' of the Honourable Baronet, who, he
thought, if confirmed in the opiOions he, expresse:d
Df his Right Honourable Friend, ought nut to have
addressed hien as he had done.. For himself he should
never kel atnity towards any person of whom he
could entertain such, opinions. When his Right
Honourable Friend bad giVen the cou'ient of the
Crown to this proposition, he had distinaly stated,
that he gave, that consent only that the question
should be investigated, and at the same time dean-
ed.any pledge upon the subjeEt. All the cases
quoted by his Right Honotirable Friend appeared
to him to be per';ectly in point. He then contended,
that'the measure should be sent up to tl,?e Lords in
a shape in which that House should have an oppor-
tunity.of exercising their uufetterred discretion and
judgment.
Mr. TIERNEY thought that' so far as the sense of
Parliament could go, Mr. Palmer had a claim upon
the' public for
.1)4,0001. This was the first time that
a Private Bill w;ts brought in against the. will of the
individual who was concerned. Where. were the
officers to go tor_ their fees? Mr. Palmer disclaimed
the Bill. NVhatwas the reason,of all this ?. the mor-
tified pride of the Right-Hon. Gentleman. He bad
heard that ne, Chancellor of the Exchequer lead ever
been in five minorities on a qoestion of finance. The
reason was, that other Chancellors of the Exchequer
had sense enough to See when there was danger in
the wind, and wit enough to avoid by not pressing
apinst the marked sense of the House a measure
upon which the House bad repeatedly deCided.—
The Right Hon. Gentlenir then proceeded to shew
that none of.the cases cited by the Right Hon;the
Chancellor f the Exchequer would include this
eise, The Right Hou. Gentleman had not come
deewn lower than I 7 81, in the cases which he had
quoted.. It 'remained for him to quOte instances
since. There appeared a case of a Dr.-Carmichael
`Smith, to whom for' his discovery of fumigatiop by
nitrous acid, a sum 0'50601. had been granted by
Address to his Majesty. The Lords knew nothing
of this grout, which was iriserted in the Appropria-
tion Act of the following year, to make good a like
stun issued pursuant to an Address of the Houk..
The grant to Mr. Martin, an American Loyalist, of
20,0001: ; the. grant to Messrsthalitiers and Cowey,
and the' grant to Maynoollt College in the present
year, had been inserted in the Appropi;ation Ad,
without the Lords having any opportunity of dis-
Penssing the tuerits of the grants. The Right lion.
Gentleman had challenged arty. Gentletnan to pro-
duce a case in, which -an arrear and a prospective
annuity were granted, that tither was included in
the ApPrOpriation Ad ? .If be took the challenge
right, he Should state the case- of the grant last Ses-
sion to the family of Lord Nelson, when the grant
of an immediate stun was inserted in the Appropria-
.tion Act, and the-prospeciive annuity included in a
separate Bill.
Mr. BANKgS justified the. course be hadrecOm-
mended Upon- a. former occasions, namely, that the
arrearsshould be proVided‘for by a clause in the An-
nuity Bill.- That course he lociked upon as.the best,
in order to bring the matter fully under the consi- .
&ration of that House, as well as to- Dave to the
other. House an opportUnity of exercising their jndg,..
meat upon the whole" of the case. He thought it
'unfair to place the Upper House: in a situation in
which it could not exercise ita constitutional judg-
,ment upoe it grant of public money; without incur-
ring.the odium of ohstruding the public SerViee. 'He
professed himself as strong a friend of the privileges
of this House as any man could be, hut he thought
these privileges would be best maintained by abstatn-
i ing from invasion of the rights of the other House.
He lmerited the influence of ptivtite canvass, for by
such iutiuence alone could the majorities in the pre-
sentrase be accounted for. He took a review of the
precedents; and contended that, kit, far as they ap-
plied, they were in favour of the course proposed by
- the Chancellor of the Exchequer. On all th‘tse
grounds he heartily eouceried in the Motion of the
Chancellor of the Exchequer. . •

GEORGH Poti'son-; denied, that this was 4

. .
-qUestion t.ar ntcrj* htiott of. eon t rita bn the con-
trary, it was a mere iinestitm of fact; Old confirmed
over and over 'again by the votes of the House in
favour of the claim: The ChanCelloi of:the Ex-
chequer in hiving the recommendation of the Crown
to the Petition, slitrui,ed a dispo4tion to leave this
business to tlfe judgment of the House. 'But as soon
as that judgment ;was prononticed,..he•-nrislied to
make it a nullity. He thought it an od,Li. argunient
to say, that the House should, in deferenee to an-
other branch of the Legislature, abstain from taking
the course which was calculated to give its own re.,
trolation the best et e&. The General. ik'ppropriation
Act, containing the grants of the year, was the best
Vehicle to carry the grant to the Lords. He chal-
lenged any body to instance a proceeding equally
violent as that not, proposed since' the Revolution.
Mr. Rose, from papers which he held in his hands,
maintained there were a majority-of cases
.of sepa-
rate grants passed by bill, and not by clauses in
_the
Appropriation Ail. He argued-at some length on
the propriety of making .a separate Bill' on the pre-
Sent occasion. '

Mr. ta'tn.LEtt maintained, that the'constitutionnl
jealousy of the interference of the House of Lord)
with Money Bills, ought to be insisted on, so as
not to allow a letter to be igl:lied, -and called Upon
the House to maintain its derision, jive times pro-
nolincM.

Sir F. BunnErr thOught- it incumbent on The
House to maintain its,decisiOn so 'frequently and so
clearly prortbunced. He excused Mr. Palmer for
attempting, by indire&, as well as diced weans, to
establish his improvements, 'which were introduced
into the Post Office under the hostility of every per-
on in that Otlice. IXa ..e.::1).-oiatedytt the higenOty
of Mr. Pahner's invention; and the great amount of
the benefiCial effats produced by .
Mr. Bu itTON denied that the. gen6ral merits of
the case of Mr. Palmer formed the, gites-tion. tjdw
before the House, The only; questi6n was' how:the
vote passed by this Ilb4se, and to be adhered to so
far as this House .was' concerned, should be sent to
the birds,, whether in the Appropriation Ant, or in
a separate Bill. He tnointaincd that all the circum-
stances of the case particularly called tar a separate
Bill.

Mr. WHAREAD ridiculed the tenacity shewn by
his Majesty's Ministers for the-privileges of the Lords.
in this measure, when they had 4o largely invaded
those privileges in others. Let the Appropriation ACS
take its chance. .The ,lionour of thee. House if once
lost was irretrievable.

. Mr. Secretary CANNING said, the merits of Mr.
'Palmer's case tbrmed no part of the question betdre
the House. The only question was, in what Irriil-
nec.the House should carry its decision into erica.
The precedents were not all on one, side. There
were some for the course proposed by the Chancel,
for of the Exchequer, ma the HouSe: was tree to
tbllow the line that should please it. He censured
the objMion to referring the whole question to the
Lords, because that House. could eXainine witnesses
on oath ,to the matters Of fad. It should seem the

Honodrable Gentleman thought matters of fad
were not to be implied into on oath, but
_that mat-
ters.of opinion and conjeture were ; he insisted on
the constitutional impropriety of sending the present
business to the Lords, otherwise than in a separate

The CHANCation' of the Exontauen denied in
his reply, that giving the recommendation Of' the
A7,hin so 36 tp bring a Measure under the cottiidera.!,
twit of the Meuse, implied an obligation to support
it iR its-progrsst through the Howe— He also via-.
dicated his condua in proposing this Bill, on the
knowledgo that the House of Lords was examining
the agreement with Mr. Palmer... He went into a
detailed explanation.of the whale of his condo in
this cage, answering the .variaus -cOMinerits urged
against him in the course of the debate.
After a short expthnatirm from,Sir T. IitIRTON,
the CHANCELLOR of the F.:,:direcluntt, and Mr. S.
130111:SL, the Hou‘sg.: ditidej.

For the Motion - . . tB6
Against it .
11143ority for the Motion ' . . •
Strangers were notagaiu admitt6d, and the House
adjourned at FOLK O'ClOck..