The Sun.
London, England, 1801-04-21 00:00:00

MUSE OF COMMONS,

MONDAY, 20.
Sir JOHN ANDERSQN presented the Report of a
Committee appointed to consider the subjed, and
moved on it for leave to bring in a Bill to enable
the Corporation of London to insure Baigesemploy-
ed in inland NaNiigatior, in the same manner as
Ships at sea, Leave granted.
Duckworth's Divorce Bill was reada second time,
committed for tomorrow sennight, and lcavc was
given to Mr. Duckworth to be then heard by Coun7
sea in support of the Bill. •
Mr. N t cyo Lt,s presented a retition its /favour of
,the Croydon Canal Bill.
A Bill was brought in to explain and amend two
Alts for enlorsing the harbour of Scarhornugh in
Yorkshire, read a first time, and ordered to be read
a second time.
Sir WiLLIAM SCOTT rose to give Notice of
his intention to move for leave io bring in a sill
for the better rtgalation of Vice Admiralty Courts
in the West Indies, and other Foreign Possessions.
He expressed his opinion, that this species of Juris_
diction ought to be founded on the clearest princi-
ples, and exercised with the s"tric"test impartiality,
Justice, and regard to the rights and privileges of
other Countries, From the situation, however, in

. .
which he was placed, he had had opportunities of
observing that .erroneous decisions have been made
in some instances. The Hon. Baronet was proceed_
ing to state the cases in which these errors had ori-
ginated, when
The SPEAKER interrupted him by observing,
that if he only meant to give Notice and not to
make any Motion, he would he out of order in
proceeding.
. Sir WILLIAM SCOTT then repeated his Notice.
• A Message from the Lords intimated, that they
had agreed to the Bill imposing an additional Duty
on English Spirits carried into Scotland.
Mr. DICKINSON, after making a few observa-
tions on the hardships to which. many Clergymen
have been subjefted by common Informers taking
advantage of .a Clause in' the At; of Elizabeth, to
enforce the residence of the Clergy, gave Notice of
his, intention to move for leave to bring in a Rill to
repeal for a limited time, (two years, or perhaps,
only to the end of the next Session of Parliament),
by which time new and proper .regulations may be
devised and enacted,, some& of that Aa as gives to'
the informer the half of the penalty Fixed by it on
ConviEtion.
The House resolved itself into a Committee, to
consideftheproprietx of prohibiting the
.Export,A-
tion from, and pernutting the importation into, Ire,
land, of Corn, Potatoci, &c.
The Report was ordered to be received to-mor-
row.
The Bill for permitting the dire 4 Importation
into Ireland of Rice from the East Indies, was read
a second time and committed for to-morrow.
The Bill for granting Bounties on the Importa.
tion into Ireland, of Wheat, Flour, Pats, Rye, ike.
was read a third time and passed.
The, British tottery, Bill was read a third time
and passed,
The Custom Duty Bill was read a third time and
passed.
Mr. VANSITTART moved the appointment
orit. Committee to prepare an Estimate of the Ex-
price dunking provision for the "subsistence of a
certain class of Militia Officers in time of Peace.
The Motion was agreed to, and Mr. VANsiT-
SITTART,
,the SECRETARY at WAR, Mr. RYDER,
and Colonel LONGFIELD, appointed to compose the
Committee.
Mr. VANSITTART presented an Account of the
amount of the produce of the Income Tax, with an
Account of the Charges on collening the same for
the years 1799, and !Soo, which war ordered to be
Tinted for the use of the Members,
Mr. WHITBREAD presented the Report of the
Committee appointed to consider the propriety of
exempting persons in Holy Orders from the 'l'ax on-
posed OW Horses, by the AEI of the 38th of the
Xing. The Report was read and agreed to, and a
Bill ordered to be brought in pursuant to it. Mr.
WHITBREAD the CHACELLOR of the EXCITE-
quER, Mr. i N
A. TaYLog, and Mr, BRAGCE,
were appointed to prepare and bring in the, same.
' Mr. ;ONES said, in consequence of his having
read a violent Manife!lo of the KING of PR kiss ;
in which he inh;mates an intention of invading Ha-
nover, he, thought it his duty as a 'Member of Par-
liament, to take the earliest opportunity given him
by the presence of the CHANCELLOR of the Ex.
CHEQUER, to inquire if Government have received
finy information whether that Country is at present
in the possession of the Torso Of PR UsSIA ur of the
j.." /NG Of ENGLAND ?

. The CHANCELLOR r?,f. ibe EXCHEQUER said,
lw did suit understand. t question.

Mr. YONES repoted 111; question, and asserted
'fie had a right to put it,
The .Sediticus Niecting Bill was rend a third time.
The question being then put that the Bill do

Tile CH ANC ELLO R e?ftlie EXCHEQUER said,
Le burl .s'ouid t•x.s•used, thuinTh it was rater
ont of order, to odliert to what had Olen from any
Gentleman on a fornirr night, in niaking a few ob-
servations on what hmi [alien from to lion, Gentle.
man oppoite (Mr TIFTUI.:II, on a former Night,
when speaking of this Bill. That Hon. Gentleman
then asserted, thilt.no one instancc could be pro.,;need
of the House having adopted any' 'tixasure .like the
present, aficaing the fbrrty of the sa4ea, on ;;Q
alight grounds as mutely
.the general report of a
Comnittee of Secrecy. He had at the titx re-

plied, that though there were no instance exaaly
analogous to the present, yet there was nothing in
the proceeding inconsistent with the regular course
and order of proceeding generally pursued by the
Hotise. He had besides instanced two cases in which
Bills had been passed for continuing the Suspension
of the Habeas Corpus,. without any inquiry what-
soever, or any Message from the Crown containing
any statement of their necessity, The Hon. Gen_
tleman, however, then chose to make a distinCtion
between reviving and continuing an Act, the
force of which, as applied to the argument, he
confessed he could not perceive. But as he was
anxious for preserving stria regularity in the
order of proceedings, he thought it his duty
to consult the Journals for a precedent, which
would obviate completely the Hon. Gentleman's
()Nation, and he had found, that no longer since
than the year 1798, the Habeas Corpus Suspension
Bill was revived, not continued without any inquiry
whatever being made by the House into the grounds
on which it was eevived. If he recolleCied right,
the Bill was first passed by the Lords, and sent by
them to this House, and he believed that that was
the only occasion on which the Hon. Gentleman
voted for the Suspension of the Aft. He had men-
tioned this case, in order to satisfy the House, but
without it, he would have contended that this pro.
ceeding was perfeEtly regular, and on this ground
would have defended it.
Mr. TIERNEY said, that the case which the
Right Hon. Gentleman had mentioned, did not at
all affe& his assertion respelling the unprecedented-
ness of the present proceeding ; for if the Right
Hon. Gentleman will consult the Journals, he will
find, that on the same day on which the Bill for
reviving the Suspension of the Habeas Corpus was
sent down from the Lords, a Message from the
KING was delivered to the House, which stated,
that he had received information of a design being
formed by the Enemy to invade this kingdom, and
to aCt in concert with certain disaffeeted persons
within it. Here a pledge of responsibility on the
part of the Ministers of the Crown was given to the
House, and on that pledge lie voted f'qr the Bill.—
He maintained that, in the present instance, the pro..
cecding sv,as neither sandioned by evidence, nor by
responsibility ; that the House was aCting on the
bare assertion of twenty-one Gentlemen selede,d by
the Ministers of the Crown, without having any
pledge of responsibility on the part of these Mini-
sters: Mr. Tt E NM' then defended the distindion
which he had made between reviving and continuing
an Aft, and concluded with asserting, that if evi-
dence it can be called at all, the only evidence now
before the House is six years old, the evidence con-
tained in the Report of the Secret Committee in
795, to which the House is referred in the Report
of the present Committee of Secrecy.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
allowed that the case which he had referred to, was
'as the Hon. Gentleman had stated, and that a Mes-
sage was delivered to the House from the KING,
stating grounds which rendered the revival of the
Smpepsinn of the Habeas Corpus at that time neces-
sary. fie had thought, that when he adduced that
case in answer to the lion. Gentleman's arguments,
that when lie said that there was no precedent of
any measure sunilar to the present, having been
adopte3 without a Message from the Crown, or evi-
dence having b.een Lid before the Host, he meant
without a IVlessaget as preliminary to inquiry being
instituted by the House. It seems, however, that
he means without either evidence being produced to
the House, or such a Message being sent to it from
the Crown as may render Ministers rte.sponsible for
the measures recommended. Futr !pis own part, he
could see no difference, as to the responsibility or
Ministers, between their advising the Cromi to send
such a Message as the Gt:ntteman seems to
wish for, and their advi,ing the Crown to lay Pa-
pers before the House, upon wh,eit it may itself
ground such measures, as if the Message had been
sent, that Message might have recommended. In
his opinion, Ministers would be as responsible for
laying false documents before the House as for ad..
rising the Crown to send a Message containing 'a
false statement of fads.

Afr. TIERNEY still contended, that this pro-
ceeding is wholly unprecedented, and farther, that
no reason whatever has been adduced for passing the
Bill, because it has not been shewn how it can be a
remedy for the evil coinplained of. The Report of
the Committee states the evil to ba, that Seditious
Meetings are to be apprehended for the purpose of
producing a great .explosion throughout the Coun-
try on one day. But how can this Bill prevent
these Meetings being held I. Under this Bill, Meet-
ings may be held to petition for Peace, or for the
removal of His Majesty's Ministers, or for other
still better purposes. May not" Miptings be eon_
vened for these purposes, or such al these ostensi-
bly, and may not their attention be afterwards di-
redcd to the object stated by the Committee, pro.
ducing an explosion in the Country ? He contended,
that this may be done even under this Bill, and
that therefore it was nugatory, as- effeeling it, pre_
tended object, as it was unprecedented in the. man-
ner in which it was brought forward.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
corrected two errors in point of fact, into which
Mr. TIERNEY had fallep.
Mr. PlT7' rose merely to advert to two or three

things which ha fallen from the Hon. Gentleman
(Mr. ERNEI ). Fie said, that this measure is no
remedy for the evil which it is intended to cure, be.
cause the manner in which it can operate has not
been shewn. The nature of 114 argument is ex.

tremely singular---at one time he asserts that the
measure is an infringement us liberty, as being de-
Jrudive of the right of petitioning, and, at ano-
ther, he asserts that it is nugatory, because it leaves
entire the right of assembling fur the purpose of
petitioning, er any other purpose whatsoever, ex-
cept to concert alteration 3, or deliberate on griev-
ances in Church or State. He would agree that
this measure duel leave entire to the People the
right of assembling for any legal purpwe, and every
other, as they were enjoyed and exercised before
that time when an attempt was made tppervert this
right fur the purpose of subverting the Constitu_
tion itself, and destroying all the rights of which it
is the parent and the guardian. but, at the 'same
time, this measure is not without efficacy, as to its

objet.—Tt prevents the calling of any Meetings by
secret messengers and verbal messages : it requires
that public notice shall be given of all Meetings, of
the time and place at which they are to be held,
and of the &Tel. for which they are convened. It
prevents the possibility of a Meeting called for a
legal' purpose, occupying itself with illegal and se-
ditioes subjeas. it is not therefore nugatory as to
the purpose which it is intended to answer. The
Honourable Gentleman said that there is no evi-
dence of the necessity of this measure, except what
is six or seven years old, which he contended is
now done away. But, is it six or seven years 41;o
that proof was laid before the House of the benefits
produced by, this measure ? It is only two years
ago that a Report was laid before the House of Com-
mons, both of Great Britain and Ireland, which
gave a detailed history of all the plots, combina.
tions, and conspiracies which had been formed in
both Countries for their ruin and destrufflon, a Re.
port which stated that this, with some other mea-
sures of a similar nature which had been adopted, had
been the means of saving the CountrY, and which was
the more corret and the more to be depended upon,
as it was made on a review of what was ascertained
to have been done, or intended, and not merely oh
apprehension of what might be done. Besides this,
the House has before it the Evidence of a Com-
mittee appointed by itself in favour of this measure.
It has been said, that this measure goes to annihi-
late the privilege of petitioning. But Gentlemen
on the other side of the House ought to recollect,
that while this measure was in force, they them.
selves made Petitions, presented by different clan.
ses of people fur Peace, the wounds even of motions
in that House ; and so numerous were the Petitions
then presented that they argued, mistakenly indeed,
in his opinion, that the general sense of the Country
was in favour of Peace. On the whole he contend-
ed, that Gentlemen on the other side of the House
were mistaken, both as to the nature of the Bill and
its operation.

Mr. SHERIDAN said that the Right Hon.
Gentleman who had just spoken seemed to have for-
gotten the Rill entirely ; it was really inefficacious
as to the purpose for which it was professed to be
necessary ; but most harsh, vexatious and harrassing
when considered as an abridgment of the liberty of
the subjea.• The Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr.
PITT) had said it was a safe.gvard against the
attempts of most desperate persons, who might
otherwise meet, avowedly for one purpose, and
proceed to one of a very different nature, and endan_
ger the safety of the Public. • It would certainly be
a very good Bill if that was to be the etrea Of it,
but most certainly it would have no such effe6l,
because it contained no fresh Provision. [Here he
read that part of the Bill which prohibits the hold-
ing of any Meeting, &c. without due notice being
given, and vrequest made by-Householders, Sec.]
He then proceeded to argue, that unless in the
Advertisement it was stated that the Meeting was
intended for the purpose of procuring some altera-
tion in Church or State, any Meeting might beheld,
whatever the nature of it might be, so that the pre.
caution, however necessary, of preventing a general
explosion on one day, if any such was intended by
any set of men, was not taken- by this Bill, because
in this Bill there was no Provision whatever, for
preventing any Meeting, except such as had avow-
. Idly for its objea some alteration either in Church
or State. The People might meet at all places, and
in any numbers they chose, to petition for Peace ;
or they might meet, if they pleaseel, to instruEt their
Constituents to vote against granting Supplies ; they
might meet for the purpose of petitioning the Throne
tv change its Political Servants, or, indeed, for any
purpose whatever, except that of expressly altering
any thing le Church and State, and there was nothing
in this Bill to hinder them from doing so. They
might instruA their Representatives either to im.
peach the late:Ministers of the Crown, or to dis.
miss those who are now following their system. So
flint the Right Hon. Gentleman, when he treated
the Bill as a measure of precaution against SeditiOus
Meetings, either totally misunderstood this Bill, or
wholly misrepresented it. -Undoubtedly these Pe-
titioners, from whom so much mischief was appre-
hended, if any. such there were, would not be such
fools as to advertise their Meeting under such de-
scription as to be prohibited by the Letter of this
Law. Np, they would chuse suchstibjeas for their
Meeting, as might be legal, even under this Bill,
and then they might agree upon any thing they
pleased.—So that this Bill was, in the sense in
which its Advocates pressed it, absolutely nugatory.
As to, the general principle •of the Rill, that of
abridging the Right of the Subjea, that he knew
would not be defended by any body, nor was it, in-
deed, ever attempted upon any ground but that of
absolute necessity ; and this he did not conceive
himself called upon to argue now—that had been
abundantly done already, and, lie believed, that
nothing need, if any thing could, be added to what
had been already said. He was glad the Right Hon.
Gentleman had got the Bill in his hand ; if :he had
read it.—" I hope," said he, " the Right Hon. Gen.
deman will have the candour to get up and say, that
he is wrong, and that I am right, upon the effed
which this Bill will have."
The Question being put, " That this Bill do
pass,"
Mr. SHERIDAN said, that when the Riglit
Hon. Gentleman understood this Bill, he would as-
sent to what he, (Mr. SHERIDAN) had said of it.
Mr. PITT said, he had spoken from recolleaton
as to the tcnour of the Bill.—" The Honourable
Gentleman," said he, " has not given me so much
time as might be requisite to read this Bill through,
but quite as much as he himself seems to have taken
to understand it, for he talks of the possibility of
any sort of Petition being agreed to, after the
parties are met, but he leaves out the words or for
the purpose or pretext of deliberating, Ste.'
[Here Mr. PITT read the whole of the Chime,
by which it is provided, that the Business carried
on, shall be conformable to the Advertisement,
which shall cqnverie any of these Meetings.]

Nowl he said, he would ask, whether, if there
was any
Meeting took piace for the purpose either
of censuring His Majesty's late Ministers, or dis-
missing his present Servants, or for petitioning for
Peace, old at sudi Meeting it were to be. voted,
that the scarcity wholly owing to the present

{

War, or that the House of Commons ought to with.
hold Supplies, whether that would or would not be •
a Meeting which came under the head of a
test ? Most undoubtedly it would be a pretext with-
out a mask ; for those who met under that Adver-
tisement, would, in substance, he availing them-
selves of a Privilege to commit a Breach of the
Public Peace. In such a care, the Magistrate has
power, under.this Bill, to dissolve such a Meeting.
" I am sorry," said Mr. PITT, " that the Hen
Gentleman has not had sufficient leisure to look at
the Mt."

Mr. SHERID AIV maintained that the words
of the Aa were perfeaty plain ; that they had the
meaning which he put upon them, and no other--•
which was, that_any Meeting—might be held under
this Bill, except such as did not go to the alteration
of any thing in Church or State. If any body
thought that Bishops were a grievance, then the
taking away that part of the Constitution would be
an alteration in the Church ; or, if any one thought
that the Lords were useless, then the abolishing the
House of Lords would be an alteration in the Stare,
and such purposes could not be carried into a vote at
any Meeting ; but he was confident there was no
Provision in this Bill for preventing the other ob-
jets he had stated, from being carried into effect.--A
He really wished rho Right Hon. Gentleman woad
agree to postponing this Bill, and CO= another day,
when he might be better informed upon it.
Mr. Pl7l said he was prepired already to shew
the futility of the objections o the Hon. Gen tlemari
to this Bill. Did he mean to say, that if a Meet-
ing were called, for instance, either for censuriv
His Majesty's late Ministers, or for dismissing
those who are at present in office, that under txeli
an avowed object it world be competent to such a
Meeting to \rote that no more Supplies should be
granted ?—Would that, or would it not, come under
the head ofalteration either in Church or State? Most
unquestionably Waded upon, it would endanger the
safety of the Public, which was the bulwark of the
State. This,he mentioned as a direct answer, inde-
pendent of the other he hid stated to the objections
of the Hon. Gentleman to this Bill, namely, that
wherever the Meeting was held as a pretext for
something different from thit for which it was
avowedly convened, the Magntrate had authority
to dissolve it.
Mr. GREY supported the observations of Mr,
SHERIDAN, and contended that they had been, in
substance, admitted by the SOLICITOR GENERAL,
whose abilities he admired when the question was
argued on a former night, and that Learned Gen..
tleman gave this interpretation of the Bill to,shew
the mildness of it. Mr. Garr, however, regarded
the Bill now, as he had always regarded it, a dis,
grace to the Constitution of England, and a shame.
ful encroachment on tke Liberties of the People....
A measure for which there was no apology offered,
and'for which hardly any apology could bereceived.
The Right Hon. Gentleman (the CHAtteattois of
the EXCHEQUER) had found a precedent for tl4s
measure ;—a precedent he might have in the pro.
gress of the present War, for almost any thing dig
was unconstitutional, and that was only giving to
the Public fresh cause for indignation, for it was
quoting one unconstitutional measure to WNW:
another.--. 6. preCeicnt in th. ...Liu, of the ptesell.:
War they might quote for almost any thing that
was hostile to Liberty ; but in the good old dines
of the Constitution of England, when Liberty.
flourished, and while its principles were cherished,
precedent for such a measure as this there was none,
True, indeed, the Habeas Corpus' Ad had beta
co
suspended, but it never was SQ., except in case of
actual Rebellion, or something equal in danger to•
the
things,oul d
actual Rebellion. He stated these things, not by
way of argument, but rather by way of protestation
against this for in present condition of
frilecr tow
thiaewparre n
aware of
resfmtehaesuineirll7 of what he
Crentlensen oft
the other side
of the House. He could not.
however, leave this subject without taking son.
notice of the, materials of which the Report of
the Committee in Mg was founded. He sMI
the Report of the Committee in 1795, because ski
Report of the Committee which immediately pre,
ceded this, was a mere echo of the former. Rete
he read, i
and as he went on, ridiculed that part of
the Report of r79s, which relates to the nstrue,
tions found in the 'possession of General Hurnbetat,
in Ireland. Mr. GREY concluded with protestinti
el
of the People of England, and anomalous to the
against this Bill as a measure hostile to the Lila
true principles of their good old Constitution.
The Question being put, " That this Bill do
pass," the House divided.—Ayes iss—Noes 3s.