The Sun.
London, England, 1830-02-18 00:00:00

TOBACCO AND SNUFF DUTIES.

Mr. C. CALVERT presented a petition from the
Manufacturers of Tobacco and Scruff in the cities of
London and Westminster, and the borough of
Southwark, complaining of losses which they had
sustained in consequence of certain circumstances,
and praying for relief. The Hon. Member stated,
that the petitioners had in 1825 sustained a loss of
23 per cent. on their stock, in consequence of being
misinformed with respect to the intentions of Mi.
sisters. An Act by which they were affected hav-
ing expired in July, 1825, a delegation waited on
the then Chancellor of the Exchequer (Mr. Robin-
son), and, in consequence of the communication
which he made to them, they had subsequently in-
creased their stock to the large amount of 2,500,0001.;
on which they had afterwards been compelled to pay
a duty of 125,0001. They had memorialized Govern-
ment in rain upon the subject, and they now came
to the House for redress.

After a few words from Mr. HART DAVIS,
the petition was ordered to lie on the Table.

Mr. R. DUNDAS presented a similar petition
from the Tobacco and Snuff Manufacturers of Ips-
wich; and Mr. W. SMITH, a similar petition from
the Tobacco and Snuff Manufacturers of Norwich.
—Ordered to lie on the table.
MILITARY OFFICERS HOLDING CIVIL
SITUATIONS.

Mr. GORDON said that, in compliance with re-
peated wishes which had been expressed to him
from various quarters, he begged again to call the
attention of the House to the subject of Military
Officers holding high civil situations, and retaining
their military pay in addition to their civil allowances.
The impropriety of such a proceeding was increased
by the consideration of the severe regulations respect-
ing officers on half-pay, whose affidavit had been re-
cently altered, and WllO,Oll claiming their half-pay,were
called upon to swear that they had no civil appoint-
ment, and did not receive from Government any other
allowance than their half-pay. He was aware that a
distinction was attempted to be set up in this re-
spect between the officers on half-pay and officers on
full pay ; but Le considered it to be unfair and un-
tenable. If the regulations were not strictly appli-
cable to Officers on full pay, it could only be because
the circumstance of their holding civil appointments
had not been contemplated. How was the case?
A general Officer, receiving his full-pay from what
is called the Unappropriated General Officers'
Fund, held a high civil office, the salary of which he
also received. It should also he remembered that a
General Officer having a regiment not only received
his full pay as Colonel, but all the various allowances
derived from clothing the regiment, &c. Was it
fitting that an Officer thus circumstanced should be
qualified to hold a civil appointment, and receive the
emoluments attached to it ? The same thing hap-
pened in the Navy. The Lord of the Admiralty
whom he saw opposite to him, he believed, received
his full-pay as an Admiral, while at the same tune
he held the situation and enjoyed the emoluments of
a Lord of the Admiralty. It might be said that the
Lords of the Admiralty were not well enough paid.
Granted. But let them be paid as Lords of the
Admiralty. As in his opinion the subject was not
unworthy the consideration of the House, and as
the Right lion. Gent. opposite had told him that
he had no objection to the motion, he moved for a
Return of the Name, Rank, and Yearly or other
Pay, Allowances, and Emoluments, derived from

whatever sources, of all Military an 1 Naval Oflic r.;
holding Civil or Official Sit Hatiwis.
The motion was agreed to.
On the Motion of Mr. K. DOUCiLAS, various
Returns were ordered to be hid before the House
of the quantities of sugar, coffee, rum, (Sze., imported
into Great Britain and Ireland from our West India
Colonies.
FEES PAID BY PERSONS ACQUITTED OF
CRIMINAL CHARGES.

Mr. Secretary PEEL rose, in pursuance of his
notice, to move for leave to bring in a Bill—by
which, however, he did not feel quite satisfied that
the immediate object which he had in view would
be gained—namely, a Bill to abolish all fees here-
tofore payable by persons on their acquittal or ether
discharge from any criminal charge. In 1818, a Bill
had passed that and the other House of Parliament,
the intention of the framers of which must certainly
have been to abolish all fees payable by persons on
their acquittal or other discharge from any criminal
charge. The construction which had been put upon
that Bill, however, was, that it was applicable only
to persons retained in custody, tried and acquitted,
and not to persons who were held to bail, tried, and
acquitted. The object of his Bill was to relieve
all acquitted persons, whether they had been in cus-
tody or only held to bail from the payment of fees
upon acquittal. At present, a person so circum-
stanced was liable to pay 13s. 4(1. to the Clerk of
the Peace, 2s. to the Crier of the Court, and
(which was the most extraordinary fee of all) 123.
to the Jury on every traverse. On grave considera-1
tion, however, it appeared to him that the Bill for
which he was about to move would not go far enough.
It would only relieve the person acquitted from the
payment of fees, but he would still be subject to
the payment of different formal processes of the
Court. Among other charges there was the drawing
up of the record, for which the person tried had to pay
a shilling a folio ; amounting, in some cases, to five
or six pounds, and in many to two or three; although,
in numerous instances, no record whatever was
drawn up. Since he had given notice of his Bill,
the Hon. Member for Cumberland had expressed his
intention to move for the appointment of a Commit-
tee to inquire into the amount of the Fees receivable
by Clerks of the Peace, and the authority on which
those fees were demanded. He (Mr. Peel) highly
approved of the proposition, and, if that Committee
were appointed, would not press the Bill upon the
attention of the House until the result of their inqui-
ries was known. He understood that last year it
was a question with many country gentlemen whether
granting compensation for fees was desirable, very
large sums having been demanded on that score.
The Act of 1815, to which he had before alluded,
provided compensation for the officers whose fees it
took away, and subjected the county to the pay-
ment of that compensation. He confessed, however,
that he (lid not see the justice of rendering the county
liable at all times; although, with respect to fees,
he was certainly inclined to think that on the ter-
mination of all existing interests, it might be advis-
able that they should cease. The whole subject was
one of great importance, and as he understood the
Hon. Member for Vumberland would take an early
opportunity of moving for the Committee to which
he had alluded, he would merely now move for leave
to bring in the Bill, but postpone any further pro-
ceeding:with it until the Committee had inquired into
the subject. The Right Hon. Gent. accordingly
moved for leave to bring in his Bill.
Sir T. BARING expressed his satisfaction that it
was intended to appoint a Committee to inquire into
the amount and nature of the fees paid to Clerks of
the Peace. In his opinion all officers of -County
Courts ought to be paid by salaries, and not in fees;
and he was happy to find the Right Hon. Gentle-
man of that opinion. He would take the oppor-
tunity of observing, that the Act which had been
introduced by the Right Hon. Gentleman for com-
pelling the county to pay prosecutors their ex-
penses, though very good in principle, was not so in
practice; and in some cases had increased the
County Rates so alarmingly, that it was a subject
which ought to be considered by the proposed
Committee.

Mr. Secretary PEEL wished to guard himself
from the supposition of having absolutely declared
that in his opinion all fees ought to be abolished.
A great deal might probably be said on both sides of
the question.

Sir T. BARING, in explanation, said that in
many Courts the Clerk of the Peace disposed of his
fees for a certain sum to 'a Deputy, who, of course,
extended their amount as much as he was able.

Mr. W. SMITH hoped that before any corn.
pensation were granted for fees, their nature and
amount would be strictly inquired into.
Sir. JAMES GRAHAM observed that it was
very desirable a system of uniformity should be
established on the subject; and, therefore, that it
required a general inquiry.
Mr. O'CONNELL thought that all judicial fees
ought to be abolished.
Leave was granted to bring in the Bill.
CLERKS OF THE PEACE.

Mr. PORTMAN moved for leave to bring in a
Bill regulating the office of Clerk of the Peace, par-
ticularly with respect to the abolition of fees and to
the substitution of a regularly salary.
Mr. FREEMANTLE could bear testimony to
the fact, that the present regulation of paying the
Clerks of the Peace by fees was attended by very
great confusion and inconvenience. The preferable
mode was to pay by a regular salary.—Leave was
then given to bring in the Bill.