The Sun.
London, England, 1830-05-18 00:00:00

iMNDON, TUESDAY EVENING, MAY 13, 1830.

petitions from the Merchants of London trading to
the Mediterranean, South America, and other parts
of the Ni•orld, from which they were in the frequent
habit. of importing bullion. They stated that they
suffered great injury from the high rate at which the
importation into this country of bullion, carried in
the King's ships, was charged. Whenever that
article was imported, King's vessels were selected
for the purposes of safety, and the petitioners com-
plained that the Commanders of these vessels were
;Authorised to exact two per cent. for the importa-
tion—a charge almost sufficient to abstract all the
profits of the transaction from the importers. The
consequence of this system was, that the com-
manders obtained a greater profit on the importa-
tion of the bullion, than the merchants engaged in
the traffic. If one per cent. was sufficient compensa-
tion, as it seemed to be, to commanders, for carry-
ing this bullion, in some instances, it ought to be so
in all ; and there could be no doubt that that sum
afforded an ample remuneration to the • lieutenants
who comminied the frigates in which the bullion
of private individuals was imported. Even at that
rate he would often be obtaining 50/. or COI. a day.
The petition was laid on the table.
PAY TABLES.

Mr. IMSKISSON presented a petition from a
number of most respectable housekeepers against the
system of masters paying the wages of the work-
men in public-houses.
Lord BELFAST presented a petition from Bel-
fast, against the increased Duty on Stamps.
Mr. O'CONNELL and Mr. BROWNLOW
bore testimony to the rank and respectability of the
petitioners.

sented a petition froni the city of Cashel, against the
increased duty of stamps and on Irish spirits.—To
lie on the table.

Lord CLIVE presented a petition from Ludlow,
in Salop, in favour of the Beer Bill.—To lie on the
table.

Mr. COOTE presented a petition from Cionmel,
azainst the assimilation of the stamp duties.—To be
printed. . . _

Lord STANLEY presented a petition from the
cotton spinners of Manchester and the workmen in
their employment, taking notice of a Bill intro-
duced by the Hon. Member for Stafford, and pray-
ing that it might not be so framed as to prevent
landlords deducting rents due to them out of wages
which they might have to pay.—To lie on the table.
The same NOBLE LORD presented a petition from
the Chamber of Commerce, Manchester, against
the punishment of death for forgery.—To be printed.
The same NOBLE LORD also presented a petition
from Burton-upon-Irwell, against the paying of poor's
rate by the occupiers of small tenements.
Sir JOHN SEBRIGHT presented a petition
from Royston, praying that the duty affecting corn
should be transferred to rum.

Mr. O'CONNELL presented a petition from
hree individuals, which he knew could only be re-
ceived as coming from t:iem, it being actually signed
by none others, though it proceeded from a much
larger body—the Radical Reform Association of
London—praying for a reform in Parliament.--•To
lie on the table.

Mr. JOHN MARTIN presented a petition from
the Catholics of Worcester, in favour of the re-
moval of disabilities affecting. the Jews.

After a few words from Mr. PROTIIEROE, the pe-
tition was ordered to be printed.
Mr. BARING presented a petition in favour of
the Jews, from the inhabitants of London and its vi-
cinity.. It was signed by upwards of fourteen thou-
sand persons—amongst whom were some of the
highest respectability. The petition was worthy of
attention, because, out of the 30,000 Jews resident
in England, about I 8,000 resided in the metropolis,
and therefore this petition might be looked upon in
the light of a testimonial to their good character from
those best acquainted with their dealings and general
conduct.

General GASCOYNE admitted that there were
no petitions against the Jews, but it was because
the country had not the slightest idea that the House
of Commons was in earnest in what it was doing.—
(A laugh.)—A Noble Lord had pledged himself to
prove that the emancipation of the Jews would be
the means of increasing Christianity—that was cer-
tainly a hold assertion.
Mr. O'CONNELL said, that the statement of
the Noble Lord (who was not in the House) had
been, that it would strengthen the principles of
Christianity—(Hear,)—and he was happy to say,
that he took exactly the same view of the subject.
After a few words from Mr. EwART, the petition
was ordered to be printed. •
Mr. BROUGHAM presented a petition from
persons resident in and near London, to the same
effect, 150 of whom were Barristers—among whom
he saw the names of Mr. Denman, •Mr. Rose, Mr.
Treslove, Mr. Bingham, Mr. Butler, Mr. Hum-
phries, and many others equally well known. Not-
withstanding he might expose these persons to the
indignation of his Hon. and Gallant Friend (General
Gascoyne), he could not forbear stating a few words
contained in the petition_ They stated it as their
opinion, that disabilities for holders of civil offices
were repugnant to the tolerant and benevolent spirit
of Christianity, and injurious to the strength and
solidity of his Majesty's Government ; and they
were, therefore, of opinion, that the Jews were en-
titled to the protection of that House, in common
with Dissenters and Roman Catholics.

Mr. N. CALVERT objected to the measure be-
cause it was partial, and not general. The society
of Friends, commonly called Quakers, would still be
excluded, and that appeared to him to be the height
of injustice. It might be said, that they did not
petition, and that they were an unambitious people;
brat though that was true, that was no reason why
Parliament should not do them justice.—(Hear.)
Mr. BROUGHAM entirely agreed that it would
be unjust to make a distinction between the Jews
and the Quakers; but it was not by excluding the
Jews, but by admitting the Quakers, that justice
was to be done; and he marvelled that the Hon.
Member for Hertfordshire should be for taking up
the question at the wrong end. If the Hon. Gen-
tleman voted against the Jews now, en the same
principle he ought to have voted twice over against
the Dissenters and the Roman Catholics, when
their relief measures were before the House.

Mr. N. CALVERT had had a thought of moving
on a former night, by way of amendment, that a
Committee should be appointed to consider how far
oaths might be dispensed with as a qualification for
holding civil offices. He thought that a simple de-
claration was enough to answer all purposes ; a de-
claration was sufficient to bind an honest man, and
no oath or declaration was sufficient to hind a man
that was not honest.

Mr. R. GRANT would propcse a very fair bar-
gain to the lion. Gentleman. If he would vote for
his (Mr. Grant's) Bill on this occasion, he (Mr.
Grant) would vote for the lion. Gentleman's Bill
in favour of the Quakers when he brought it
which of course he would do, after what he had
stated.

General GASCOYNE explained.
The petition was then ordered to be printed.
Mr. BENETT presented a petition from War-
minster in favour of the general removal of Civil
Disabilities. lie agreed with his lion. Friend (Mr.
N. Calvert) in the observations which he had made
with respect to the Quakers.
Lord E. SOMERSET presented a petition from
the parish of Cole, in Gloucester, against the Sale
of Beer Bill,

Petitions in favour of the Jews were presented by
Mr. Pendarvis, from Falmouth; Mr. Benett from
Woolwich ; and Mr. Marshall, from Leeds.
Mr. 0. CAVE presented a petition from Leices-
ter against the punishment of death for forgery;
also a petition from the same place, for an altera-
tion in the laws between Landlords and Tenants ;
and also another from the Unitarians of Chichester,
for an alteration in the laws of Marriage.
Mr. 0. CAVE presented a petition for the Abo-
lition of Negro Slavery, from Bassingbourne, in
Cambridgeshire. -
Sir G. MURRAY would take that opportunity
of correcting an error with respect to what he bad
stated on Friday, in answer to a question from the
Hon. Member for Dumfries. Pie was told that he
had been understood to have said, with reference to
the increased quantity of sugar imported from the
Mauritius, that that had arisen in a great measure
flEloyr'rect. The importation had taken place the illegal importation of slaves into that co-
He begged to say that that impression was
i
be-
tween 181-1 and 1821; and it was an Act which
had passed in 1825 that was the main cause
of the increase alluded to, for that Act had in-
tended to induce planters to employ estates, which
up to that time had been differently occupied, in
the growth of sugar, to which were to be added the
great improvements that had taken place in the roads
in that colony, and in the machinery there, partieu-
lady in the use of steam-engines. •
The petition was then ordered to be printed.
DISTRESS AT BIRMINGHAM.
Mr. E. DAVENPORT presented a petition
from Birmingham, signed by 25,000 persons. The

petition prayed for an effectual arid speedy Reform
in the House of Commons ; and went on to corn-
p!ain that the effect expected to result from Mr.
Peel's Bill of 1819 had not taken place. He be-
lieved, before Mr. Peel's Bill passed, that the rise
in the value of money had been 15 per cent., and
subsequent to that period, and between 1828, that
the rise had been 20 per cent. Since then he be-
lieved that the rise in the value of money and the
fall in the price of commodities since 1828 had been
20 per cent., which ought to be added to the 30
per cent. difference in the value of money between
the termination of the war and 1828. He had re-
ceived from the petitioners a list of 26 articles,
chiefly made at Birmingham, and all hardware,
which articles confirmed in a striking manner the
view he had just laid before the House. The
lion. Member would not read ever the Pet, but he
would state the result. The -sum of all the list
was, that between 1818 and 1828, the price of all
these articles on an average had fallen 36 per cent.
Since 1828, the petitioners stated, that prices had
fallen 22, bearing out, its a remarkable manner, the
statement he had just submitted to the House.
The general fall in the price of commodities since
the period he had alluded to—since 1819, when the
IZight Hon. Gentleman's Bill passed, and since
1828, when the small notes were suppressed—
showed the operation of some general cause, and
the effects were such as might be expected from
altering the standard of value. There were other
circumstances noticed in the petition. The peti-
tioners complained that nothing had been done to
relieve them of the burden of taxation. The peti-
tion, he should observe, had been drawn up and
signed before the Beer Bill had been introduced
into Parliament, and before the Government had
announced any reduction of taxation. '1 he peti-
tioners stated, that to enable them to carry on
their business there must be a great reduction of
taxatiou. They stated that at present the rates
could not be levied, and that the taxes could not be
collected. These, the petitioners stated, were the
consequences of the Bill for regulating the currency.
To these present calamities was to be added the
apprehensio❑ of scarcity, for we had a Corn Law
which kept the produce of other countries from
coining into this country. The petitioners riot only
prayed for a great reduction of taxation, but also for
a Reform of Parliament, and they said that they
could not expect any attention to their griev-
ances till there was a Reform in Parliament.
The petitioners also noticed one circumstance, to
which the Right Hon. Gentleman had referred on
a former occasion. The Right Hon. Gentleman
had stated that Birmingham was in a state of pros-
perity, and he had quoted as proofs of this the traffic
on the roads and canals, and particularly the increase
of traffic on the Worcester and Birmingham Canal.
The reason of this was, that the canal had been, as
we understood, extended to Gloucester.—(The
lion. Member, stated some other reasons for the in-
crease of the traffic on this canal, w.bich we could
not hear, owing to the noise in the House, and to
the low tone used by the Hon. Member.)—He next
referred to the statement of the Right Hon. Gentle.
man that some ground rents had sold in Birmingham
for one hundred years' purchase. But the fact in
this case was, that by the purchase the ground was
converted into freehold, and by the purchase its
value was considerably augmented. The contract
price, as we understood, was 3,5001., while the
profit derived from the purchase was 5001. n-year.
fire Right Hon. Gentleman had also quoted the
number of four-wheeled carriages in use in Birming-
ham, but he believed that the four-wheel carriages
referred to by the Right lion. Gentleman were only
pony chaises, which the people had taken to use in-
stead of gigs. The real four-wheeled carriages, such
as gentlemen use, and such as were really under-
stood by the term, had increased, he believed, in
Birmingham, since 1818, about one-fortieth. In
1818 there were thirty-eight such carriages in Bir-
mingham, and in 1828 there were twenty-nine. But
a different sort of proof might be derived from the
state of the poor in Birmingham. In the last year
the ow-door poor had increased 41.5, and since 1818
they had increased full I,4oo.—(Some impatience
being here manifested by the House, the Hon. Mem-
ber observed, however impatient the Members were
to give relief to the Jews, perhaps they ought to
think that some attention was due to the complaints
and sufferings of 25,000 Christians. Ile Hon.
Member then adverted to the state of the iron trade,
and stated that of the Staffordshire and Worcester-
shire furnaces no less than 45 out of 107 (we under-
stood) haul been blown out; while of the 45 fur-
naces in Shropshire 14 had been blown out.

Mr. TRANT here rose to order. The Hon.
Member objected to the Hon. Member entering into
so many statements on presenting a petition.—
(Cries of " Order," and " Chair, chair,")---The
lion. Member might content himself with an im-
promptu speech on such a subject.—(A laugh.)
Mr. E. DAVENPORT, in continuation, said,
the petitioners prayed for Reform in Parliament, and
in that he cordially concurred. He had been a re-
former since the time of the disgraceful expedition
to Waleheren. The Parliament was not a fair re-
presentation of the people. As it was a selection
from the mass, it ought to be better than the
mass of the people ; but it was\ not. He did
not think it wits a fair specimen of the average
talent of England. If he threw a net across the
Strand, he believed that the first 658 men he caught
would constitute a House of Commons which would
obtain the confidence of the people, and be more
worthy of it than the present house of Commons.
A reform might be obtained on constitutional prin-
ciples, which would satisfy him. lie would have
the Septennial Act repealed ; and he cordially con-
curred Nvith the petitioners in desiring to see the ex-
pellees of elections diminished, so that talents and
character might have a fairer chance than at present
against money. If any person should propose the
vote by ballot, it !should have his consent. The
reform meeting at Birmingham had been followed
by similar meetings over the country, amid reform
was becoming a,:.Z•,,ourite topic with the people.
For the rest he ' the never been slow to express his
opinion either in that House or elsewhere, and he
should still have the courage to do so without enter-
taining any apprehension that the societies he had
alluded to could meet the fate of other societies
across the water, or that he should be afflicted with
the " Scarlett" fever. The Hon. Member concluded
by moving that the petition be brought up.
Sir It. PEEL was never more surprised than by
the speech which the Hon. Gentleman had just de-
livered. Part of that speech he was told to con-
sider as affecting him personally °, but how it could
lie understood to affeee him lie was totally at a loss
to imagine. The lion. Member, he was informed,
had repaired to Birmingham for the special purpose
of collecting facts which would enable him to con-
tradict what he had slated on a former occasion,
when he represented to the House that that town
was not really suffering under any distress which a
little time would not be likely to remedy; and what
was the result ? He had tdrtatiy said that he would
all
of ov.the
prosperity
which
e trliibee rt
thought
usgpie,
tt(i)fili;etthhiee4ti
~es;ts l indicationso‘l.t;li;ecdi)
upon as tests, and had offered to judge of the exist-
any
11.eg
meritedrrsi tiga
thett
the increase recogniseßinierrnelai slagslOsf7"tTbi.ey lie had
ieffTo.afl eeci el
saries of life, the increase of the tells on the Ron-
pike math, as well as on every canal which was
used in conveying the produce of that great com-

mercial and manufacturing town to other parts of
the kingdom. But none of those topics were al-
vertcd to by the Hon. Gentleman, with the excep-
tion of one canal, where the increase of the toll, for
the fact itself he did not deny, was'partially ascribed
to the operation of other 'causes. 'He had specified
two-wheeled as well as four-wheeled carriages in
his own statement, well knowing that the Hon.
Member would be the first to turn round on him with
the objection that he had only referred to articles
which were used by the rich alone, and the increase
4 which, therefore, implied the growth of luxury,
without giving any information as to the actual con-
dition of the poor. He did not know from what
source the Hon. Member had his knowledge of the
details to which he alluded, but he would readily
tell him how he had himself arrived at his conclu-
sions, and should second his motion if be thought
tit to move for the documents from whence he had
deduced them. He had applied to the excise to
ascertain what reduction had taken place in the con-
sumption of those articles that paid duty since the
passing of the unfortunate measure to which his
name was commonly attached. In 1819 the num-
ber of four-wheeled carriages entered for taxation
amounted to 38; in 1822 to 44; in 1823 to 55;
in 1824 to 68 ; in 1826 to 106 ; in 1827 to 136 ;
and in 1828 to 157.—(Hear, hear.)—The Hon.
Member accounted for this increase by assuming
that the gigs had been converted into four-wheeled
post-chaises.—(Laughter.)—Such might be tl!e
case : he did not question the correctness of the
Hon. Member's information, but then there ought
to be a reduction in two-wheeled vehicles before it
established any thing in favour of his argument,.
Unfortunately, however, for his hypothesis, no such
reduction appeared. In 1815 their number was
301, and in 1828 it came to 470.—(Hear.)—Rest-
ing on these facts, he still maintained that Birming-
ham was in an improving state, notwithstanding
the measure which, it • was alleged, had increased
the public burden 56 per cent. He most confidently
Believed that the value of property, on the contrary,
had increased 20 per cent since 1820. It was sa7d
that taxes and poor-rates could not be levied, such
was the existing distress; but the fact was, they
were never levied with less difficulty.
Mr. E. DAVENPORT-1 meant in general.

Sir R. PEEL was willing to abide by the Hon.
Member's explanation. In that can the country in general
was supposed to be in distress, while Birmingham was ar:
exception.—(" Hear," and laughter.) The arrears of
the Birmingham poor-rates in 1819 were 3,5401. ;
1820, they were 8,5711. ; and in 1829, they only came
to 1,031/. If the Hon. Gentleman looked to the arrears
of taxes paid in Birmingham in the years he referred
he would find that they had decreased very much within
the last two years as compared with the preceding, In
1825 the arrears amounted to 5,7481. ; last year they were
but 2,0221. Then, with respect to the Hon. Gentleman's
t la)sustecrii oer's nnwaa f
haile rd
iomc
nasiisho net,i that
rethte on h
acnsp ti
one-thirdtf
t i
that town within the last few years, he could only say he
hid made inquiry into the matter, and he Sound that
there were no means of ascertaining the fact positively;
hut that, front the imperfect data which could be pro-
cured, it would appear that the Hon. Gentleman', asser
tion was erroneous. In fact, there had been an increase
in the consumption of all articles and commodities with
the exception of two, of which he would give the, llon.
Member the benefit—namely, the amount of duty paid by
horse-dealers and on hair-powder, owing to the disuse of
that article. These were the only exceptions. There had
been an increase in the demand for houses, windows,
horses (draught and other), carriages of all descriptions,
armorial bearings, dogs, and of every other commodity or
manufacture in licating increased means of consumption,
in the year ending April, 1830, as compared with the
preceding year. As the 'Hon. Gentleman had not
punned his statements on a former evening, relating tit
the other topics touched upon by hint, he would not thein
take up the time of thw House by a repetition of them.

Mr. ROBINSON contended that, however plausible
might be the arguments of the Right Hon. Baronet to
show an improvement in the condition of the working
classes in Birmingham, there was on• fact which, in his
mind, more than outweighed them, and which should lead
the House to a ♦ery different conclusion,—he meant the
fact, that there had been an increase of 50 per cent. in
the number of families charged on the poor-rates in that
town between the years 18'26 and 1830. The distress of
the agricultural classes was also great, and manufacturers
had experienced a depreciation in value of 60 per cent.
After a few words in reply from Mr. DAVENPORT, the
petition was ordered to be printed.
JEWISH RELIEF BILL,

Mr. R. GRANT had, previously to moving the order
of the day for the second reading of this Bill, three peti-
tions in favour of it to present to the House. The first
came from the Jews themselves, and was signed by 692 of
the most wealthy and influential of that persuasion resi-
dent in the metropolis, and was in itself a refutation of
the petition which bad been presented by the Solicitor_
General from an individual named Levi, which that Hon,
and Learned Gentleman had cited as a proof of indiffe-
rence of the Jewish body in relation to the present mea-
sure; the second came from a gentleman resident in Hun-
tingdon, and grounded its prayer on a prophecy, which,
whether true or not, was at least consistent and charitable;
and the third came from Mr. Robert Owen, a gentleman
well known to many lion. Members.

On the question that the petitions be laid on the table,
Sir J. WROTTESLEY said that he would take ad-
vantage of that occasion to observe that he was friendly to
the principle of admitting the Jews to all the advantages
of the Constitution except seats in Parliament. Should
they become eligible to seats in that House, the result very
soon, from their command of money, would be that they
would purchase an influence which might be very preju-
dicial to those, not members of their religion.
Mr. R. GRANT thought that, for the sake of consis-
tency, Hon. Members who, like the lion. Baronet, ad-
mitted the principle of admitting the Jews to the advan-
tages of the Constitution, were bound to allow the second
reading of his measure. In Committee they might state
what restrictions they would impose on the application of
the principle, but not before the Bill was in that stage.
The petitions having been bid on the table, and the or-
der of the day fir the second reading of tie Bill read,

General GASCOYNE rose to express his dissent from
the measure. He should have withheld, he said, ltis oppo-
sition, till the:Bill was in its next stage, did he not feat that
it was meant to have iediscussed and shaped in Committee
on the same plan with the Catholic Relief Bill of last Ses-
sion. There was no argument to that measure founded
on the essentially Protestant Christian genius of the Con-
stitution which did not appear to him to apply with in-
creased force against the:present Bill. Already, lie would
still repeat, had the Protestant femal of the Constitution
been too much broken in upon—rendering it the more
incumbent on all true friends of that Constitution to vigi-
lantly watch the proceedings of those who, within three
years, had repealed the Test and Corporation Acts, had
passed the Catholic Relief Bill, and had introduced a Bill
to emancipate the Jews from their civil disabilities.—
( Hear.)—These were times of startling changes. Would
not a tight look-out have been kept to the titan who a few
years ago would have predicted;that those great measures of
relief—(Hear, hear)—to which he had just alluded would
have obtained the sanction of a Protestant Parliament?
To be sure, much was said about the blessings of what
was called religious liberty,—of which, by the way, he
had no great opinion,—which, in fact, meant nothing but
such a union of sects,—(Laughter, we believe owing to the
lion. and Gallant Member's pronouncing the word " sects"
as if it were "sexes")—as very often led to an indifference
to all sects. He had heard, he repeated, no argument
aginst the Catholic Relief Act which did not apply with in-
cre ised force to the present measure. All the differences of
degree in the application pf the objections fouudel on the
Protestant principles of the Constitution was in favour of
the Catholics. They were a numerous and highly re-
spectable body ; they possessed much law led property ;
they had large stakes in the country—they were our fel-
low-Christians, professing that form of Christianity which
our common ancestors had bequeathed to us—the only ob-
jection lay in the anti. Protestant tendency of their tenets.
But what was the case with the Jews? They were not
numerous—indeed, were so few compared with the rem of
the population, that the smallest unit in the representation
would be their just proportion, admitting them to the
right. They hid not the equal stakes in the country with
our Catholic brethren, and were essentially inimical to all
Christian institutions. It was no argument that because
the paling of the Constitution had been here and there
broken down, that therefore the whole should be left to
bi come a waste; quite the contrary, it should only induce
them to mare careful), guard those few fences which re-
mained, and this the rather, as the spirit of innovation,
so characteristic of the age, had been extending to tell-
gious topics with as much rapidity as to our commercial
institutions. It was, in his opinion, quite impossible to
unagine that, under any circumstances, Jews could be
I;iund to embody themselves with the essential interests of
a Christian people. He should therefore conclude by