The Sun.
London, England, 1830-06-05 00:00:00

SUPPLY.

The House then resolved itelf into a Committee
of Supply. Sir A. GRANT in the Chair.

On. the first Resolution being put, for granting a
sum of 19,0001. to defray the expenses of the Gold
and Silver Coinage at the Mint,
Mr. P. THOMSON wished the Right Hon.
Gentleman opposite would explitin some of the cir-
cumstances connected with the seignorage on coin.
Mr. WARBURTON observed, that all writers
on the subject agreed that the seignorage on the
coin, beyond that which was necessary to limit its
quantity, was equivalent to depreciation. In France
nearly 100,0001. a year was obtained, by exacting a
seignorage on the coin; but this was, in fact, a tax
to that amount on the French public.

After a few words from Mr. P. THOMSON and
Mr. D. GILBERT,

Mr. HUME wished to ask the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman opposite what was the amount of the profits
derived from the coinage of silver, and how those
profits were employed ? He was at a loss to under-
stand why it was necessary to maintain 4in esta-
blishment at the Mint, at an expence of 19,0001.
a year, when the country was already full of gold coin.
Mr. HERRIES stated that there had been no
silver coinage at the Mint since the year before last,
when a hundred thousand pounds' worth of silver
had been coined for the use of the colonies. All
the former profit which had been derived from the
coinage of silver was applied to the purpose of de-
fraying the expence attendant on the gold coinage.
Since the time of Charles the Second there had been
no alteration in the usage of not charging any
seignorage oh the gold coin.
Mr. BARING maintained that the present plan
was not only a coinage without seignorage, but was
also a premium to the party who brought"his gold
bullion to the Mint, for the purpose of being coined.
He did not know why there was any deviation
from the former usage of the Bank's .taking
seignorage.
Mr. HERRIES observed, that the delay which
formerly took place in returning the gold coin from
the Mint for the bullion carried thither, rendered
the Bank the sole importer of bullion; as indivi-
duals could not afford to lose the interest for five or
six weeks, and which was, in fact, a large seignorage.
When Government looked to what possibly might
be the effect of a change of paper into gold circula-
tion, they bad felt that it was their duty to devise
the means of putting the importer of bullion, who
brought it to the Mint, speedily in possession of his
coin. The manner by which they had done that
was to apply the funds which had been derived
from the coinage of silver to the expence of coining
the gold. From this arrangement the public had
experienced great benefit.
Mr. BARING said, that the advantage which
the importer enjoyed of a half per cent. was in fact
so much paid by the public. Why should that pre-
mium be given ? He denied that there was any pub-

lie advantage in thus not rely coining for nri,h;,,g,
but giving that benefit. There WIL3 some reason for
believing that our silver coinage stood, at present in
an awkward predicament. The propertien be; ween
the price of the silver when coined, and the price
of silver bullion, in the market, was very different
from what it was when originally established. At
that period it was as sixty-two to sixty-six; and
then the difference did not hold out a sufficient temp-
' ration for the coiner. But now it was as fifty-nine
to sixtrsix. The consequence was, that a great
alarm had been excited by the introduction of a
quantity of false silver coin. The whole system of
our coinage ought indeed to undergo a revision in
another Session of Parliament. He wished to ask
for some explanation wlh respect to the great mass
of silver coin which be supposed must be in die
Bank and in the Mint.
Mr. HERRIES said that there had been no
coinage of silver in late years. All that had taken
place %vas in the first two years after the establish-
ment of the present system of coinage. He be-
lieved that there was an accumulation of silver in
die Bank, hut there was none in the Mint. There
was one subject alluded to by the Hon. Gentleman,
on which he was anxious to make a few observa-
tions. Rumours had been circulated that a spurious
silver coinage, not a false one but one of silver, had
been fabricated in ether countries, of a weight and
quality equal to our own, and had been introduced
in large quantities in this country. He had not the
least reason to believe that there was any truth in
these rumours.

Mr. lICJSKISSON wat convinced that the faci-
lity afforded at the Mint to all persons to have the
full value of their gold bullion returned to them in
the coii, of the realm, was very advantageous.
After a few words from Sir G. COCKBURN, Mr.
Ilusictssos, Alderman THOMPSON, Mr. MABERLY,
Mr. HUMS, Mr. BARING, and Mr. ROBINSON, the
vote was carried.

The question was then put, that a sum not ex-
ceeding 7,000/, be granted to his Majesty, to defray
the expenses arising out of prosecutions relating to
the coin of this kingdom, for 1830.—Agreed to.

On the question, that a sum not exceeding 15,0004
be granted to his Majesty, to defray the expenses of
law charges for 1830, being put,
Mr. GORDON wished to know whether these
expenses were incurred by the Treasury for the pro-
secution, or rather persecutions, of the press during
the het year. In 1829 the sums voted for fees of
counsel was only 2,2891., while the estimate for the
present year was 3,1391. He also observed on the
practice of employing a great number of counsel. In
Alexander's prosecution, six counsel, he believed,
were employed for the Crown, while a private indi-
vidual would perhaps only employ two or three. He
hoped the lion. Gentleman opposite would give a
detailed estimate of the manner in which the sum
voted last year was expended, previous to bringing
up the report.
Mr. DAWSON said, that the sum for fees of
counsel was lower this year than last. With respect
to the number of counsel employed, probably his
Learned Friend (Sir J. Scarlett) would give the
House some good reason on this point.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL thought he was
bound, on the occasion of the prosecution adverted
to, to give his Majesty the benefit of the counsel
whom he considered most efficient. He was per-
fectly ready to show that the charges in this instance
were usual and reasonable, and he was ready to
meet any motion which the Hon. Member might
bring forward on the subject. It was a matter of
great, and he might add, indispensable convenience
to the Attorney-General to have the assistance of
King's Counsel in cases of this description. The
Solicitor-General and he were often called out of
Court on such public occasions when it was impor-
tant that they should be present, and it was neces-
sary in such instances to have counsel ready to take
upon them the management of the case. As
to the number of counsel, it was not greater than
was usually employed is such cases. That was his
answer to the Hon. Gentleman, and it was all the
answer he was prepared to give him on the subject.
As to the fees paid in these cases, they were not
equal to the fees which were often paid in private
prosecutions. He thought he had now answered
all the questions and the statements of the. Hon.
Gentleman. He might be allowed, however, to tell
the Hon. Member, that if he was anxious to make
personal attacks upon him (the Attorney-General),
he should do so in the regular way, by bringing.a spe-
cific motion before the House. Let him do so, and
he (the Attorney-General) would be then ready to
meet him. Let him do that, awl not assail him by
those side-wind attacks, and by calling prosecu-
tions, which he (the Attorney-General) in the dis-
charge of his duty felt himself bound to institute,
" persecutions."—(Cries of " Hear, hear," and
" Oh, oh.")—He (the Attorney-General) was most
willing, most anxious that the whole line of his
conduct should be submitted to the decision
of a vote of that House, and he would be ready
to stand or fall with the vote of the majority.
—(Hear, hear, from the Opposition benches.)—
lie should be very sorry if many gentlemen in that
House participated in the sentiments expressed by
the Hon. Member for Cricklinle, and in any event
he should derive some consolation from the reflection
that his conduct did not meet with the approbation
of that Hon. Member.—(Cries of " Oh I") Some-
thing had dropped from the Hon. Gentleman which
seemed to insinuate that he (the Attorney-General)
received a great portion of the fees paid for those
prosecutions. Now he was ready to meet the iron.
Member, if he would make a specific motion on
the subject, whenever or wherever be pleased. Of
the fees paid to counsel in all the various depart-
ments, and of which he could assure him that the
Attorney-General received a very small portion, the
Hon. Member would have an opportunity, by a re-
turn which would be laid before the House in a few
days, of seeing their amount; he would then see
that the office of Attorney-General was one not
overpaid, and that the labour of the office was con-
siderable, while the remuneration was comparatively
small. And as lie was now on his legs, he would
take this opportunity to remove a mistake which
had gone abroad on the occasion of a .Bill lately
passing through that House—he alluded to the no-
tion which appeared to hare beets taken' up by the
Eublic, that the Attorney-General would derive con-
siderable emolument from a demise of the Crown.--
He had taken some pains to ascertain the fees which
would in that case be received. by him and by the
Solicitor-General upon every patent which would
then possibly be renewed. It was only- fair to as-
sume, that not more than two-thirds of them, that
is to say about 200, would be renewed; in that case
he hoped the Hon. Member would just attend to
the kind of work which the Attorney-General had
to do in each of those instances where patents were
renewed. The Attorney-General had to prepare
the Bill, copies of the Bill when prepared were
sent round to the different offices, and. after the Bill
was approved of and signed by his Majesty, it
was carried round to the various offices, and for
all that the Attorney and Solicitor-General, who
prepared and arranged the Bill, received only a
fee of 5/. ; and the whole of the patent clerks' fees
amounted only to 31. 15s. He believed that the
whole amount charged was far less than mould be
charged by a solicitor for doing an equal quantity of
business for a private individual. He hoped the
House would forgive him for making this explana-
tion on this occasion. The Bill from which had
originated the anisapprehenaioa which- he was de-
sirous to remove, was generally discussed at three
or four o'clock in the morning, so that be had no
opportunity then of disabusing the public mind of
the erroneous impression that the Attorney-General
would derive great emoluments from a demise of
the Crewn.—.(Hear.)—lt should be recollected
that the sum charged in this estimate was for
Treasury business, which branched into, :a variety
of departments, and he thought that the estimate
was, under such circumstances, a small one indeed.
Mr. R. GORDON would, in the first instance,
say a word as to what had been said by the Hon.
Gentleman, the Secretary for the Treasury, as to the
amount of those fees to counsel charged in this es-

timate. The non. Gentleman had said that 8,1391.
the amount charged, wai not taken upon the expen-
diture of •last year, but was the average of the three

preceding years. Now the Hon. Secretary for the
Treasury was exceedingly unfortunate in that state-
ment, for it appeared that the amount of fees charged
in the three preceding years was as follows :—in
1829, 2,189/. ; in 1828, 2,819/.; in 1827, 2,7001.;
so that he (Mr. Gordon) was perfectly at a loss
how to make out that 3,139/. formed the average
amount of the fees charged in those three years : f 0
much for the arithmetic of his Hon. Friend the Se-

cretary for the Treasury.—(A. laugh.)—A word
now as to his Majesty's Attorney-General,if indeed,
so humble an individual as he (Mr. Gordon) was
might venture to say anything in the presence of
that personage. The Learned Gentleman had com-
plained of his having used the word " persecutions,"
and he had maintained that it was unfair to apply
that epithet to what were only prosecutions. Now
• he (Mr. Gordon) would venture to tell him, the
Attorney-General though he might be, that as long
as he (Mr. Gordon) retained a seat in that House,
he would never fail there, as well as every where
else, to call those prosecutions " persecutions; '—
(Cheers.)—He would do so, and he would not be
put down by His Majesty's Attorney-General for
calling them so.—(Repeated cheers from the oppo-
sition benches.)—The Learned Gentleman corn-
plained that he (Mr. Gordon) had preferred an ac-
cusation against him in reference to these prosecu-
tions, but could he say that he accused him in his
absence ? The Learned Gentleman was present,
and he had every opportunity afforded him to answer
for his conduct, If he had not been present, then
he might have justly complained that he (Mr. Gor-
don) had been making charges against him and at-
tacking him behind his back. But he (Mr. Gordon)
had pursued an opposite course, and he had stated
fully and fairly, in the presence of the Learned
Gentleman, and beforethe House, that he considered
those prosecutions persecutions. The Learned
Gentleman had talked about the propriety of his
(Mr. Gordon's) bringing forward a specific motion
on the subject, and he raid that an opportanity alight
be easily found in that way for arraigning his con-
duct, when he should be prepared to meet whatever
charges might be preferred against him. Why the
thing had been done already, and what was the re-
atilt ? A majority of that House, which his Ma-
jesty's Attorney-General could seldom fail of com-
manding, pronounced a decision in his favour. At
present, indeed, and for some time past, he (Mr.
Gordon) had indeed heard rumours of other mo-
tions on the subject. The Hon. Member for
Newark had been whispering about a motion of the
kind, but he had never brought it before the House.
He (Mr. Gordon) would tell the Learned Gentle-
man, that if he had been more constant in his at-
tendance in that House, he would not have heard
now, for the first time, that accusation preferred
against him of which he so much complained.—
During his absence from the House on various occa-
sions, Hon. Members on that side of the House had
expressed an opinion similar to that which he (Mr.
Gordon) had expressed with regard to those prose-
cutions ; and if he had used too strong a word, in
calling them " persecutions," he was sure that his
constituents and the country at large would sympa-
thize with him in that feeling.--(Hear, hear.)—He
should only add, that when the House resumed, be
should take advantage of the facility offered by the
Secretary for the Treasury, to move for a detailed
account of the charges incurred for those prosecutions.
Mr. D. W. HARVEY said that the Attorney-
General had stated that they would speedily have
laid upon the table of the House a return of the fees
paid to the law officers of the Crown, and that it
would be seen from that the Attorney and Soli-
citor-General were very moderately paid. It would
be well for them to have such a return laid before
the House, for it would go far to remove the erro-
neous impression which prevailed throughout the
country, and in which he (Mr. Harvey) would con-
fess that he participated, that those parties were not
too much employed for the emoluments which they
received. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman hail
stated truly and candidly that the whole of the fees
paid to the law officers of the Crown were not so
great as were paid to Counsel when employed by in-
dividuals. But still they were paid in many cases
for doing nothing, and that was a great tax, and a
great hardship upon the public. He would refer
the Learned Gentleman to the case of charities
Before any individual. could present a petition under
Sir Samuel Romilly's Act to file an information, it
must first be considered and approved by his Ma-
jesty's Attorney-General. He could speak of one
individual case, and there were, no doubt, many such
in which:the Attorney-General received his fee to give
his fiat to a petition for an information in the case of a
charity, and he finally determined that no informa-
tion should be filed in that case. Here was the At-
torney-General of England enabled, in his private
character, to act the party judge, without the re-
sponsibility which attached to the discharge of the
judicial functions. The Learned Gentleman, though
he disapproved of the information, was enabled to
retain his fee in this instance. This was conduct
which he did not at all mean to charge as peculiar
to the present Attorney-General. It was the line
of conduct which had been uniformly pursued by his
predecessors in that office, but it was at the same
time a great blot upon the administration of
justice in this country, and one which ought to be
removed. He (Mr. Harvey) would in a few days
have a petition to present on the subject, and as the
Attorney-General had stated that the Law Officers
of the Crown were not over paid, he (Mr. Harvey)
would agree with him that they were not over paid
for what they did, but he certainly thought that they
were over paid when they were paid for what they
did not do, as in the instances of charities. The
system with regard to them was a cruel one : in all
instances of charity cases in the Court of Chancery
the Attorney-General was not present, and yet in
every one of them he took a brief. It was no
wonder, then, that the impression prevailed in the
country that these officers were rather well paid.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said with re-
gard to the subject of charities he had this to say—
the power of investigating and regulating public
charities was vested in the Crown, and that power
was delegated to his Majesty's Attorney-General;
and whether it .were right that such a power should
be so delegated or not, he would not now say ; but
this he would say, that so long as it was vested in
him, as it was, he would keep that right, and he
would not allow the Hon. Member or any other
person to take it from him. If the Hon. Gentleman
should choose to apply to file an information in the
case of a charity, and have the certificate of a counsel
in suppoit of it, and if the facts should not after-
wards appear to warrant such an information, he
(the Attorney-General) would only do his duty in
preventing him from filing it. He felt that he only
did his duty in that way in regard to the case to
which the Hon. Gentleman referred. There had
been sent to him (the Attorney-General) from seve-
ral quarters copies of a circular letter which had
been distributed throughout the country amongst
the trustees of the various charities, of which let ter
probably the Hon. Gentleman knew something, and
which was to this effect—" You (meaning the
trustees to whom it was addressed) are in the re-
ceipt of funds for some charity, and we are desirous
to have an account from you as to how these funds
have been expended; and we are ready to impart to
you important information with regard to the cha-
rity in question." The letter concluded with a threat
that if it were not met in a corresponding spirit,
they would file an informationagainst them at the suit
of his Majesty's Attorney-General. Such a circular
lessee had never been authorised by him (the At-
, .tornersGenehl) nor by the Charity Commissioners;
and if any individual entertained such a mistaken
notion, he wished to take this public opportunity
to disabuse him of it, and to set the public right
upon thst matter. If any individual, a party to this
letter, filed an information, as a kind of adventure
to bring arson into Chancery, and that he (the
Attorney-General) should discover that the infor-
mation so filed was a wrong one, it was his duty to
keep the proceedings in his own hands the au-

thority being vested in him. He had done his duty
in cases of that kind to the best of his judgment, and
if similar cases should occur again, he should endea-
vour to examine them to the best of his ability, and
not to allow any man, under any pretence whatever,

to take from him that power ;which had been in-
trusted to his hands.
Mr. D. W. HARVEY said that the Learned
Gentleman had made a strange exhibition on this
occasion. To any gentleman who heard him it
must have been evident that the Attorney-General
appeared to be under the impression that he was
in a court of law, and not in that House, for he
seemed to think that he might
_deal out to indi-
viduals here the same treatment which he did to

the unfortunate parties who came under the lash of
his forensic talents in a court of law. The Hon.
and Learned Gentleman had complained of what
he called the sarcasms of the Hon. Member for
Cricklade. He (Mr. Harvey) would not accuse
the Hon. and Learned Gentleman of employing sar-
casms against him, for that would be givinghim credit
for wit which he did not possess, but he had certainly
dealt out a great quantity of coarseness against him.
It was rather odd that the Learned Gentleman, who
put forward assumptions to a purity of intention
which he would not concede to others, should have
on this occasion so completely perverted the spirit
of a printed letter which could scarcely have been
misunderstood if it had been read to the House. In
doing that, the Hon. Gentleman, with his usual dex-
terity, had diverted the attention of the House from
that point with regard to which he (Mr. Harvey)
had required an answer from him. He alluded to
the amount of fees charged for these suits with
respect to charities in Chancery, in which suits the
Hon. Member had been in the habit of taking fees
for doing nothing, though it had been recommended
by the law commissioners as one remedy for the
abuses of Courts of Justice, that Learned Counsel
should confine themselves to the Court, and not go
into other Courts to scramble for fees for doing

nothing. That was what the Learned Gentleman
(the Attorney-General) had done, for he had taken
fees in those suits in Chancery where he could do
nothing, as his practice did not lie in that Court. But
the lion. Member alluded to a circular letter which
had been sent round to the trustees of charities. He

(Mr. Harvey) gloried in being the author of that
letter. He would venture to say that the Attorney-
General would never be the author of suchaletter.

—(Laughter and cheers from the Ministerial
benches.) He was glad to hear that cheer before
he assigned his reason for the assertion he was
about to make, for it proved that it was given with-
out any reascn for it. He would say that the Attorney-
General would never write a letter in such a spirit
—it was not a letter written to bring fees to him

(Mr. H.) for doing nothing. He had never made to the
amount of 6s. Sd. in that way by it. His intention in
writing it was to call the attention of the trustees of the
different charitable corporations in the country to the
plunder and waste which was made of those funds
which were destined for the poor. The country had
paid from 200,0001. to 300,0001. for commissions
of inquiry on this subject, arid now he, Mr. Harvey,
could not file an information where he had discovered
an abuse in the management of a charity, and
wished to apply the remedy to it, without obtaining
the leave of his Majesty's Attorney-General. He
could refer to many cases to show what he had done
to remedy such abuses. He should instance one
which a worthy Alderman opposite (Alderman
Thompson) must be aware of—he meant the case
of the Ironmongers' Company. The funds of this
corporation amounted to upwards of 400,0001., and
100,0001. bad been left to them originally to be
applied to the rescue of English slaves captured on
the coast of Barbary. Happily for this country
such a condition was not now required to be fulfilled ;
and the question was, whether this money should
not be applied to some charitable purpose, instead
of being left to accumulate in the hands of this
most famous toast-drinking and turtle-eating com-
pany in the city of London. It was for that purpose
that the inquiry had been instituted with regard to
the charitable funds vested in that company. It
was fora similar purpose he (Mr. Harvey) had
written the letter which had been mentioned; and

he should continue to write letters in that spirit,

however they might be characterized by the Hon.
and Learned Gentleman, who would no doubt con-
tinue to receive his large fees in the Court of Chan-
cery, where he never practised, and consequently
where he did nothing for the money which he re-

ceived.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said, if the
Hon. Member were prepared to bring forward any
motion on this subject, he should be prepared to
discuss it with him on the proper occasion. The
Hon. Member said that he had written the letter in
question, and that he (lid so through the purest
motives. Of course every gentleman in that House
would give him credit for such motives when he
claimed it. It might so happen, however, that the
letter would be the means of securing to him some
profits. At all events, lest it should be misunder-
stood, he would repeat that no such letter had been
authorized by the Commissioners of Charities or by
the Attorney-General.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL hoped that the

House would allow him to say a few words in refe-
rence to the case of the Ironmongers' Company, to
which allusion had been made by the Hon. Member
for Colchester. He begged leave to say that as to
the result of that case, the Hon. 'Member appeared
to be entirely mistaken. No pretence existed to
justify any one in stating to the Commissioners that
there was any intention on the pact of the Iron-
mongers' Company to mismanage or misapply this
money—(Hear)—on the contrary, it was shewn
that all their regulations with regard to it were
framed to meet the intentions of the original founder.
The only difficulty was with regard to the applica-
tion of the money, so as to comply with the condi-
tions specified by the founder. He must say, that it
appeared upon investigation, that the money had been
managed by the Ironmongers' Company in the best
possible manner. With regard to the controlling power
possessed by the Attorney-General, as to the filing of
informations in cases of charity,he would observe that
when the Legislature thought proper to confide that
power to the Attorney-General,without the authority
of a rdator in Chancery, it was done so in order to
guard those individuals who might be connected
with charities from any improper bills being filed
against them. The Hon. Member for Colchester
expressed a wish that this state of the law should
be altered, and he (the Solicitor-General) had no
doubt that there were many others who shared in
that opinion. But if bills could be filed in any case
without such a controul, the number of such bills
would be vastly increased, and the public would
have to lament the result. He did not wish to im-
pute any personal motives to the Hon. Member for
Colchester; it might be quite true that he had
written this letter from the purest motives, but one
object of the letter which had been sent out would
appear to be to get cases.-,-(Hear, hear.)—He did
not say that there was any thing wrong in his doing,
so, but he did not see what right that Hon. Mem-
ber had to get up in that House and assume to him-
self the credit of nothing but pure charity and be-
nevolence in writing the letter. The fact was, that
the Hon. Member who had written that letter had
filed more informations against the trustees of chari-
ties than any solicitor in London.—(Hear, hear.)—
He (the Solicitor-General) must object to that Hon.
Member's bringing his private business in this way
before the House. What was his complaint against
the Attorney-General ? That in the execution of
his duty he had taken an information off the file, by
which he had suffered great loss. The Attorney-
General, seeing that the information was an im-
proper one,would not allow it to be proceeded with,
and it was natural that the Hon. Member for Col-
chester should feel sore upon that point. It was to
guard the trustees of charities against the filing of
vexatious bills and informations against them that
this controuling power had been confided to the
Attorney-General. If such a protection did not
• exist, it would not be po,sible to get gentlemen
throughout the country to undertake the office of
trustees to charitable institutions. He contended

that the chief inducement to any man of professional!
eminence, in taking office; was not the pecuniary
remuneration, but the rank and station which he
derived from it. Pecuniary remuneration there cer-
tainly was for the office which he had himself the
honour of holding; but he assured the Committee
that he should receive two.fold the pecuniary remu-
neration which he now received as Solicitor-Gene-
ral if he were to give up to his pris'ate clients the
same amount of time which it -was now his duty to
devote to his public functions.—(Cheers.)
Mr. Alderman THOMPSON defended the eon-
, duct of the Ironmongers' Company, and contended
that they bad not been guilty of any misapplication

of their funds. _
Mr. lIUME said that if any person was justly
liable to the accus• tion of irregularity upon this oc-
casion, it was his Majesty's Attorney-General, who
had introduced a letter into the discussion which had
not the slightest connexion with it.—(Hear.)---
The Hon. and Learned Gentleman had been asked,
why he condescended to take fees for suits insti-
tuted in his name in the Court of Chancery, when
he never went into that Court, or took any pait in
conducting them. It was a plain question, and ad-
mitted, as he (Mr. Hume) thought, of as plain an
answer. But the Hon. and Learned Gentleman,
instead of giving the Committee a plain answer to a
plain question, did not vouchsafe to give it an an-
swer at all, but endeavoured to divert its attention
to a very different subject, by going into a letter of
which he hinted more than stated the substance.
The Hon. Member for Colchester deserved well of

his country for the exertions which he had made in
behalf of the defrauded poor of this country ; and
the Hon. and Learned Gentleman opposite would
therefore have acted more prudently by assigning
to him the credit which he deserved, than he had
done by loading him with misrepresentations, which
had much better have been spared, and by talking
of a letter which he had never seen. All that rright

serve very well to take the attention of the Com-
mittee for a time from the subject regularly before
it—(l-fear, hear)—but he trusted that the Com-
mittee would not be deceived by so stale a ma-

nceuvre.—(Hear.)—For his own part, he must say
that he entirely concurred with the Hon. and
Learned Member for Plympton, in considering the
late proceedings against the press not so much as pro-
secutions as persecutions.—(Loud cheering.)—He
was at a loss to conceive how the Hon. and
Learned Gentlema►► had been able to justify,
even to himself, the institution of them. His ima-
gination must have been strangely perverted, his
views of public events and of public principles must
have been marvellously altered by the change of
situation from which he took them—(Loud cr►es of
Hear, and laughter)—for he (Mr. Hume) recollected
well that when the Hon. and Learned Gentleman
sat upon the opposition side of the House, he was ac-
customed to admire the Hon. and Learned Gentle-
man as a friend of freedom and an enemy of op-

pression. Every speech which the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman had made from that side of the
House tended to produce that impression upon his
mind : but his actions, now that he had changed
sides in the House, were all contrary to the character
which had gained him his present situation—he
meant the character of a generous and liberal Whig,
who had deserved and obtained a leading influence
with his party.—(Hear, hear.)—He appealed to the
Whir, if a Whig were yet to be found in that
House, and he asked such of them as had formerly
been the associates of the Hon. and Learned Gen-
tleman, whether they were prepared either collec-
tively or individually to approve—he would not say
to applaud—his conduct in the late political prose-
cutions.—(Hear, hear.)—He had never met with
any Whig who had not condemned those proseca-
dons, and who had not lamented, in the most poig-
nant terms, that the Hon. and Learned Gentleman
had become, at the close of a long life of honour
and eminence, the persecutor of those liberal opi-
nions which he had for so many years so warmly
supported.—(Hear.)---He would avail himself of
the present opportunity to ask whether the Lord
Chancellor had paid the expences of the prosecution
which he had instituted against certain persons in
his individual capacity, or whether those expences
were included in the sum charged in the estimates
for expences incurred in carrying on public prose-
cutions ?—(Hear.)—That was a point on which
he thought it most essential that the Committee
should forthwith receive some distinct information.
—(Hear, hear.)—He repeated his declaration that
the prosecutions recently instituted against the
press were persecutions, and said that the best
proof of that assertion was to be found in the fact,
that they had not ceased until the ruin of the in-
dividual against whom they were directed was com-
pletely effected.—(Hear.)—He had heard that such
an intention had been avowed on the part of the
Government. Now, if such an avowal had been
made, how satisfactory it must be to the Govern-
inent,—how gratifying it must be to the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman and his liberal associates,—a
satisfaction and gratification, however, which he did
not envy them,—to find, that by bringing all their
combined influence against an obscure individual,
they had at last succeeded in effecting his ruin, by
the numerous prosecutions with which they had over-
whelmed him.—(Hear, hear.)
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL, who spoke in
a lower tone than is even usual with him, was un-
derstood to say that he should confine himself to a
simple answer to the question which had been put
to him by the Hon. Member for Aberdeen, inas-
much as. he was convinced that all who were ac-
quainted with his private character would do him
the justice to believe that he was not likely to feel
gratification at the ruin of any man. The expences
incurred in the prosecution instituted on behalf of
the Lord Chancellor, after it had been taken up as
a public prosecution, were, he had no doubt, in-
cluded in this item. He could not positively say
of his own knowledge that they were, becau,e he
had not the drawing up of this estimate. To the re-
mainder of the observations made by the Hon.
Member for Aberdeen, he would only reply that he
(lid not know till that evening that in prosecuting
the individual alluded to, he had been prosecuting
an individual who advocated liberal principles.
Neither did he know that that individual was a
Whig. If he was, he had taken a most effectual
mode of concealing it, by pouring the most unquali-
fied abuse upon that party at all times and upon all
occasions.
Mr. DAWSON rose for the purpose of stating
that the expences of the ex-officio information filed
on behalf of the Lord Chancellor were included in
this estimate.
Mr. D. W. HARVEY denied that he had made
any such attack upon the Ironmongers' Company
as justified the remarks which had been made upon
his conduct by the Hon. Member for London. He
believed that the members of that company thought
that they had (lone as well as the members of other
companies of " the great corporation ;" and he did
not mean to say that they had done worse. All
that he had complained of was, that they had had a
large sum of mcney unemployed for years, or if em-
ployed, employed on no visible object save that of
eating and drinking. It appeared to him that the
Learned Solicitor-General had upon this occasion
run wild very unnecessarily.—(A laugh.)—The
Learned Gentleman had accused him of adopting
his present course for the purpose of gaining popu-
larity; and if he (Mr. D. W. Harvey) might judge
from the exhibition which he had just seen, was
rather envious of the honour which he fancied him
(Mr. D. W. Harvey) to have acquired in his cha-
racter of a reformer of abuses. He (Mr. Harvey)
certainly did wish for a share of popularity, and he
believed that the Solicitor-General, much as he dis-
guised the fact, was equally anxious to obtain it;
else how was it that he had read an inflated account
of certain journies made from Lincoln's-inn to the
Fleet prison, and of certain accounts, then and there
taken, of the sufferings endured by a certain class of
prisoners 2—(Dear.)—He repeated what he had
said before, that so far was the attempt to remedy
the abuses of charitable institutions from deserving
attack in that House, that he believed that who-
ever made it was undertaking a work of great uti-

lity. The twenty-two volumes of hepo-rts on Cha-
ritable Institutions, which had cost the country up-
wards of 300,0001., showed the perversion of funds
amounting to 1,000,000/. per annum, although
the commissioners had not yet extended their
investigations over half the country. It was
well known that the sums set aside annually

by our public charities for the relief and
education of the poor amounted to more than
2,000,0001.; and yet almost half of them presented
cases of perversion, which required immediate cor-
rection. In spite of all that had been said to the
contrary, he would still contend that the man de-
served great praise who redeemed a single charity
from misapplication. He never said any thing against
the lawyers, but he expected to have a hard run made
against him by the whole body of them in the
House ; but though he might get crushed between
the heavy waggons of the learned Attorney and
Solicitor-General—(A laugh)—the anticipation of
that fate would never deter him from getting up to
attack those Learned Gentlemen, when he consi-
dered their conduct to deserve attack, or to vindi-
cate himself when he thought their aspersions ren-
dered his vindication necessary.—(Cheers.)

Sir E. KNATCHBULL rose for the purpose of re-
peating the question which had been already put by the
Hon. Alember for Montrose. He thought that he had

heard that question answered in the affirmative. If it
had been so answered, he, for one, must have a further
explanation.—(Hear.)
Mr. DAWSON repeated, that the expences incurred by
Lord Lyndhurst in prosecuting an individual for a libel
against him as Lord Chancellor, had been defrayed under
the charges of law expences for the last year.—(Hear )
Sir E. KNATCHBULL wanted to know the grounds
on which such a resolution had been adopted. A great

constitutional principle was here at stake.—(Loud cries of
" Hear")—and he should like to bear some satisfactory
reason, if such a reason could be given, for so unprece-
dented a proceeding.
Sir C. WETHERELL said, that unless some of his
M..jesty's Ministers explained to the Committee, before
this estimate was put to the vote, why Lord Lyndhurst's
application for a criminal information was abandoned, and
an ex-officio information filed in its stead, he should move
that so much of this estimate as contained the expences of
prosecuting that ex-officio information to judgment should
he disallowed. The Committee would recollect, that he
had expressed his opinion that the Lord Chancellor had
done right in applying to the Court of King's Bench for
s criminal information on his private suit. He had also
sated, that if originally an ex officio information had
been filed for the libel against him in his public capacity,
that course would not have been objectionable. But he
had also contended then, as he contended now, that the
change of the former of these proceedings fir the latter
was at once oppressive, illegal, and unconstitutional.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL then rose to address
the Committee under feelings of strong excitement. He
was not always audible in the gallery, but spoke, as far as
we could hear him, to the following effect :—He hoped

that the Committee would feel that he was now most un

expectedly called to address it at some length upon a sub-
ject that was pointedly personal to himself. He had had
no previous notice given to him that a question as to the
propriety of his official conduct would be that evening
raised in Parliament. Not one of the Hon. Gentlemen
who had that evening thought fit to pass such sweeping

censures on his conduct, had had the courtesy to intimate
to him that they intended to bring under the notice of
the Committee of Supply, that part of his public conduct

which had already undergone discussion once, and which
was to undergo a discussion a second time, whenever the
Hon. and Learned Member for Plympton should think fit
to bring it on by moving for leave to introduce a Bill to
Prevent the recurrence of such conduct in future. He

had promised the House, that whenever his Hon. and
Learned Friend should be ready to renew his attack, be
would be ready to mist it—(Hear)—and to vindicate
himself, as he hoped he had already vindicated himself,
'o the satisfaction of every just and honourable mind
(Hear, hear)—for be felt that upon this subject, at least,
he had a conscience void of all offence.—(A laugh.)—lf
he were now addressing himself to the judges of his con-
duct, he trusted that they would act with the impartiality
of judges, and listen to his defence before they proceeded
to condemn him. He complained that it was a strange and
cruel proceeding for hitn to have to rise in his own de-
fence in a Committee of Supply, without any previous
notice that charges were to be made against him.—
(Loud cries of " No," in which the voice of Sir E
Knatchbull was particularly audible.)—What was it that
the Hon. Baronet meant by that cheer? Did the Hon.
Brronet mean to say that he had had the courtesy or the
candour to give him a previous notice of his attack ? If
a question were to be raised upon his conduct in the Com-
mittee of Supply, surely, in common candour, he ought
to have bad some notice of it.—(Great confusion in the
Ilouse, mingled with cries of " Order.")—He did not
know from what part of the House, or with what inten-
tion, this clamour was raised ; but he did hope that Hon.
Gentlemen did not come into that House with an inten-
tion to stop their ears against the claims of justice. He
took it for granted that the expenses incurred in prosecut-
ing the ex-officio information filed for the libel against
Lord Lyndhurst, were included, as soon as that prosecu-
tion was made a public prosecution, in this estimate; and
he took it for granted, because it was quite clear that they
ought to he so included. It was now proposed by his Hon.
and Learned Friend the Member for Plympton, that they
should be disallowed, on the ground that the filing of that
ex-officio information was iilegal and unconstitutional.
Now it was necessary to remark that that information
was conducted by the public prosecutor. Was it usual, he
would ask, in Committees of Supply, when Members were
called upon to vote the expenses of the Government, to ob-
ject to them without previous notice, on the ground that the
purposes for which those expenses were wanted were
unconstitutional? He requested that he might be pro-
perly understood. Such prosecutions as those now under
discussion might be unconstitutional ; but was it usual to
object to them as such in Committees of Supply? He
well recollected the time which his Hon. and Learned
Friend the Member for Plympton had occupied in making
his accusations against him, and also in replying to his
defence.—(Hear, and a laugh.)—He well recollected that
at half-past twelve o'clock at night, and not till that late
hour, be was called upon to reply to his Hon. and Learned
Friend's prolix charges. He might deceive himself as to
the effects produced by the defence which he had then
made; but he thought that he had satisfied not only the
House, but also his former and his present associates, if
the Hon. Member for Aberdeen must draw such a differ-
ence, that he had not acted in these prosecutions either
oppressively, illegally, or unconstitutionally. Since that
time he had been waiting for the further explanations
which his Hon. and Learned Friend the Member for
Plympton, and another Hon. Member, his ally, had
threatened to make upon this subject. His Hon. and
Learned Friend, the blember for Plympton, said that
he had not foregone his avowed intentions upon it,—
that he had prepared a Bill, involving the principles
which he had propounded in his speech, and that
be now had that Bill in his pocket. If so, why
did not his Honourable and Learned Fri nd bring it
forward at once ? After dilating upon this point for some
time, the Attorney-General proceeded to observe, that he
had not heard one gentleman, either in that House or out
of that House, declare that the libel on the Lord Chan-
cellor ought not to have been prosecuted. He knew that
there were many gentlemen both in and out of Parlia-
ment, who disapproved of all prosecutions for libel. As-
suming, for the sake of argument, that the opinion was
right that there ought to be no public or criminal prose
cutions for libel, he would ask Hon. Gentlemen to con-
sider whether, as long as such criminal prosecutions were
the law of the land, they ought to let that abstract opinion
to influence their judgment in deciding upon this, or upon
any other particular case? lie next came to another class
of reasoner', who thought that no ex-officio informations
ought to be filed. He would not enter into the discussion
of that question at present—they might be right, or they
might be wrong; but so long as the power of filing ex -
officio informations was allowed by the practice of the
Constitution, ought they to quarrel with the exercise of it
in any particular case ? He now came to the consider-
ation of what that particular case was. He requested the
particular attention of the Committee to what he was go-
ing to say, premising, at the same time, that as he had
been unexpectedly, without any previous notice, called
upon to make a defence a second time—
Mr. BARING rose to order, but was so inaudible, that
the Members themselves called upon him to "speak out."
We understood him to be protesting against the irregu-
larity of this discussion. The committee had already lost
more than two hours in the discussion of a subject which
had nothing whatever to do with the estimate then before
it. In former times it was not usual to talk so much : the
consequence was, that they did more, and proceeded with-
out circumlocution to the business of the state. The single
question before the committee was this,—were the ex-
penses of prosecuting the ex -officio information filed by
Lord Lyndhurst against the Morning Journal included in
this estimate? A reply had been given in the affirmative,
and that had led—
Mr. BROUGHAM also rose to older. He was sure
that hie Hon. Friend the Member for Callington, could

•••

not have heard or if he had heard, could not have attended

:o the whole of this discussion. He agreed that upon
this occasion the committee had wandered widely from the

real question before it, and he was sorry to observe that
that was a practice which was daily becoming more pre-
valent, both in that and the other House of Parliament.
If, however, his Hon. Friend had determined to call the
House back to the question, he thought that be ought to
have carried his determination into effect before his

Hon. and Learned Friend the Attorney-General had
been put upon his defence.—(Hear, hear, with cries
of " No, no." )—He contended that his Honourable
and Learned Friend the Member for Plympton, hail

put his Hon. and Learned Friend the Attorney-Ge-
neral upon his defence by his mode of proceeding, that
night.—(Hear, bear.)—The question which his Hon. and
Learned Friend the Member for Plympton had raised was
this,—" I will not vote the expenses of filing the ex-
officio information on behalf of the Lord Chancellor,"—
for the private prosecution instituted by the Lord Chan•-
cellor he (Mr. Brougham) took it for granted would be
paid out of the Lord Chancellor's private funds—" I will
not vote the expenses of the ex-officio information, until
I hear the Attorney-General explain why be changed the
one proceeding for the other." That might be an incon-
venient mode of proceeding for the Committee,—it might
be an nadir mode of treating his Hon. and Learned
Friend the Attorney-General ; but as it had been adopted,
he did think that his Hon. and Learned Friend ought not

to he interrupted now that he had been put upon and bad
commenced his defence.—(Hear, bear.)
Mr. BARING—If there be any question of constitu-
tional 11w at issue between the two Learned Gentlemen,

it is hard upon the Committee, which has met for busi-
ness, to have its time wasted in settling it now.—( Hear.)
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL proceeded to state that
no one felt more strongly than he did the inconvenience
which had arisen from the irregularity of this discussion.
He understood that this vote was objected to on the ground
that the expences to be covered by it had not been regu-
larly incurred. He was going to discuss that point at the
very moment when his Hon. Friend interrupted him by
calling him to order. lie was going to state why the pri-
vate information filed by the Lord Chancellor had been
adandoned, and why the ex-officio information had been
instituted in its stead. The Lord Chancellor was a high
officer of State, an attack was made upon him for his con-
duct in his office ; a charge was preferred against him that
for a sum of 30,0001. he had appointed the present Soli-
citor-General to his office. On consideration of the mat-
, ter, he thought that this charge was preferred against the
Lord Chancellor in his public capacity ; and thinking so,
he felt it to be his duty to file an ex-officio information
against the person who preferred it. That many of his
predecessors had exercised the same power was a matter
too clear to he denied. He agreed that this was not the
best time to make the explanations he had stated to the
Committee. But he appealed to their candour and intel-
ligence.—(Hear.)—The Committee had been invited not
to pass this vote without an explanation from him ; and be
had explained that the transaction was a fit subject for a
public prosecution, and lie therefore did not think it to be
his duty to leave it in the hands of a private prosecutor.
Having stated this, he left it to the consideration of the
Committee to deal with the vote as they thought proper.
Sir E. KNATCHBULL said, as to the propriety of the
prosecutions in question, though he (Sir E. Knatchoull)
had an opinion of his own, he expressed none. All he
wished to know was, whether those prosecutions were con-
ducted at the public expense. The Hon. and Learned
Gentleman had referred merely to that on behalf of the
Lord Chancellor; but there were several, and he should
be glad to know if those other ex-officio informations \vac
at the public expense. On the general question as to
whether the expenses of prosecuting libels on high public
officers should be defrayed by the public, he alight have
something to say ; it was a question of much importance
—(Hear).---because, if they were to be so defrayed, he did
not know how far that circumstance might not operate as
an inducement to an Attorney-General to file such informa
tions.—( Hear, hear.)—That was a constitutional ques-
tion, which admitted of discussion. But he confes.ed
that he was not satisfied with the explanation of the Hon.
and Learned Gentleman.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL, in answer to the
question proposed by the Hon. Baronet, stated that the ex-
penses of all the prosecutions were included in the public
estimates. He begged it to be understood that no informa-
tion was filed by the Lord Chancellor ; his (the Attorney-
General's) judgment being that he ought not to proceed in it.
Mr. WIGRAM could not vote for the estimate; the
Lord Chancellor, in his opinion, was in the same situation,
when attacked in his private capacity, as another indivi-
duol, and should defend himself in the same manner.
Mr. O'CONNELL hoped that the Hon. 'and Learned
Gentleman (Sir C. Wetherell) would bring this question
to a decision by moving his amendment to strike out of
the estimates the expences of the Lord Chancellor's pro-
secution. It was a most unnecessary waste of the public
money, not because a foul libel had not been published,
but because that libel had been put in a way of being pro-
secuted. The Lord Chancellor had been foully libelled,
and he proceeded to prosecute the libeller. He obtained
the answer of Mr. Alexandir upon oath, and after he had
put the defend ant to the torture of this proceeding, what
occurred ? Why, for the first time—for no case had been
cited where an Attorney-General, after a defendant had
put in his answer on oath, had commenced a second pro-
secution—for the first time, the Attorney-General, avail-
ing himself of the di,coveries contained in the answer,
acquaint;ng himself with the man's defence, files an ex-
officio information at the public expence. He (Mr.
O'Connell) opposed the vote—first, because the proceed-
ing was totally unnecessary; secondly, because it was un-
constitutional, and was a double prosecution for the same
offence. Was a British subject ever—he would not say
exposed to such persecution—but placed in such a predi-
cament before? It had been said by the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman that the person thus prosecuted had
not advocated liberal opinions. What did he (Mr.
O'Connell) care what his opinions were. He had as much
right to his opinions, be they what they might, as the
Hon. and Learned Gentleman.—(Hear.)—That man was
now in gaol : no wonder, if lie was prosecuted at the pub-
lic expence. He (Mr. O'Connell) did not complain that
he was prosecuted. Let him be prosecuted ; but let not
the public pay for the prosecution. As to th • want of
notice, was not the vote itself a notice?
Sir 11. PEEL said that whatever might be the opinion
of the House on the question now before it, he was cer-
tain that no other Member would he prepared to give his
vote on the same grounds as the Hon. and Learned Member
for Clare: Ile had said that the prosecution was vindic-
tive : if so, let the House mark its sentiments by repro-
bating the conduct of the Attorney- General ; but let it
not degrade itself by such a paltry mode of reprobation, as
that of reducing the votes on the estimates.— (Ilear.)—
Was there ever such a miserable mode of dealing with a
great constitutional question?—(Hear)—was there ever
an instance of an attempt to subject a Lord Chancellor
and an Attorney-General to censure by diminishing a vote
of 1001.?—(Hear.)—And what if the Lord Chancellor
had paid out of his own pocket the expences of the prose-
cution instituted by the Attorney-General ? Would not
the Hon. and Learned Member for Clare be the fist to
charge him with vindictiveness on that very ground, and
cite that as the strongest instance of an unjust and vindic-
tive feeling?—(Hear.)—He (Sir R. Peel) had never yet
seen a gentleman placed in such a situation as his
Honourable and Learned Friend .beside him. When he
had been expressly challenged to justify his conduct,
he had been called to order by an Hon. Member, and
told that he ought not to proceed in his explanation, in
which he had been taken quite by surprise. He must
say that his Hon. and Learned Friend had not been fairly
dealt with. He was called upon, without any public
notice, or private intimation, to vindicate his conduct in
these prosecutions ; and lie would ask whether this was a
convenient opportunity for discussing this subject ? A mo-
tion on this question had been made by the Hon. and
Learned Member for Flynipton, who had protested against
a private prosecution being changed to a public one. The
House had decided against it.—(No, no.) Well, the
House had given no vote upon the subject ; but the Hon.
and Learned Member had given notice of a motion which
would bring the whole subject before the House. Not
content with this, the Hon. Member for Newark had also
given notice of a distinct motion to a similar effect.
Neither had persevered in their motions; and was it
therefore probable that his Hon. and Learned Friend was
prepared t., enter into the whole question now ? Although
it was competent for any Hon. Member in a Committee of
Supply to introduce any qui stion he pleased, yet as a matter
of convenience, it was desirable to limit them as much as
possible to pecuniary questions, unless distinct notice
were given. A pecuniary consideration certainly arose
out of the question of the lion. Baronet, whether the
expenses of the Lord Chancellor's prosecution were de-
frayed out of the public purse. If they were, they were
defrayed by the vote of last year. He hoped they were,
for lie thought it far better that the charges of
such prosecutions should come from the public funds
rather than from those of individuals. He would say
that although his (Sir R. Peel's) name had been intro
duced into an information, he should not pay the expence
of it. The Attorney-General had instituted that prose-
cution not out of regard for his (Sir R. Peel's) private
feelings, but because he had, as Secretary of St ae, been
unjustly libelled. He had done so without communicat-
ing his intention to him ; and could there be any thing

mor,l absurd and unjust than for him (Sir R. Peel) t)

required to pay the cxpences of a pro,ecution in respect
to which ho was not even consulted? It was the duty.of

!he Attorney-General to protect public servants from at—
tempts to run them down whilst in the performance of
their public duties; end he hoped that the Lord Chancel—

lor soul I refuse to pay the expences of such a prosecu—
tion. He should propose that, before the report be con—

sidered, and before agrant be made to defray these ex-
pences, in order that the House should not adopt a pro-
ceeding implying the slightest censure on the Attorney-
General, or on the Lord Chancellor, or on any individual

connected with those prosecutions, an inquiry should be
made, and the facts fully stated to the House, as to
whether it is usual for the public to p•iy the expenses of
such prosecutions. If it be the practice, and that prac-
tice be wrong, it was certainly competent f.ir the House
to a'ter it. The course he proposed, therefore, was that
the vote should pass, and that, prior to the report, the
facts should he fully stated to the House.
Sir E. KNATCHBULL was satisfied with the propo-
sition of the Right Hon. Gentleman. It would then be
for the House to decide on the sufficiency of the explanation.
Mr. SADLER stated, that the reason why be bad not
brought forward his motio❑ might be seen in the state of
the vote paper. The Hon. Member was proceeding to
refer to the subject of ship-money in the reign of Charles
1., when he was interrupted by violent coughing. He
observed, that if lion. Members were so impatient he
would take the liberty of exercising their patience.
Sir C. WETHERELL would withdraw his intended
amendmen►, as the proposal of the Right Hon. Secretary
he thought was a far one. The information be wanted
was, whether any instance could be cited in which a pri-
vate information had been commenced and abandoned, in
order to give an opportunity for the institution of a public
one. The Hon. and Learned Gent'eman, and the Rig"
Hon. Secretary. seemed rather to be retiring from this
question. He (Sir C. Wetherell) maintained that no such
instance had ever occurred in Westminster-Hall, and if
no such case was brought to light, he should persist (as
we understood) in proposing a reduction of the vote.
S;r R. PEEL explain-d. After a few words from Mr.
BRIGHT and Mr. Huma, the resolution was agreed to.
The n-xt resolution, which was for a grant of 107,986/.
to defray the expenses to be incurred on account of con-
vitts at borne and in Bermuda, for the year 1830, was
agreed to without any discussion, as was also a vote of
35,000/. for captured negroes.
On the resolution for a grant of 18,7001. to defray the
expences of the Commission for Preventing the Illegal
Traffic in Slaves,
Mr. HUME wished to ask the Right Hon. Gentleman
opposite whether he could not make arrangements to do
away with the expense in part, if not altogether.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the
Commission grew out of treaties made with foreign
powers with a view to abolish the slave trade, a circum-
stance which constituted the difficulty of receding..---
Agreed to.
On the resolution for a grant of a sum of 28,000/. for
omissions to the New States of America in 1830, being
proposed,
Sir J GRAHAM observed, that this vote and the next

to it were liable to great objections. He hoped, as it was
his wish to take the sense of the House on the subject,
that the Chairman might be permitted to report progress
and ask leave to sit again, reserving the discussion upon
these items or an earlier hour and a fitter opportunity.
Sir R. PEEL had no wish to press these particular re-
solutions at present, as they were objected to, but trusted
that Hon. Members would allow the subsequent votes to
be proceeded with.
Mr. HUME said, that almost every vote that followed
would be objected to.
The Resolution was postponed.
On the vote of 16,6001, for the Common Law and
Real Property Commissioners for 1830,
Mr. HUME objected to going into the Resolution at
that hour, on the ground that the vote was likely to entail
upon the country a perpetuity of expense.
Mr. BROUGHAM denied that such was the fact, and
stated that the Commissioners bad not been appointed
quite two years, and were within a year and a ball of the
final close of their labours.
Mr. HARVEY said, that although the Commissioners
had made several Reports, no practical good had as yet
result,d from their valuable labours; however, this was
not the fault of the Commissioners, but of the Government.
Sir R. PEEL having agreed to postpone the remaining
votes, the House resumed, aid the fu►ther consideration of
the Resolutions was fixed for Monday.
Mr. GORDON understood that the Forgery Bill was
fixed for Monday, and expressed a doubt whether (such
being the case) it would be possible to go into Committee
of Supply on that day.
Sir R. PEEL said, that it was intended t i go into
Committee of Supply at five o'clock, continue it ill nine,
and then take the Forgery Bill.
On the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the Exctiz-
QUER, it was resolved that the House at its rising (iv ad-
journ till Monday.
SALE OF BEER BILL. _ .

On the question that the House do resolve itself into
Committee on the S ile of Beer Bill,
Mr. BRIGHT objected to proceeding further with the
present measu e till the nature of that for effecting an
alteration in the system of Excise which was connected
with it should be before the House. He called upon Mi-
nisters to say precisely what that measure was, and to
what extent it tv,,uldtake off the burden of the Excise.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER objected
to entering into a discussion of one measure at a time
when another measure was before the House. When the
p esent Bill should have been disposed of, he would go
into the other, and afford his Hon. Friend an opportunity
of discussing it.
Sir M. W. RIDLEY asked whether the publie-houses,
now in existence, and licensed according to the present
system, were to be put under the direction of the Excise
in the same manner as was provided with respect to the
new houses to he opened under the authority of this Act?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, the
law would be, that those who sold beer only as provided
by the Bill, should be licensed by the Excise ; and that
those who combined with the beer trade a trade in wine
and spirits, should continue to be licensed as at present.
Mr. BROUGHAM said, it appeared to him that those
who had the spirit licences would theieby possess such A
preference as would give them a very fair chance, he might
abrost say a certainty, of keeping their ground.
After a few words from Lord MILTON, the CnAscst,
LOB of the EXCHEQUER, and Mr. Baron; the House
went into Committee.
As the clauses were put Ly the Chairman, several were
objected to, and some amendments were made; hut, as
tar as we could gather the purport of the observations of
the Hon. Members who took part in the discussion, the
amendments were only verbal.
On the clause being read, restricting the brewers Of
porter and ale from using any other material in the process
of brewing than malt, hops, and water,
Mr. BRIGHT proposed, as an amendment, that
duals should not be thus restricted.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER observed,
that the great object of the Bill was to supply the public
with a wholesome and nutritious malt beverage ; and it
was evident that that object would be defeated, 'if indivi-
duals were allowed to concoct liquor from quassia, coculus
indicus, and other deleterious drugs.
The amendment was negatived without a division.
Sir T. FREMANTLE proposed a clause to enact that,
any person applying under the Act for a licence, should'
give a notice to be put up for three successive Sundays
on the church-door, containing his name and address ;
and that it should be lawful for any thi ee rated parishioners
to apply to a magistrate, and give security to enter an ap-
peal against the granting of the licence ; and that the ma-
gistrates should not be authorised to grant the licence,
if the applicant had been convicted of a felony, or was
a man of notoriously bad character, or if the place where
the public-house was to be kept was 100 yards front
any public road.
After a short discussion the Committee divided—
For the clause
Against it 72
Majority —3o.
Some other clauses were then added, and the House
having resumed, the report was brought up and agreed
tr, and ordered to be taken into further consideration co
Thursday, and the Bill, as amended, to be printed.
The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and
at Half-past Three o'clock the House adjourned till Monday

The Court Journal of this day contains, we
understand, an entirely new and important feature, in the
form of an Original Sporting Communication, and tvr''
most piquant Fashionable Ai ticles, growing out of The
Manners of the Day" (from a high quarter.) One i 3 en'
titled, " Secrets of the Boudoir," and the other is a Ile'
troipective Glance at the Fashionable Parties of the pre'
sent Season. There is also an admirable Patrician PortraJt
of a Great Ex-Dignitary, probably Lord E.--rt ;
Second Number of " Portraits of the French Peerage"
1
a great variety of Court Gossip—some important Origioat
Foreign Correspondence—and a variety of other piquao
and interesting matters, more or less connected with the
peculiar object of this Journal that of reflecting the
manners of Highs Life as they actually exist in the proem..
day.

Gana stoc
Per Cent
Per Cent
„ r Ce
4.0 tpoeßed.
tP lr Cent
Di
ur tts 195
tto 5o y
Di tt6 SO y
nt! lia Btoc
Bon
•••••
Melts
Austrian
:Brazilian
_Buenos A
Chilian B
Celornbia
Ditto, ISt
-Danish
Greek Bo
13itbo,
Guatimal
Mexican
Litt(,
PRI

trazilian
trarilian

tLitto c
Mr itican
United iv.

'Bank Sio
Consols,
Gov. Stni
Ditto, N
4 per Cer
Gov. Del
Royal Cs
Grand C
City Del
Ballast (

Arrived
O A
O B
O C
1 D
O F
O F

0 G
..--__.

Morning

11

allay
ing; h

prival
more

authc

JEST
has NI
ands
the n

regpit
but li

Mon

vidu
by ti
and

this
of

truer

got
man

quei
co►u

ust
Di
Fr;