The Sun.
London, England, 1830-05-07 00:00:00

must OF COMMONS--(LAST NIGHT).

Lord PALMERSTON reported from the Rye Election
Committee, that the committee met this morning at the
usual hour, but that in consequence of the absence of one
of the Members of the Committee, (General Kin:, who
was prevented from attending by indisposition), the Com-
mittee hod adjourned until eleven o'clock to-morrow, (this
day.) A mediml witness having been examined as to the in-
disposition of General King, the Gallant Member was, upon
the motion of Lord Palmeteton, excused for his non-at-
tendance in the Committee.

Mr. H. DRUtIMOND brought up the Report on the
Glasgow Royalty Extension Bill.
After a few words front Mr. MAXWELL, the Report
‘ea agreed to, and the Bill was ordered to be engrossed,
and read a third tire.

MEXICO.
Mr, HtSKISSON had given notice far eveninz,

of his intention to ptetent a "petition from Liverpool, with
reference to the trade of this country with Mexico, hot he
now rose to postpone it, in consequence of the unavaidabie
absence of the Right Hon. Gentleman, the Secretary for
the Home Department. The question was one which in-
volved considerations of great importance ; and, as it rfit4
extremely desirable that the Right Hon. Gentleman's at-
tention should be called to it, he (Mr. Haskisson)
leave to postpone it till this day se'linight, when that Right
Hon. Gentleman would probably be in his place.
Mr. DUNCOMBE presented a petition from the wool-
manuticturers and other inhabitants of a place in York-
shire, against the employment of machinery.
Sir R. PHILLIPS presented petitions from Harerfecd•
west, against the Welsh Judicature Bill.
Mr. 11PKINNON presented a petition from Ipswicl•:
against the Be!n. Bill.
Mr. E. D. DAVENPORT presented a petition from
Shaftesbury, praying for the abolition of the punishment
of death in can s of forgery. The same Hon. Member
presented petitions from t::e retail brewers of Manchester
and of Rochdale, praying relief from certain penalties to
which they were exposed under the existing law.
Mr. P. THOMSON presented a petition from the
Chamber of Commerce, Manchester, in favour of a repeal
of the usury laws,
IRISH NEWSPAPERS.
General HART presented a petition from the letter-press
printers of Londonderry, against the proposed intvease of.
the stamp duties on lush Newspaper.. The Gallant
Member supported the prayer of the petition.
Sir J. BRYDGES also supported the prayer of the
petition.

Mr. G. MOORE gave his cordial support to the prayer
of the petition.
Mr. S. RICE said so fir from an increase, a dir!►inn•

tion of revenue would follow the imposition of additional
duties upon the newspaper press of Ireland. Under the
existing scale of duties, the revenge arising from the duty
upon advertisements in Ireland had diminished latterly
from 26,0001. to 14,0001. a year ; and if this measure
were carded, the press of Ireland would be altogether
annihilated. There was but one unanimous opinion
amongst all the Irish Member, on the subject ; and though
the press was the most powerful engine in controlling
their actions, they were determined to resist any measure
which went to impose any additional shackles upon. it.
Mr. O'CONNELL supported the prayer of the peffities.
The measure in question would annihilate the Irish preal.
Mr. C. FERGUSSON, though he had not the honour

to belong to the county from which this petition had
come, felt warmly interested in the question, and he
should certainly protest against the imposition of any ad-
ditional tax upon Ireland. The petition was laid on the
table, and ordered to be printed.
Colonel WI LSON presented a petition from the brewers
and public-house keepers of York against the Beer Bill.
Mr. R. DUNDAS presented a petition from the Lord
Provost and Magistrates of Edinburgh against the tis
upon surgeons' diplomas.

Mr. C. FERGUSSON supported the prayer of the
petition, which was ordered to be printed.
Mr. DAVENPORT presented two petitions from places
in Wales, against the alteration in the Welsh judicature.
The same Hon. Member presented a petition from Nant-
w,ch against the Beer Bill.
PROPOSED ROAD from WATERLOO-BRIDGE to
the NORTH SIDE of the METROPOLIS.

Lord BELGRAVE hal a petition to present on this
subject which was entitled to the attention of the House.
It was from the parish of St. Paul, Cureut-garden. The

petitioners complained of thepresent very inadequate com-
munication between the northern and southern parts of
the metropolis, which was only affirded by Chancery-lane,
which was not at all fit for a thoroughfare ; and they sug-
gested that the opportunity which the thstruction of the
English Opera-house presented should be seized to open a

street opposite Waterloo-bridge for the purpose of affording
the necessary public accommodation. He trusted that the
Noble Lord opposite (Lord Lowther) would attend to the

suggestion of the petitioners.

Mr. HOBHOUSE said, that the improvement recom-
mended by the petitioners would be productive of great
public advantage, and he trusted it would be carried into
effect. He (Mr. Hohhouse) understood that applications
hail been made to the Noble Lord opposite and to the Go •
vernment on the subject, and that no difficulties had been
raised by them to the proposition, provided Parliament
should give a proper and ad.qu .te sanction to it. There
was a very natural objection in the first instance to appro-
priating the public money to measures of the kind, as such
heavy expences had been already incurred for other im-
provements ; but lie was sure that if Parliament voted a
sum for this purpose, the new buildings iu the projected
street would scion return enough to repay it.
Lord LOWTHER was not disposed to deny that great
public advantage and convenience would arise from
making the proposed street, and the only difficulty seemed
to be as to the party who should bear the expence of the
projected improvement. He believed that the days of
prejudice had gone by, and that there was one general
opinion in favour of improvements such as were now in
progress at Charing-cross. But it was to be recollected
that the improvements in Regent-street, and in progress
at Charing-cross, were upon Crown property, and that
the proposed line of street in this instance would not be
upon property belonging to the Crown. The Crown
property in Regent-street actually returned at present 2i
per cent., and he was sure the improvements at Charing-
cross would be equally profitable to the Crown. The
property here, however, did not belong to the Crown ; it
was not, therefore, for his (Lord Lowther's) department,
more than any other, to interfere with regard to the pro-
posed improvement. There was a small portion of Crown
property just contiguous to it, anti he believed that some
of the houses in the line of the improvement' could be
exchanged for it at a cost of about 2,0001. Indeed, he
thought that for 20,0001. the intended improvement
could be carried as far as the Dake of Bedford's pro-
perty. It lay with Parliament to decide as to the sug-
gested improvement, and whence the funds for it were to
be derived.
Sir J. YORKE had given notice of his intention to
present a petition on this subject tonight; but as the
subject was now before the House, lie thought he might as
well take that opportunity to state the opinion of the pro-
priuturs of Waterloo-bridge with respect to it. The
House was aware that upwards of 1,000,0001. had been
expended on Waterloo-bridge, for which a very trifling re-
tin n indeed was now made by that prOperty. The money
toads undoubtedly returned 5 per cent., but the shares
did not return 1r per cent. The original shareholders,
besides, had been completely cleaned out,—to speak ip the
modern phraseology, they had been totally " cliane."--(A
laugh.)—lf the Noble Lord, therefOre; expected that the
proprietors of Waterloo-bridge would do any thing to-
wards effectirg this improvement, he had a very good
chance of been disappointed. If gentlemen would but
enter the door of the theatre, they would see a large space
which had been occupied by buildings burnt down, as if
done by a great operation of nature for the purpose. If
he wished to make gentlemen perceive still more fully the
necessity of making this gr-- nue to the north of Lou-
don, lie would take the tiOo-britlie, and make
that structure I,ii'adeticate .irpose. The build-
ing,.
of that bridge had created - rise in all the pro-
perty adjacent to it. It hadincreak?„, yr., value of the
Crown property, and also that of the a. 'neuter,
and-had relied that of the see of Canterbt. g S 5001. to
.5,000/ a year. It had also lieen of great to the
Excise ; for the stone-masons, who during ita , astruaion
had mind 255. a week, expended, to his personal know.

leage, full half of it in swizzle.--(44 laugh.)—He would
also give anotiver reason why the House should listen fa-
Aourably to the prayer of this petition. On the 29th of
June, 11316, the House resolved to address the Prince Re-
gent for the erection of a national monument in honour of
the officers and soldiers who had fought at the great vic-
tory of Waterloo ; and on the .nth of June the Prince
Regent replied to that address by stating that he would
give such directions as the House required. Now, the
only monument of that victory which had been yet erected
was Waterloo-bridge. Now the company which had
erected that bridge had no funds to make these improve-
ments, nor bad the Commissioners of Woods and Forests.
whose funds for some time were fomstulled. The expense
would not exceed 120,0001. ; and be trusted that the
House would see the necessity of facilitating an opening to
the north of the metropolis, which would conduce at once
to the ornament of the town and to the health of its inha-
bitant..

Sir JAMES GRAHAM observed, that as the Noble
Lord opposite had said the funds belonging to the Woods
and Forests were forestalled for some tin-.e to come, he
hoped that part of them were set aside for the repayment
of the 250,0001. which had been taken from the sum set
aside by the French Government for the indemnification
of British claimants. Seeing the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer in his place, he would take that opportunity of
asking him whether he was prepared to inform the House
if he had formed any plan to appropriate that sum of
250,000/., which had been grossly misapplied, to the
claimants upon it, who were yet unsatisfied ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER did not
expect to have been questioned, upon a petition relating
to Wateiloo-bridge, about arrangements which had sin ung
out of the treaty of Paris. He would at present simply
state, that he hoped in a short time to be able to submit a
measure to Parliament for the purpose of carrying into
effect some such measure as his Hon. Friend contemplated.
Lord LOWTHER felt as strongly the necessity of re-
paying this sum as the Hon. Baronet ; and, as a proof of
it, stated, that within the last few weeks they had paid on
account of it a small sum into the Treasury.
The petition was ordered to be printed, as was also a
simllar petition from St. George's, Bloomsbury.
Petitions against the Beer Bill were presented by
Lord Retrace, from the Mayor and Corporation of Ches-
ter ;—by Mr. Blackburn, from Warrington ;—by Sir
W. Rowley, from the Licensed Victuallers of Woodbridge
and Beccles ;—by Sir M. W. Ridley, from those of New-
castle-upon-Tyne ;—by Colonel Lygon, from those of
Dudley ;—by Mr. Batley, from Beverley; and by Mr.
Dick, from Maldon.

Lord BELGRAVZ presented a petition from the Mayor
nd Corporation of Chester; and Mr. EGERTON from cer-
tain Justices of the county of Chester, against the Welsh
Judicature 801.

Lord J. HAY presented petitions from the Magistrates
of Haddington, Cnpar, and a third place, against the im-
position of further duties en the importation of raw spirits.
Petitions for the repeal of the Malt Tax were presented
by Mr. Firm 'rom the neighbourhood of Chipping Nor-
ton ; and by Mr. CURTICIS from the Rape of Hastings, Rye,
and other places in Sussex.
Petitions against the East India Company Monopoly
were presented by Mr. Maxwell from the county of Ren-
frew, by Sir R. Fergusson from Kincardine, by Sir M. S.
Stewart, from Arran (referred to the East India Com-
mittee), and by Lord Milton, from Otley.
Petitions for the abolition of the punishment of death for
forgery were presented by Mr. Fane, from Henley-upon-
Thames ; by Lord Milton, from Doncaster, Guisborough,
and various other places in Yorkshire; and by Mr. De-
nison, from Godalming.

Mr. LENNARD asked the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer at what time it was intended that the discussion on
the law of forgery should take place?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said,
that he coul,l not answer the question. As soon as his
Right Hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Home
Department returned to the House, he would fix a day for
that discussion.

Lord MILTQN presented a petition for the abolition
of negro slavery from Great Ouseburn, Green Hammer-
ton, ShPiield, Leeds, and ♦arious other places in the connty
of Yolk.

Lord MILTON presented a petition from Kirkby,
ThurstanlAnd, and various other places in the West Riding
of Yorkshire, praying for the removal of the assizes for the
county of York from York to Wakefield.

Mr. MAXWELL presented a petition from the county
of Renfrew, and also from the faculty of procurators at
-, praying for a cheaper administration of justice in
Scotland.

Mr. CLINTON presented a petition from the Licensed
Victuallers of East Retford, against the Beer Bill.
Sir J. NEWPORT presented a petition from certain
letter-press printers in Waterford, praying that no addi-
tional tax might be imposed upon Irish newspapers.
Mr. Alderman WAI CHNIAN had been requested to
present to the House a petition, signed by 260 ship-owners
of London, complaining of distress, and praying that the
House would adopt measures to relieve them. He knew it
was the fashion in that House to contend that the ship-
owners, so far from being distressed, were in a snore
flearishing condition than at any former period. Ile
thought, however, that the ship-owners mitt he the best
judges of their own situation, and they declared that their
interests had been materially injured by the measures
'which Government had for years past persevered in. At
the present moment the number of British vessels employed
was less by 674 than in 1826, and the diminution of ton-
nage since 1826 was 217.375. The generally distressed
state of the country was proved by the lessened consumption
of necessary articles. In the last year there was a dimi-
nution in the consumption of the undermentioned articles
to the following extent---candles, 2,000,0001 b. ; soap,
5,000,0001 b. ; starch, 1.500,000:b. ; leather, 2,000.0001 h.;
paper, 5,000,00016. ; and printed goode, 10,000,000
yards. In other articles which he would not enumerate,
there had been a proportionate reduction. In his opinion,
the sudden departure from the prohibitory system was an
act almost of insanity. The line of policy now pursued
struck at the vital parts of the naval power, which was the
bulwark of England's glory. He might perhaps be an-
swered by an appeal to official returns ; but it was impos-
sible to form a correct opinion from these documents, for
the difference between the real and official value of exports
during the last three }ears was not less than 51,000,0001.
The free trade system had now had a fair trial, and as it
had proved ruinous, he thought that Ministers were bound
to retrace their steps and revert to the ancient policy under
which the country had flourished.
Mr. SADLER could bear testimony to the sufferings
of the ship-owners. On a close itvestigation of the sub-
ject he had found, that since 1828, there had been a dimi-
nution of shipping to the amount of thirty-five per cent. ;
and, taking various contingent points into consideration,
the reduction was not less than fifty per cent., as compared
with former years. If he looked to the registered vessel,.
in 1830, as compared with the registered vessels in 1828,
he found a great declination both in the number of vessels
registered, and in the amount of their tonnage. This was
the case, notwithstanding the increase of population which
was going on all the while. He knew that there had been
an increase of British shipping, since 1828, of 1 per
cent. inwards, anti of two per cent. outwards, in tonnage.
But what, he asked, was the increase of tonnage amongst
the foreign shipping ? In 1828, the foreign vessels en-
tered here amounted to 134,620,000 tons; in 1830, the
amount bad advanced to 710,303,000 tons ; being an in-
crease of 20 per cent. He, therefore, wanted the reason
to be pointed out to him, why, in British shipping, the
increase should only have been between two and three per
cent., while in foreign shipping, the increase was twenty
per cent. The documents to which he referred, and which
led him to this conclusion, were most important. He had
avoided declaiming this night—•his figures declaimed foi
him. Here was shown an increase of between two and
three per cent. on our registered vessels, while there was
an increase of 20 per cent. with reference to foreign ton
nage. The ill effects of this free trade system, as it was
called, were seen in every branch of industry which it
touched. A year age they were told of the prosperity and
activity that prevailed in the silk-manufacture. But what
was the fact? In the year ending the sth of
April, 1328, 4,828,0001 b. of raw silk were im
ported ; in the year ending the sth of April, 1829,
4,133,0001 b. were imported; but in the year ending the
Bth of April, 1830, the importation had fallen to
2,899,0921 n. Let this fact be heard, and let it be trea-
sured up in their minds, as a proof of the little dependence
that was to be placed on statements hastily and inconsi-
derably made. Now, to return to the shipping interest :
be could, from a single instance, lead gentlemen to ima-
gine what its general depression was. In 1826 there were,
at Whitby, eight shipping establishments, which gave em-
ploynteat to several thousand hands ; but soon after the
alteration was made in our system, several of the princi-
pals went out of business, and, within a few days, two
others had given notice that they were about to decline
carrying on the trade. The subject of the shipping in-
terest ought to be investigated before a Committee.
Mr. LIDDELL bo* sony to the depressed state
of the shipping int, . his opinion, all that the
shipowners had t as likely to afford them relief,
was an extension trade, and that could only be effected
by a measure which ought to be conceded to the com-
mercial interests of the country—namely, a more free
and direct trade to India. He hoped, however, that in
the course of the Lenin she kihrb t Hen. Gentleman

would state sotorthlng which would be soothing Ind eon-
siding to this deeply suffering interest:
Mr. PROTIIEROE believed that the shipping interest
looked entirely for relief to the reduction of taxes, and the
reuriOval of East India monopoly. He wished that, in
the tett year, Government would be able to give them
some relief with respect to the first point.
Mr. STEWART should htiVe gl'eat pleasure in support-
inr,- the petition whit% had just been presented by the Hon.
Arderrnki opposite. He did not feel himself competent to
triter so minutely into the subject as he had done, nor in-
deed would it be necessary for him to do so, as it was im-
possible to transact businese, or hold communication with
respectable shin-OWiters, or to look at the state of the
shirring now lying in the River Thames, without being
convinced that the shipping interests of the country were
reduced to the lowest possible ebb. In corroboration of
what was stated by the Hon. Member opposite (Mr.
Sadler) as to the state of the building establishments at
Whitby, he would beg to read a short extract of a letter
from that place to a most respectable ship-dinner in the
City of London, from whom he received it a few days
ago. It was written in the middle of last month, and
was as follows There are four new ships lying here
withottt purchasers ; four out of seven of the extensive
ship-building establishments are laid down ; a l'easel has
sailed with part of our population for America, and another
goes in May." This, he had reason to believe, applied
to most of the ahip-huilding establishments in the king-
dom, What might be the best remedy for this state of
things, he certainly felt diffident in suggesting, but he en-
tertained strong doubts as to the expediency of the reci-
procity system now in force.
Mr. SYKES said, there never was a time when the
shipping interest Was so badly off as at present.
Mr. lIBRRIES said, what he had to state should he
directed exclusively to the shipping interest. Amongst
the multifarious points touched upon by the lion. Member
for Newark, he was astonished to hear him advert to the
regulations of the timber trade as a grievance to the ship-
ping interest. Ile should have thought that any cautious
advocate of the shipping interest would not bare said one
word about the timber trade--(Hear, hear)-since it must
stare every one in the face that this country annually paid
a very large sum in taxation, on account of that trade, for
the benefit of the shipping interest. The Hon. Member
for Newark, in arguing this question, contented himself
with taking two years, without touching at all on antece-
dent years, and looking to peculiar circumstances con.
nected with the years be had selected. He would go back
to the period of the peace in 1814, and he thought that
nothing could be more fair than to take the average of
each three years since that time. The Hon. Member for
Newark had instituted a comparison between the ships em-
ployed at different periods ; but he (Mr. Herries) thought
the simplest and most satisfactory way was to take the ave-
rage amount of tonnage of British vessels entered inwards
in certain years. He would not embarrass the House by
stating the outwaid tonnage. which generally corresponded
pretty nearly in amount with the inward_ Taking the
average amount of British tonnage entered inwards in the
three years ending in 1814, we should find it to be
1,290,000 tons. The average of the next three years
amounted to 1,470,000 tons ; and of the ensuing three
years ending in 1820, to 1,787,560 tons. In the next
three years-viz , 1821, 1822, and 1823 (and he called
attention to this statement because it referred to a period
just before the alteration in our system of commercial po-
licy), the average tonnage inwards amounted to 1,668,106
tons. The three years immediately ensuing embraced the
period during which our present system of policy was in
course of adoption-and in that the average was 1,964,182
tons, showing a considerable increase on the former pe-
riods. But in the last three years, ending with 1829, when
the new system was m itured, and had come into full
operation, the average tonnage amounted to 2,921,939
tons, infinitely exceeding the average of former years.
Further, it was worthy of remark, that 1829, the last
year of the three, exhibited by far the largest tonnage of
the whole. In point of fact it was the largest ever known
in the course of our commercial history; there had been
nothing like it previously or subsequently to the peace--
nothing to be compared with 1829. In order to satisfy
gentlemen of this, he should advert to the highest average
he could find of the three consumptive years during the
war. That was included in 1810, 1811, and 1812,
when the average amount of British tonage entered
inwards was 1,570,490 tons. But, as had been already
stated, the average of the three last years amounted to
2,121,930 tons, being an increase over the highest ave-
rage previous to the adoption of the present system of
551,440 tons, or one-third. Thus it appeared that there
had been a constant increase of British tonnage entering
our ports subsequently to the adoption of a system which
it was now said was the cause of decay and embarrassment
to our shipping interests. With respect to foreign shipping
the opponents of our commercial policy assumed that it
nad been favoured to the direct injury of the home in-
terest : the inference was, that its activity and amount
must have been increased. But what was the fact? The
average of foreign tonnaee entering British ports during
three years of the war when the amount was highest, was
793 000 tons, whereas in the last three years it only
reached 698,000 tons. Thus there was a diminution of
100,000 tons in the annual average of foreign shipping,
while we had an increase of 550,000 tons in that of
British shipping entered inwards in the last three years,
as compared with the three years previous to the adoption
of the present system, when the amount of tonnage in-
wards (British and foreign) was highest. To exhibit
the progress of foreign shipping in the three years pre-
ceding the alteration in our system, during the alteration
and in the three years ensuing, he would state that in
1821, 1822, and 1823, the average of foreign tonnage
entered inwards in our ports was 482,000 tons ; in the
next three years there was a great increase, and the average
amounted to 803,899 tow ; but during the last three
years (the system having come into foil operation) the
average fell to 698,900 tons. So that while British ton-
nage had greatly increased, the amount of foreign ton-
nage had decreased. How were these facts, plainly
stated and (he pledged himself) extracted faithfully from
official tables, reconcilable with the complaints now
made? Our coasting trade exhibited the same activity
as our foreign trade ; there had been a great increase
generally from 1823 up to the present period. In 1523
the amount of tonnage was 7,899,000 ; in 1824,
8,101,000 ; in 1825, 8,300,000 ; in 1826, 8,316,000 ;
1827, 8,611,000 ; in 1828, 8,700,000 ; and in 1829,
8,932,000 tons. We divided our trade into that with
the north and south of Europe, with America and our
own colonies. Take the average of three years' trade
with the north of Europe before and after the adoption of
the present system, and see the result. The first period
he should select comprized the years 1821, 1822, and
1823, when the tonnage of British vessels engaged in that
trade and entered inwards was 514,135 tons, and o'
foreign vessels 314,969 ; outward tonnage, British
711,959; foreign, 615,102. In 1826, 1827, and 1828,
there was a great increase in the amount of tonnage en-
gagtd in this trade, but it was decidedly in favour of this
country, the average amount of British tonnage inwards
being 839,541, and of foreign 504,000 tons. Let it be
recollected, too, that this trade involved the main point at
issue, that the north of Europe was the field of battle
where, according to the opponents of the existing system,
we were to be annihilated in consequence of its operation.
Was this so? Were there any symptoms of such an
issue? No; the direct contrary was the fact. What was
the number of ships that had passed the Sound in 1821,
1822, and 1823 (the golden period of those who objected
to our present system ?) 8,954 ships passed the Sound
during this time: of these, 2,977 were British, and
5,977 foreign vessels; the proportion of British being
just 50 per cent. on the whole. In the next three years
11,581 vessels passed the Sound, British 4,152, foreign
7,429: our proportion having risen to 56 per cent.
Here was a very considerable increase after the adoption of
the new system. In the last three years (1827, 1E428,
and 1829), the number of vessels passing the Sound was
in all 13,241, and of these there were 4,772 British and
8,469 foreign ships, giving a little increase on 56 per cent.
The Right Hon. Gentlethan proceeded to refer to a report
drawn up in America, by Mr. Campbell, on the subject
of commercial policy, in which it was stated the changes
introduced in the British system were of a nature to
strengthen her marine, to give a wider range to the com-
merce, and an additional impulse to the trade of the country.
His object was to induce Membersito weigh well the proofs
he had adduced of increased activity and employment in the
branch of industry in question, which was assumed by many
to be in a state of ruin, difficulty, and embarrassment.
He might observe in passing, that the Hon. Member was
quite mistaken with respect to the silk-trade, and as to the
quantity of raw materials imported within a given time.
The silk trade (he spoke upon the best authority) was
one of those branches of industry at present in the least
distressed situation. There was more activity, and a
greater share of employment in it than in many other
branches. He would only add, upon this point, that
whenever the Hon. Member chose to give notice of a mo-
tion on the subject, he (Mr. Herries) should be ready to
meet him upon it. The petitioners prayed the House to
take their depressed situation into consideration, but no
particular mode of relief was pointed out. If there was
any prospect of Government being able to promote the
interests of the petitioners, he would be the last man to
object to taking the case into consideration ; but he con-
fessed he saw no such prospect.
Mr. ROBINSON said the Right Hon. Gentleman bad

einteavoureal to answer complaints as to the falling off in
the amount of British tonnage built and registered, by a
reference to the amount of British and foreign tonnage in-
wards. This was any thing rather than a satisfactory
answer. The Right Hon. Gentleman talked of increased
activity in the shipping interests,----a fact not denied by
those who supported the petition, who argued that the
ship-owners were placed in such unfavourable circum-
stances as to be obliged to work harder than ever to en-
deavour to sustain thtmseives. The amount of British
registered tonnage had decreased ; in 1826 there were
24,625 vessels, the tonnage of which amounted t.t
2,635,644 tons; last year we had 23,453 vessels; ton-
nage, 2,517,000 ; so that here was a diminution of
1,172 vessels, and 118,644 tons in a space of three years.
The petitioners coawlained that freights were so reduced
as to deprive them of deriving advantage from their capital.
Something should be done to remedy the evil ; if we could
not depart from the system we had adopted (and, per-
haps we were pledged to it for some years at least), we
might endeavour to reduce the materials used in ship-
building to a par with the prices paid for them by foreign
builders, and adopt other measures to lessen the inequa-
lity that at present existed between British and foreign
shipowners, so as to enable the former to compete suc-
cessfully with the latter: The Right lion. Gentleman had
gone into an elaborate statement of figures,' but did not
say one word of an intention to reduce the duties on the
importation of timber, &c.
Mr. BERRIES was proceeding to explain the manner
in which the number of British ships and the amount of
tonnage was apparently reduced, by the new system of
registration adopted in 1825 or 1826, when an Act was
passed directing the future omission of ships that had been
previously improperly registered, when
Sir J. NEWPORT rose to order, and deprecated fur-
ther discussion upon a petition to the hindrance of public
business.

Colonel WILSON wished to refer to a letter which lie
had received from a respectable ship-owner of Hull, and
some opposition being offered to the Hon. Member's doing
so, he expressed a hope that the House would allow him
to proceed, as he was going to asset t facts and not hearsays
from the moon —(Laughter.) He was ready to produce
the gentleman who wrote the letter at the bar to prove
the statements contained it. He was sure the House would
thank him when he was done—(A laugh)—for calling its
attention to these statements. The Hon. Member pro-
ceeded to read from a letter extracts, describing at consi-
derable length the depressed state of the shipping interests
in the north of England. Some of the details having
been received with murmurs from several Hon. Gentlemen,
the Hon. Member said, Gentlemen might call, "Oh !
Oh !" but these were facts, and came from a gentleman
of undoubted veracity, who might have been in the trade
for half a century for any thing he (Colonel Wilson) knew
to the contrary.—(Laughter.)
Mr. P. THOMSON regretted that a discussion respect-
ing one of the meet important interests of the c ountry
should have been brought forward on the mere presenta-
tion of a petition. If, in spite of the figures on the table,
and in spite of clear and authentic statements to the con-
trary, the worthy Alderman (Waithman) persisted in his
opinions, let the worthy Alderman bring forward a sub-
stantive motion, and take the sense of the House upon the
system which had been adopted with respect to the ship-
ping intererest.
The petition was then read.
Mr. Alderman WAITHMAN, in reply, complained of
the dictatorial tone assumed by the Hon. Member for
Dover, and said that the Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr.
Herries) opposite, had, in all his arguments and state-
ments, lost sight of the increase of the population of the
country during the last thirty years. It was a most im-
portant subject, and ought to be fully discussed.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER thought
that no Hon. Member present could doubt that the worthy
Alderman and his supporters had had ample opportunity
of discussing the subject, and that they had not let the
opportunity escape them.—( Hear, hear.)—He hoped that
now they should be allowed to proceed to the question
which regarded the administration of justice, and which
it had been arranged should certainly be brought on this
evening.—(Hear, hear.)
After a few words from Mr. SADLER. and Mr. FYLER
respecting the state of the silk trade, the petition was or-
dered to be printed.
ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved
that the House, at its rising, do adjourn till Monday
next. —Agreed to.
ADMIRALTY COURT (IRELAND)—CONDUCT