The Sun.
London, England, 1822-03-29 00:00:00

PARLIAMENT.

0.13-$E Or; LORPS, THURSDAY, MARCH 28.
.:rhe Loaf) Cii:A'ick.At.on. having been detained
at Carlton Palacetili,,,a 'late hour, the House' did
antlialfepasefive o'clock.
Toxii.iNs, from tie Treasury, presented returns of the
.total amount of the Fiveand Four. per Cents. before the last
_ Aet waa pasied; and of the Four per Cents. since the comple.
-t.zu of the measure.—Lail on the table.
Mr. Jail MST owe, from /he Chief Secretary's office, in Ire-
land, presented returns of:tile:lncrease and diininution of Sala-
c.ps ta.Public tiffico, irilaCind.,--,l2aid on the table. •
Mr. Itr.-3-04,. ten tiliCanairtdty, presented a copy of the
•::omtnissior.. fort,execdtirt theeffice of ,Lord High
en the:table.
DEEDE4N IRELAND.
.:"kly Earl, of ...13/4.stsijort postponed the fnr-
-Pier .proceedings: on. the Irish Deeds'. Register
from _to-mortals,- to. Monday., the 22(1- of
April. The, Noble Earl took this opportunity
of . observing, that he had been. represented in
some of the daily-,..popers to have used expressions
•the late debate. ou'lrish Tithes,_ with regard
to college'lisfii4o,liio7.were regarded in.lreland:
zo be ltarli.and.se.rere, —lf we understood his
Lordship rightly, he -lroit eXPlained that what he
-had said on the occasion: alluded to, was', that
trier F'ellows of the Coilego:of: Dublin, when they
toot -livings, usuallY:'lot: the collage at, an age
fat. advanced to eii;ablethe,m to accommodate
'themselves to the new situation in which they
ere placed. • - . .
• ILORDS OF THE ADMIRALTY.
Lord 311.ersi.t..Li. presented the Bill.of which
he had giyeti.,ilat'ice esterday. Their Lord.
ship; would see from the paper- which had just
been laid- onithes-lable; that his Majesty had:
been advised to reduce -,the number of commis-
sioners of the Admiralty from seven to five. The.
_House did not need to be informed that a certain
,riumber of.Lorda-wereaequired,to go from time to.
time to the-outports:,-•SNIT-Ifen the number of Lords
Is-as seven, lour could be Spared ; as, by the acts of
Parliament fOr regulating the office of Lord High:
eertainlwwers' w ere given to the whole of
the Commissioners'otto any three of their number.
If these acts remained in. force, it would be im-
possible to -go-on without risk to the public see-
. -vice, now that the.number of Commissioners was,
-reduced. In the Commission now laid on the
- table, the tininber of Commissioners necessary to
'form a quorum had been reduced from three to
two; but that was net sufficient while the Acts.
to which he
.had allude! :remained in force.—
With respect. to the proceeding by which this re-
uction had been -produced; he must say, that it
vyas one in thepropriety..of :which he could not
-concur ; and which, had. -he been a Member of
the other House,. he. sficted• have thought it his.'
<3.uty to oppose. He wonfd.not, however, now.,
,enter into any detail of the:reasons on which this
opinion was founded: Inithe,first place, he ob-
jected to all reductionS of this description.
.Li the second place, he olijetted to this particular
reduction, because. the redoction of two Members
of the Board would. tend greatly to obstruct
public business. He • could, if necessary, assign
many reasons in proof of this opinion. If the
.proceeding of the other House had only gone to
reduce one Lord COtiimissittner, whatever ob-
jection he Might still have.had to. it, he could not
say that public business ite,, the time of peace
'would be 'much impeded •by such a reduction,
though he was convinced • that if a war took
,place, it would be necessary' to replace the nUm-
her of seven. But with a view to a state of peace,
a would have been much better that the re-
-Auction had left six than five. As be had said,
he would not enter into
_details; but if any
Noble Lord thought fit to call for the grounds of
.his opinion, he was prepared to state them. All
'he should add was, that-instead of the reduction
proving a measure of economy, it would be found
..to be one of considerable expense. He now gave
notice, that he would move the suspension of the
Standing Orders in order that the Bill might go
through the remaining stages, and be sent to the
'Commons without delay,:as.-it was necessary that
it should pass before the,liolidays: Their Lord-
shipc, he apprehended., Would. have no objection
to this course. -
The Bill was then read -K first -time, and or-
dered to -be read a second:time to-morrow.--
.Adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS..
WEST INDIA PRODUCE.
AIr.CANNING presented a Petition' from certain proprietors
,of West India Land, at Liverpool,, complaining of the depres-
,sed value of West India produce, and • praying, amongst other
rerr.edlls' that a negociation might be opened with the United
Stat -14 of America, to place the trade of the West India ISlands
on t‘..11 crams footing with those States-as formerly. The:Pe,
prirticularly eomPlained of the low, price of sugar
*ad rum, and suggested that the duties 'upon ihost • articles
-shouia ba removed or lowered, and thit they cOnsidered the
41.:..Fesaion in the prices of these•articles to'arise from the great
importation of them from the Island of puha. The Right
nonourable Gentleman said, that as ft was thecobttmplar
tion of his Majesty's Government to institute -somerneastire
with refcrence to this subject, he would refrain' fitim'inaking
.ao; observation that might have a tendency toforetali the'dis-
vvussion which would shortly take place.—Read, and ordered
to be printed. 7 I '7

The Right ffon. Gentleman then presented another Petition
from Live pool Merchants interested in the tilde •of Canada
with the %Vest India Co/onies, praying that the restrictions on
.the commerce betwixt these Colonies and America inighti not
taken elf, as it would affect the dealings in grain at present.
_-tub: sting.—Ordered to be printed.
C. it. ELLIS presented a Petition from certain Planters.
of the West India Colonies, and Merchants interested in the
•-csithmerce of those islands, complaining :of the-prevailing
.tress from low prices, and praying that the tradebetwixt these-
Colonies and the United States of America might be opened.
• 'l'he i i on. Gentleman declined entering into any. statement that •
aught anticipate the discussion to,merrow on this subject.—
O:d-ered to be printed. •
}The lion. Member also presenteda petition,•praying an in-
•.ettiiry into the prov.isions of the Acts of• parliament relative:
to and into the transactions of the West India Dock Corn-
.pany, in order to means being teroti to:protect. the property
of prsons interested in the 'West India Colotlies;:from the.ex-
-.lsotions and the excessive rates of the Company; by it renewal
• of their Charter.--Petition referred to the Committee on Foreign.
',Trade.
Lord NORMANBY presented a Petition from the City of
'York, praying for the release of Mr. Bunt. „The Noble ,Lord
seconded the prayer of the Petition, on P.ccaiiiit of the severity
of the sentence, anti the unusual hardships sheered • lir the pri-
soner in Ilehester Gaol—Ordered to be printed: .. • ...
.Mr. HUME moved for a Return of .the partic.ulusa of the
Contract entered into to supply the Hulk's with ProvisionS foi
-a-certain period.
The /Ton. Member also. moved. for an
'and Military Expenditure of the Islaiid.shf OpeinseY 11%14 ,Ter-,*
,aey, and also artAceount of the Reyeritie,;Of.- tliOse
Ordered.
:Mr. HUME postpon'ed his'lnotidn.rittiectinh tit3il•tiet.,,
which stood for this evening, till to-ruorrowlion as undicstand,
ins that it was to come on before ttietoMin4fee of Supply,
RATE OF INTEREST IN..TRE -COLONIES.
MAeiTERT,QN 1.1131, na ol;irig. for: leaVe: to: .bring-iii
:ABM forregulating the rate of•intercst in the British Colonies

and in Ireland, stated that by art Act of the 14th of his late
Majesty, persons possessod of real estates in Ireland and in
the British Colonies, axe empowered to grant severities for
money at the legal interest of Ireland and the Colonies, al-
though the securities should be executed in England. It was,
however, found extremely 'difficult to raise money. on such se-
tunties without an obligation for payment of 'the interest in
England ; and as such collateral security was considered as
.bringing the transaction withiri the provisions of the statute of
Queen Anne against usury,eue Act was passed in the last Sese
sion for explaining the Act of, the 14th of the late King, and
declaring that such Collateral 'security for payment of interest
in England should ndt,expoie the parties - concerned to the
penalties of the statute of Queen Anne. It has been found
that the provisions' of the last mentioned 'Act Were not suffi-
ciently extensive. Many Cases occur, where tenants for lifee
and trustees under family, settlements; have the poiver of
Charging estates in Ireland or the Colonies with debts limited,
, . .
to the legal interest of Great Britain, namely, 5 per cent, ;
and it has seldom been practicable to obtain loans of money
in 'lrish or Colonial estates atf that rate of interest. In order
to provide against this difficulty, and to enable persons so
situated to borrow money in Irish or Colonial estates, it is
proposed to authorize the persons possessing these powers to
borrow money at 6 per cent. interest, being the legal interest
"of Ireland and her Colonies. It is not intended that the es-
tates themselves should be charged with a higher rate of in-
terest than is authorized by the powers referred to, but it is
intended to empower the borrower himself, or any third party,
to become bottled for the payment of the additional ..one per
cent:, so as in that the interest shall in no case exceed that al-
lowed by the laws of Ireland and the Colonies. He stated
that he did not anticipate any objection to this Bill, as in the
.present distress of the agricultural interests, and the difficulties
of the West India proprietors,* mustbe the wish of Parliament
• to' afford every facility to the proprietors and planters in raising
money on their estates.
• Mr. BENNET presented a Petition from two persons, com-
plaining of the practice that prevailed of levying fees for respite
ing trial, when the trial is put off without the wish of the parties,
in consequence of the non-attendance of the Jury. The Hon.
Member stated, that he knew this practice to prevail to a great
extent, and call for Reform. • ; •
After a few words from Sir E. KNATCHBULL, :he Petition
was read, and ordered to be printed.
MR: 'HUNT.
Sir R. WILSON said, he had a.petition to present from the
inhabitants of Bethnal Green, praying for the liberation of Mr.
Hunt. - The Petitioners stated; that it• yeas not their with to
offer any insult to the House, hutwhen they saw it openly pub.
fished as coming from the mouth of a Member of that House.,
that the practice of seat-telling was as notorious as the sun at
noon day ; and when they 'read in the New Times of the 13th
February, that a Mr. Spooner had stated at a Meeting at Wor-
ceeter; that the House was filled with " boys," who.were sent
there to vote whichever Way the Minister directed, and that
he had seen them collected from coffee-houses, balls, and other
Such places, to rive their votes, orsly requiring for that pur-
pose to know on which side was the Marquis of Londonderry,
and which Mr. Tierney e they could not help thinking these
things being uncontradicted, that the punishment of Mr. Hunt
for merely expressing an opinion that Reform was necessary,
was too severe. The Hon. Member concluded by moving that
the Petition be brought up.
Mr. DICKINSON said, he was as anxious as any one could
be that the doors of that House should be thrown open as wide
as possible to admit the petitions of the peg le ; but he did
think the language of this petition was not of that respectful
nature that could entitle it to be received by the House.—
(Hear, hear !y---,lt was a most foul calumny to say that " bays"
came to that House to vote.--(Hear, hear !)
The House then divided:—
. For the Motion
Against it - - - - 67
'Majority against receiving the Petition---50
Mr. Alderman WOOD presented a petition from the Inha-
bitants of Ashton-under-Line, Lancashire, praying for the li-
beration of Mr. Hunt, for an inquiry into the occurrences at
Manchester on the 16th Augtist, 1819, 'arid for a Reform in
Parliament.—Ordered to be printed.
Mr. HUME said, he had a similar petition to that just pre-
sented to diet. ; but after what had just passed, he was. at a
loss to know how to proceed. The petition of the people of
England had been rejected without being heard now. it was
an ieeult to the people, and-nothing pointed out the necessity
of that Reform prayed for more strongly than the manner in
which the late Petition had been treated. He repeated that
such conduct was an insult to the people of England.---(Cries
of " Order.")
_, The SPEAKER said he was sure the Hon. Member, on re-
flection, would see that the House could not permit those out of
doors to use the language alluded to; and he was quite satisfied
that in no one within the walls of that House could it be con-
sistent with order and decency to persist in a course thus mani .
festly obnoxious to the House.—(H ear.)
Mr. HUME said; he had always understood that it was the
right of the people of this country, to petition Parliament, and
he had yet to learn that it was the right of that House to reject
those Petitions without having heard them. If, upon their
being read, there appeared to be objectionable language, they
might be rejected. - The Petition he had to present was from
the Mayor and Commonalty of the Town arid Borough of Mon-
routh. It stated that, in their opinion, the salvation •of the
country depended on a Reform-in the House of Commons, and,
that without this the liberties of the people, already in a linger-
ing state, would beoverwhelmed. The Petitioners also stated,
that they were aware that Petitions of this nature did not meet
with the attention which they thought they deserved from those
who called themselves the Representatives of the People. They
.concluded by stating, that they joined- the already countless
number of, their countrymen in praying for a speedy and effec-
tual Reform of the House of Commons. He (Mr. flume)
most cordially joined in this prayer, and was convinced that, in
spite of all their temporizing, that Reform must come at last.—
Ile moved that the Petition be brought up.
Lord G. SOMERSET did not think there was any thing ob-
jectionable to the Petition in point of language, but he must
say that he did .not think it was the Petition of
-the Mayor, and
Commonalty of Monmouth. ' -
Mr. COURTEN-AY rose to second the motion Qf the Hon.
Member for Aberdeen,- that -the Petition be brought up. He
did this, in order to point out the manifest difference betwixt it
acid that 'which theAlouse had rejected', in the language.—
(El ear.)—lf that Honeurable Member ' could not see the dif.
ference, he (Mr. Courtehay) was at a loSs to understand why,
• even in his opinion, it was so palpable. Ile could not help
remarking, however, that ,a,fter -they had -heard the objection-
able-language read by the Member presenting. the Petition, it
was not. quitefair reasoning to argue, that the Petition had
been 'rejected without being heard- read.- That, he appre-
hended, was quite sufficient ground for the House to express
an opinion upon whether cr no the Petition was of a nature
to be received. The greatest enemies to the right of . petition-
ing .were those who advocate the indulgence in the most licen-
tious language. This Petition was of a different nature in lan-
guage, and therefore he supported ,the motion for its being '
received. s . ..
Mr. BENNET contended that the only test by which a
petition presented to that Hotise was to be t-jed was, whether
it was presented for the purpose.of insult, or for the purpose
.of exposing a grievance, , and praying for redress. ' Trying it
.by-that test, there -could be no objection to the petition which.
had just. been rejerited. It set out -by stating that the petie
tioners had no wish to insult the House. CoUld any one
doubt. that the late Mr. Ponsonby had used the eifiression im-
puted to him ? If any oneelids b. was really to prove it at the
bar of the House in five iiiinnies ; Mill if any one doubted the
: fati.that.the Parliament of 1805 was :corruptly constructed, he
vibuld imly:aSk La have one Of the' Secretaries to the Treasury
of that period at the Bar to prove it also. That House must be
reformedsooner or later ; 'and he must say that he agreed with
LorlisCrithain, that-if it did not reform itself, it would be re-'
formed frOm without with a vengeance.
Sir J. NEWPORT said, he had given his. vote for the ac. 1
nePtanee ~of the petition, upon the broad principle that the
ilouifiihouid- hear the,contents of a petition before it decided
upon receiving or rejecting it. That,';he thought, the House
was at least bound to do, . irithe exercise Of. SD severe a power.
A judgment could not be formed on a single passage; and pro-
be.bly; had the context of the petition been read, it would not
have been rejected. , • . .:. ~ .
Sir R. WILSON explained.
Ali.-.DtutiWN said, it.was the:business of a Member to
.tsiien to the House thecontents of apetition before he moved for
its reception ; and upon that the House. was competent' to de-
cide whether ehe petition should or should not be received: The
scandalous assertion that the House was filled with boys was
'suffititiretci justify its rejection. .
,Sir M. W. RIDLEY coincided in the opinion expressed by-
his Hon. Friend near-him (Sir. J.' NeWport), as to the principle
of receiving or rejecting petitions.
Mr. Alderman WOOD thought the House had misunder-
stood the contents of the petition in question, inasmuch as that
it did not state the-objectionable:Or abont'bnys, .Sec., is their
own' seritimentha but aa•having been epbkeet by a Mr, Spooner;
at Worcester; , : -
The Petition was then read:
•"-,Mr. HUME, in moving that the Petition' lie laid' on the
table, begged to-, conteadice the 'ataiement of the Noble.Ltird
opposite (Lord George Somerset),. that thie was notehe, Petie
• tion of -the- Mayor. and-'Commonalty erase 'Triwn raid 'Bo-
rotigh of Monniouth ; he positively declared, that although
none -of the Noble• Lord's' supporters 'night =be-among the Pe-
titioners, that it was signed by:thelate Mayors the Bailiff; and
many of the Burgesses. • : • . e. s
- . Lord •U. SOMERSET :did Inot Mean to cast any impute.;
tions on the 'persons who had signed this Petition, but he
Should not do bee dty.ttethe inhableglet: •td" that respectable

••- • •
tin

town, if he did not say,, that to his knowledge he did.not per
ceive the name of any one of the respectable persons affixed to
the Petition.—The Petition was laid on the table, and ordered
to be printed.
Mr. W. LAMB laid upon the table a Petition from owners
and occupiers of land, near Hoddeson, praying relief.
IRELAND.

Mr. S. RICE took the opportunity of staring, with reference
to Papers moved for and then on the table, relative to the state
of Ireland, that there were two points greatly complained of,
with reference to the -management of public business in that
country.- The one was.; that there was considerable delay in
making returns to the orders of that House, and the other, that
the peasantry of the country were charged with the expense of
making them out. In his opinion the public offices were
bound to furnish papers to that House without any charge.
But it -would be seen by the records that-the exactions for such
expenses on the people of Ireland amounted to from three to
five thousand pounds a year. He hoped the simple mention of
this would „cause' an' end to be piit to the practice. The Re-
alms to -which he referred them on the table were respecting
the Spirit Licenses, and the amount of Malt Duty ; by which
it would be seen that the relief to Ireland from the remission
of the Malt Duty was not equal to what had been anticipated
by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Great abuses . still pre-
vailed as to the spirit licenses, and he thought the whole sys-
tem must be revised. He moved that the Returns be printed.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER admitted
that he had expected that the proportion of relief to be expe-
rienced by Ireland in the.remission of the Malt Duty would
be 200,0(101 Since that time,' however, he had learned, by
inquiry, that it Would not be above 100,0001. He would not,
however, enter into a partial debate on these subjects, and
thought they had better wait till the Report of the Commis-
sioners of Inquiry- was received. He was not before aware
that any local grievance was suffered by the people of Ireland
in consequence of the Returns to the Orders of the House.
Sir J. NEWPORT said, that almost every year since he
had been in the House he had had to complain of the great de-
lay of the offices in Ireland in making out Returns to the order
of the Houk. But he thOught the practice of making a charge
upon the peasantry of Ireland -for obeying the orders of that
ouse, deserved particular attention. The object of- these
Returns Was to.-see whether the, officers had abused their power
towards the peiaantry, and it was too much that the peasantry
should suffer a further charge' for the iicittse exercising this
power of controul. He knew himself eases of clerks of the
peace swelling out their fees, and getting them allowed by the
Grand July to maketrom 40001. to 10001. a-year.
Mr. CHOKER thought-the House had been accused rather
unjustly of overlooking the subject which had been mentioned.
If he understood it rightly, the charges in question could not
be paid unless they were allowed •by a Grand Jury ; and if
any mdividaals had made incomes of 5,0001. or even of 4,0001
in this way, the Grand Jury had neglected their duty. It was
but fair that the Hon. Baronet should place the saddle on the
right horse, and give the blame where it was due. Unless this
were done it was not to be expected that any good could.
ever be done by noticing the subject at all. .The evil, if it ex-
isted to the extent supposed, was to be charged to the Grand
Jury, and the Grand Jury alone could supply the remedy.—
It might be fortunate that the complaint had been made, as the
notice taken of the conduct of the Grand Jury in that House
would be likely to haVe more influence on the mindi of Gen-
tlemen of their rank in life than any notice that-could be
taken of them in another way. He, for his own part, should
not expect that the Gentlemen of the Grand Jury would be
likely to throw away their own money, for their own it was, in
some degree, which was thus disbursed, in the manner sup-
posed ; but if 'charges to the amount stated had been allowed,
the fault lay with the Grand Jury, and not with the Govern-
ment, nor with the Parliament, nor with the officers.
Sir .1. NEWPORT said the statements which he had made
were contained in the papers up stairs, which the Hon. Gent.
might looked at if he pleased. He considered it to be the duty
of that House to look into such proceedings. -
The Papers were ordered to be printed.
GAOL PRESENTMENTS. _

Mr. S. RICE moved for an account of the number of
debtors and criminal offenders in the gaols of the county of
Dublin, and of the Grand Jury presentments for the expenses
of the Prison.

Sit J. NEWPORT, in reference to what had before passed,
maintained that there was no law to warrant the slightest charge
for any return to the House.
Mr. CROKER remarked, that at this momeirt there were no
more clerks in the Admiralty than were absolutely necessary
to get through the ordinary business of the office ; and if re-
turns were required, persons must be hired to make them
out. Only last Week a representation had been made from
one of the subordinate departments, that it would not be pos,
sible to make out returns in future, and that the last required
had been prepared only by great exertions and working over
hours. The ptopriety of hiring assistance must be left to the
heads of the departments. •
S. RICE, mentioned, that in Tipperary, where the clerk
of the peace received between 4,0001. and 5,0001. a year, 2201.
in one instance, and 3001.• in another, had been paid under
Wand Jury Presentments for making out returns to-the orders
of the House of Commons. Yet thiS duty was piescribed to the
Clerks of the Peace by statute. He trusted that the notice now
taken would remedy the evil.
MANAGEMENT OF THE DEBT AND ~BANK BA-

LANCES. ' •
Mr. BANIES, in moving for the printing of certain Papers
relative to the Sinking Fund, begged to. ask the Chancellor of
the Exchequer whether, in contemplating reductions for the
relief of the country, he had ever taken into consideration the
Propriety of reducing the expense of managing the public debt,
and whether he would object to the appointment of a committee
to investigate the subject ?
The CHANCEELOR of the EXCHEQUER answered,
that he had not contemplated the propriety of reducing the ex-
pense of managing the public debt.. Until the expiration of the
Bank Charter, he conceived that the question had been settled
by Act of Parliament.
Mr. GRENFELL said, that the law officers of the crown
had certainly given an opinion favourable to the view of the
Chancellor of the Exchequer ; but every thing depended upon
the facts of the case
_submitted to them, and the-manna in
which f. ose facts were stated. He had read the case and the
opinion, and apprehended that a different conclusion would have
'oeen arrived at, had that case been properly made out. Mr..
Horner, unquestionably a very distinguished authority, had given
a different opinion shortly before he left this kingdom never to
return. It wrs true that in 1808 the amount was settled at,
4501. for the management of every million, but even that was
in opposition to the Act of Irel. The country owed the greatest
obligations to the Committee of 1807, which had made so clear
and so decisive a report upon this subject, and which had pro-
duced an annual saving of not less than 242,0001. Ile entreated
the Chancellor of the Exchequer,as the guardian of the public
purse and as the champion of economy, to take the question
again under his consideration, and to consent to the reference
of it to a Committee. Admitting, however, that the arrange-
ment of 1808 was final and conclusive, still :there remained a
very tit source of economy which the Right Hon. Gentleman
had not touched--the public- balances in the hands of the
Bank of England. They had indeed -formerly amounted to ,
11,000,000., and now were reduced to 41000,00014 but upon
this sum, at the rate of 3 per cent., the interest was 120,0001.
Without the slightest injustice to the Bank, he (Mr. Orenfell)
was convinced that'a saving of morelthan 200,0001. a year might
be made to the country. ,
A MEMBER, whose name could not be learnt, called the
attention of the Chancellor of the Exchequer to 'the unelainied
dividends. He wished to know to what result the inquiries-of
the Right Hon. Gentleman had lei ? - •
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, that he
would shortly ascertain the propriety of-reprinting the list that
had already been made out. The dividends were applied.to the
public service,-not to the Bank. e •, , ;,.
It via_ then ordered that the papers should be printed.
HOUSE TAX IN SCOTLAND.
Lord A. HAMILTON moved for Returns of the total
amount of the Duty of 4s. 641. paid in - Scotland on althouses
which paid a yearly rent under 51. for the last year.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER liad no ob..
jection to the production of the return moved- for bythei Noble
Lord.--It was ordered accordingly. .
MINT REGULATIONS.
Mr. GRENFELL, in moving that the lieturni of Silver
Coined be printed, observed, that the Mint Regulations had
been extremely creditable to the Government. It ,was now
proved, that all the alarin 'propagated in the letters tof " An
Old Merchant," and others of the disappearance, of the ()Old,
in consequence of the seignorage taken on Silver, were entirely
nafounded.—Ordered.
MIDDLESEX COUNTY COIIRT.
Mr: LENNARD rose to make his motion relative to the
County Court of Middlesex. That Court was established. in
its present form by the Act of 53, George 11., the constitution
of which the Hon, Gentleman proceeded to describe. Two
years ago a return was made to that House, us consequence of
a motion made by him, which stated that the number of causes
decided in County Courts amounted to 17,000 in London and
Middlesex. lie had reason to know that last yeat they amount-
ed to nearly 18,000. -The population had increased considerably
'since the pasiing of the Act. In thehundreds of Ossulston and
,Isleworth more particularly; additional duties were therefore
necessarily imposed upon the Magistrates. Having stated the
number of causes at 18,000, and that the Magistrates sat two
days in each week, it would be found that they decidedabeut
one hundred and eighty causes per day. It sees therefore
impossible that justice could be done as the business was now
' carried on. The Court ought to sit more frequently. When
the plaintiff took Out a summons, the defendant was obliged
to attend from nine o'clock in the /naming on the next Court