The Sun.
London, England, 1825-04-23 00:00:00

COMBINATION LAWS.

Mr. HUME then brought up a petition from the merchant
seamen and mariners of Scarborough, in Yorkshire, praying to
be allowed to be heard in their defence against charges which
had been unjustly made against them, before the Committee
appointed to inquire into the effect of the repeal of the Combi-
nat►on Laws.

Lord EDWARD SOMERSET presented a petition from
the Woollen Manufacturers of Gloucestershire, praying for an
alteration in the present Corn Laws.
CATHOLIC CLAIMS.

Sir THOMAS LETHBRIDGE brou up.a petition from
Freshford, Somerset, against any further concession to the Ro-
man Catholics of Ireland. This petition contained some rea-
soning, which, though it did not seem very palatable to many
Hon. Gentlemen in that House, did to him appear to carry
great weight with it ; and would, he trusted, even yet have its
influence with the House, notwithstanding that the bill to
which it had objected had so recently passed its second stage by
a large majority. He was very sorry not to see the Right Hon.
Secretary for Foreign Affairs in his place ; and the more so, as
he understood that the reason of his absence was his severe in.
disposition, a fact that no one more sincerely regretted than he
(Sir T. Lethbridge) did. But his sorrow was further increased
on this account, that he must now allude to some expressions
that had fallen from that Right lion. Gentleman on the pre-
Ceding evening.,---(Cries of." Oh no, no.")—lf any thing that
he was about to say was disagreeable to the House, or irregular,
he would not proceed any further; but if- not, he felt that he
could not allow the great - body of petitioners to this House
against the bill to be attacked as they had been, by certain ex-
pressions that had occured in the debate of the night before,
without availing himself of the first opportunity allowed him
by the forms of that House to reply to such charges. He was
not maw alluding to the Right lion. Gentleman alone, but to
other of those, Gentlemen who had taxed the petitioners with
" ignorance.".—(Hear!)—He denied the imputation : nor, when
they looked to the great body of our enlightened and respect-
able clergy, who were among the etitioners, could any season-
able man suppress the desire of effacing a stigma which bad so
undeservedly been affixed upon them.
Mr. NICHOLSON CALVERT had certainly heard the
word " ignorance" made use of in the debate, but in a very
different sense from that in which the Hon. Baronet seemed to
take it. It was intended to imply a want of information in
regard to some of the bearings of this particular question ; and
doubtless many Gentlemen might very well be supposed to
labour under an ignorance of this kind without any sort of im-
putation on their general. knowledge and intelligence. Indeed,
that species of ignorance was much more general until very
lately ; when the repeated debates in Parliament on this great
question had tended to throw a new and considerable light over
it.
Lord BINNING concurred with the last lion. Speaker in
his view of the true import to he attributed to the expression in
question ; but it would have been much more correct and re-
gular for the Honourable Baronet to have waited until he could
have addressed his remarks to the House, the Right Hon.
Gentleman being in his place. After a few remarks on the same
subject from Sir ROBERT WILSON, Sir JOHN NEWPORT,
Sir THOMAS LETHBRIDGE, and the SPEAKER, the Petition
was read.

Mr. HENRY MAXWELL said, that several of the public
prints having imputed to him most erroneously a change of
opinions in respect to the great question of Catholic Emanci-
pation, and represented him to be an advocate for that measure,
he begged to state that his opinions remained entirely unal-
tered on the subject • that he was still and should ever be op-
posed entirely to such a measure ; and that a speech of a very
contrary nature, that had been ascribed to him, was in reality
made, he believed, by the Hon. Member for Downpatrick
(Mr. J. W. Maxwell.)
Mr..). W. MAXWELL stated, that on the night of the
speech to which the last Honourable Speaker had alluded. the
whole amount of his observations went to the expression of a
very earnest wish that the subject should, at any rate, go into
a Committee of the whole House.
Mr. CALCRAFT presented a Petition from the Pro-
testant Dissenters of the town and borough of Wareham and
its vicinity, in favour of the Catholic Claims.
Mr. BARING brought up a Petition from certain warren
farmers, in the counties of Norfolk and Suffolk, relative to the
Bill for restraining the setting of spring guns.
Mr. HUDSON GURNEY remembered no petition that
had appeared to him less worthy of the House's attention.
All the preceding petitions were severally read, and ordered
to be printed.
Mr. MASTERMAN URE moved for returns of the quan-
tities of grain imported into Great Britain from foreign coun-
tries for seven years, ending the sth January, 18'25 ; distin-
guishing the sorts of grain, and the countries and ports from
whence imported ; also, of the quantities of goods exported
from Great Britain in the like period to the Continent of
Europe, distinguishing the several ports exported to, and the
amount of each year's exportation.
Mr. II UM E hoped his Hon. Friend would add to the motion
for these returns, an account of the bills drawn on either side
for such cargoes, without which such returns would be incom-
plete.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER had no ob-
jection to these returns, which would form a most valuable
paper to be laid on the table of the House, provided it could be
made out ; but how was it possible to distinguish what were
cargoes of goods exported in return for cargoes of corn imported
from other exportations ?---( Hear !) ,
Sir M. W. RIDLEY also spoke of the great difficulty which
must necessarily attend the production of such a document as
that moved for by the lion. Gentleman. While adverting to
this subject, he begged leave to notice an isolated case, which '
would prove the immense difficulty, as well as the great ex-
pence, which attended the production of returns which were
occasionally moved for. Virhen it was deemed necessary to
move for extensive returns relative to the coal-trade, much sur-
prise was expressed at the length of time that was suffered to
elapse before those returns were produced. But what was the
reason ? Why, before these returns could be made out, it was
absolutely necessary that 1,000 litters' notes should be exa-
mined theblll r. wyro i) authority.pEriolio)erusE roo kthat opportunity to express his
hope, as the question df the Corn Laws would speedily e
brought before the House, that the attention of Gentlemen, not
merely those connected with the landed interest, but all ()tilers,
would be directed to the papers which had been laid before
Parliament on this subject, especially those which the Hon.
Member for Bridgnorth (Mr. W. Whitmore) had called for.
He trusted the House would come to the discussion of that
most important question with firmness, but with temper.
3lr. MA BERM' said, if Hon. Members would apply to a
Gentleman in the Treasury, for the purpose of knowing what
accounts could conveniently be furnished, and what accounts it
was expensive and difficult to make out, before they deter-
mined on moving for documents, it would save a great deal of
time, trouble, and labour. If any Hon. Member inquired for
the Gentleman to whom he alluded, he would find him a very
intelligent individual, and one who was perfectly able to point

out the most convenient way in which 'a Motion for papers
ought to be shaped. If this .course were pursued, a large ew-
pence would be saved to the country, considerable difficulty
would be removed, and the required inforniOtion would be laid
before the House in a much more perfect and satisfaetory way.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, that 4f
the plan proposed by the Hon: Merriber for Abingdon (Mr.
Maberly) were followed, it would be productive of great benefit.
Often,-when he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) came down
to the House, a small piece of paper, sometimes very much
seribbled,upon, and consequently very difficult to he deciphered.
was thrust into his hand, and he was asked," Will you Oppose
this motion ?" As he did not wish needlessly to object, and as
he had very little time allowed for examination, he feared that
he sometimes consented to motions when he ought not to have
done so. If, for instance; he had been perfectly aware of the
nature of the motion alluded to by the Hon, Hember for New-
castle (Sir M. W. Ridley) lie never would have acceded to it.
Mr. HUME said, he felt a very strong objection to motions
for papers, on which it was not intended ultimately to found
any proceedings. He, however, could safely say, that he had
newer called for a document, for the production of which he
could not state the most substantial grounds.—(Hear, hear !)
His Hon. Friend (Mr. Maberly) was perfectly correct in what
he had said relative to the gentleman who attended at the
Treasury. Any Honourable Member who had an intention
to move for a particular paper, would find very great benefit
by consulting the individual alluded to. Ile felt it due to the
Government to say, that no expence was spared-in producing
any documents that might be called for, provided it appeared
that there was a legislative object in view.
Mr. M. URE then consented to withdraw his motion.
WINDOW TAX.
Mr. BENETT presented a petition from the masters and_
mistresses of certain charity-schools in Wiltshire, praying that
the window tax should no longer be levied on schools of that
description,____

Mr: BROUGHAM said, he strongly seconded, the prayer of
the petition. Charitable schools would be very much aided by
their exemption from this tax. The airiness and cleanliness of
those schools, and consequently the wholesomeness of their oc-
cupants, depended in a great measure on the number of windows,
and therefore he most strongly called on. the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman opposite to agree to the prayer of the petition, as both
just and pulitic.
The'CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, it was
'but justice.to himself to state, that about a fortnight ago he had
received a petition of the same purport with that now intro-
duced. Being struck with the statement'which it contained,
he had put himself in communication with the Tax Office, to
know to what extent relief could be given to Houses coming
under the denomination of school-houses, and the subject was
now under consideration.—(Hear!)
After a few words from Sir E.. KNATCHBULL, Mr. BEN-
NETT, and Mr. C. Witsotr, in support of the petition, it
was laid on the the table, and ordered to be printed.
IRISH BUTTER TRADE.
Sir H. PARNELL presented a petition from .the butter_
makers of Donagh, in the Queen's County, praying for a revi-
sion of the laws for regulating the butter trade of Ireland.
Mr. C. HUTCHINSON. hoped, that if a Committee were
appointed to investigate this subject, due notice of its forma-
tion would be given, so as to aim' all those who were inte-
rested in the trade in various parts of Ireland an opportunity t')
state their sentiments.
Mr. J. GRAT'IAN said, great anxiety was felt throughout
Ireland on this subject. The case already laid before the
House was such, the abuses in the trade appeared to be so
great, that he hoped a Committee would be appointed in the
present year to examine the evil, and to recommend measures
for its correction.

Sir G. HILL was of opinion that no new measure should be
adopted respecting this trade, without a very serious and ex.
tended inquiry.
Mr. S. RICE said the subject might be fully discussed,
without altering the law this Session.
Mr. 1,. FOSTER felt that the subject was one of deep im,
portance to Ireland ; and he conceived that if any
.alteration
were made in the law, it ought to be preceded by ti very mi.
,nute inquiry.
Sir J. NEWPORT said he had no objection to inquiry ;
but in his opinion it ought not to take place now, hut at the
commencement of the next Session. If the examination were
now set on foot, it would have a.greatettect on the exportation
of butter. Day after day the price of that article would be in.
fluenced by the evidence given, or the statements made before
the House.

Sir H. PARNELL said, that the corrupt practices can ied
on under the Butter Act were a moat severe infliction on poor
and industrious people. Complaints were particularly made of
the butter tasters. It was represented to him that those persons
were often induced to neglect their duty for a bribe—that they
sometimes attended to perform their functions in a state little
short of intoxication, and that they often decided on the quality
of butter, not as it really deserved, but in proportion to ihe
emolument which they were likely to reap from their corrupt
practices. Ile inquired into these points; and he found that
the allegations were well-founded. - In one instance he Ibund
that five guineas were given to the wife of a butter-taster to in,
duce her husband to certify that butter of second quality was of
first quality, that it might be exported in this fictitious charac-
ter. Parliament were certainly called upon to inquire into this
subject; and he could see no reason why that inquiry should
not commence now. This was but the 22d of April, and on
the 12th day of Alay last year, a Committee was appointed to
inquire into the whole state of Ireland.
Mr. C. GRANT said, that he was quite ready to go into in-
quiry on the subject.—Petition laid on the table, and to be
printed.
Mr. S. RICE presented a petition from Limerick, in favour
of the Bill for regulating Provincial Banks in Ireland.
Mr. MANSFIELD presented a petition from Leicester,
praying for an alteration in the Corn Laws. The lion. Gentle-
man also presented a petition from the Operative Shipwrights in
tha river 'Thames, against the re-enactment of the Combination
Laws.

Mr. T. WILSON presented a petition from a body of Ship-
calkers on the river Thames, against any alteration in the Com-
bination laws. The flon. Member took that occasion to ob-
serve, that he would on Monday present a petition more nume-
rously signed, and as the subject was one of great importance,
he would then make a few observations on it.
Mr. T. WILSON presented a petition from the Clergy of
London assembled at Sion College, against the Dissenters'
Marriage Bill.
ELECTIVE FRANCHISE IN IRELAND.
Mr. LYTTLETON said he now begged leave, on the on.,
derstanding to which the House came last night, to move for
leave to bring in a Hill to regulate the exercise of the Elective
Franchise in Ireland, so far as related to 40s. freeholders. 11
would, in consequence of the understanding to which lie alluded
to, abstain from making any observations on the introduction of
this Bill. He hoped, however, that an early day would be fixed
for reading it a recond time, when gentlemen would have a roll
Opportunity for the expression of their opinions. To himself,
it was a matter of no importance whether he opened the grounds
on which he introduced this measure on the present occasion, or
reserved it for a subsequent period. The House had come to
an understanding on that point early this morning, and that
understanding had been renewed to-night. The consequence
was, that a vast number of Members had left the House;
amongst them were many who were especially unfavourable to
the views which he took relative to this measure ;'and there-
fore he felt himself bound in honour simply to explain what
the nature of the intended Bill was. The Honourable Mem-
ber for Wareham (Mr. Cakraft) was of opinion, that the dis-
franchisement of the forty-shilling freeholders of Ireland would
be a measure of a very arbitrary nature. He thanked the Hon.
Member for having called for information on this subject ; and
he would take the liberty to observe, that he did not mean
to extend the provisions of the Bill to those freeholders who
held their freeholds under the same practice that prevailed
in England at this period. The Bill would only refer to fr'ee.;
holders whose votes were subject to registration. The sum which
gave to those individuals the right of voting at present, it was
the object of this Bill to raise. He would not state positively,
although he had formed a strong opinion on the subject, how
high the qualification ought to be raised ; but, in his opinion,
101. per annum would be an eligible qualification ; that, how-
ever, he left entirely in the hands of the House. Another point
which had been alluded to was the period at which the Act
should begin to operate. It might be suffered to operate forth-
with, or at the period when the present registry expired, or at
the termination of the several leases. He thought-the end of
the registration would be the proper time for the Act to begin
to take effect. liut he telt this was a proper matter for consi-
deration in the Committee. The Hon. Member then moved
" for leave to bring in a Bill to regulate the exercise of the
elective franchise in Ireland." _ _ _

11r. MO1.7(311101 observeo, that in consequence of the un-

derstanding—whether right or wrong, or whether it was or was
not perfectly comprehended, he would notsay—to which it was
stated the House had acceded, a great number of gentlemen
had undoubtedly gone away. This being the case, it would be_
wrong and inexpedient to go into a discussion of the measure
now ; but it ought to be stated, that on this occasion, leave to
bring in the Bill was only called for. If there were any Hon.
Members who wished to defeat the measure at once, they would
have an opportunity of stating their arguments against it on the
first reading.
Mr. J. GRATTAN looked upon this as a very alarming
proposition.
Mr. PEEL merely rose to say, that in acquiescing in this
motion for leave to bring in the Bill, he made no concession
whatevet.—(Hear !)—The rule of the House formerly was dif-
ferent from that which now prevailed. It was now customary
to grant leave to bring in a Bill,-merely for the purpose of con-
sidering what its effect was likely to be. Afterwards its con-
tents were debated, and it might be rejected on the second
reading. In consequence of the understanding which was come
to last night, he would not offer any objection to the present
motion ; but his opposition to the measure should be precisely
as decided in the stage when it came to be debated, as if he op-
posed its being brought in originally.—( Hear !)
Mr. BROUGHAM trusted that he might be understood
(after what he had stated this morning) as not having pledged
himself to support this measure. On a future day he should
have an opportunity of stating his opinion on this question at
length.
An Hon. MEMBER (whose name we could not learn) de-
clared that the proposed measure was fraught with injustice to
the great mass of the people of Ireland.
Mr. CALCRAFT said, if ever there was a Bill brought into
Parliament which required the most minute detail, it was this
very identical Bill.—( Hear !)—This he would assert, that if
people in the House understood it, very few persons out of the
House did. He, for one, did not understand it in detail, and
therefore he was anxious for explanation. He hoped the Hon.
Gentleman would take an early opportunity to inform the
House on the subject.
Sir T. LETH BRIDGE had no wish to take up the time of
the House by prolonging a discussion like that which was now'.
before it, but he must be allowed to say, that in his opinion the
Bill which it was proposed to bring in was not at all calculated
to answer the expectations which it had raised. A great deal
was said about relief to the people of Ireland; but he could
not see what relief they would find in being deprived of privi-
legeS which were really valoable, and.. which made them of
some importance, and in receiving instead of privileges an
imaginary good. An Hon. Friend ofhlis (Mr. Brownlow),
whose conversion had created so great a sensation in the House,
had said that he would not vote for the Bill which had been dis-
. cussed last night, unless the Bill now before the House, and
that providing for the Catholic clergy, should also be carried.
Now, in the common course of proceedings in Parliament, the
first of these Bills would have passed through all its stages be-
fore the fate of the other two Bills could have been decided.
The Hon.. Member for Armagh must, therefore, either not
Note at all, or he must vote inconsistently with the declaration
lie had made.
Mr. CALCRAFT rose to order. He submitted that it was
neither parliamentary nor delicate to allude to the words of a
past debate, and particularly when the Member by whom
those words were supposed to have been used was not present.
Sir T. LETHBRIDGE thought he was perfectly justifiable
in alluding, so far as he had done, to the declaration made by
Hon. Friend the Member for Armagh. lie thought he
had much more rea- on to complain of the interruption of the
Hon. Member for Wareham (.Mr. Calcraft), which imputed to
.him an intention to speak of the declaration made by his Hon.
'Friend in an injurious manner—an intention which he altoges
Veer disclaimed.
Mr. C. WYNN rose to order. He appealed to the Speaker
to say whether the cbservations of the Hon. Member for Ware-
ham were not perfectly just. It was beyond all question con-
trary to the practice of Parliament toallude to expressions which
had been used in a debate that was past, and still more so in
the absence of a Member by_ whom they had been used. It was
true. that in the, course of debates the House allowed a great
latitude beyond the strict letter of its orders, but he believed
that in no instance after the objection had been taken a Member
had been permitted to persist in violating the established cus-
tom of Parliament.
Mr. PEEL said there could be no doubt that a direct refer-
ence to the words of a debate was not Parliamentary; but the
Hon. Baronet (Sir T. Lethbridge). had not done this. lie had
referred only to an intention expressed by the Hon. Member for
Armagh, by which that Hon. Member said he should regulate
his conduct. This was very different from quoting the words
in which that intention had been conveyed. Whether to do this
were delicate or not, was another question—(hear!)—which each
individual must decide for himself, but of which the House, he
conceived, would take no notice.
Mr. C. WYNN thought that to refer to a declaration, as the
lion. Baronet had done, was not at all less irregular than to
refer to the precise words in which it had been made ; and for
_ this reason, that the person by whom it had been made being
absent, he could have no opportunity of explaining or justifying
wi,at he had said.
The SPEAKER rose amidst loud cries of " Chair." He
said, that having been so distinctly appealed to, he could not
hesitate to express his opinion' that the irregularity spoken of
t!id not depend upon the fact of the person to whom allusion
was made being present or not (although the question of deli-
cacy certainly did), because the House considered that all its
Members were present in every debate. The question then was,
whether it was according to the practice of Parliament to refer
to the matter or to the distinct words of any part of a former
debate. It was altogether disorderly to refer to the express
words of a debate • and this, a 3 he had already said, whether
the Member by ;horn they had been used was present or not.
With respect tostierence to the subject matter of a debate, it
was_ the practice of the House to allow great latitude. If it
were not for the excuse which this practice furnished, the whole
debate had been irregular from its commencement, because if it
was opposed to the :Mans of the House to refer to a former de-
bate, it was not less so to refer to an understanding that leave
should be given to bring in a Bill. In his opinion, however,
nothing could be so inconvenient to the progress of business in
the t House, as for the Speaker strictly to watch every violation
of the letter of the orders. He therefore commonly left such
subjaCts to be regulated by the general sense of the House,
tA:iing from them the hint, and declining himself to interfere,
seiless under circumstances likely to obstruct the public bu-

siness,
Sir T. LETHBRIDGE bowed to the decision of the Chair,
bat he could not avoid observing, that it was some consolation
to him to know,..that if he had been out of order, he was not so
alone, the whole discussion being, as the Speaker had said,
irregular. Still he contended, that if the House should give
the Hen. Gentleman (Mr. Littleton) leave to bring in his Bill
upon no other -statement than that which he had made, they
would do a very uncommon thing, and admit a Bill, of the
principle of which no one had said a word in recommendation.
Dr. PHILLIAIORE said, he believed there was a general
understanding throughout the House, that in consequence of
the late hour to which the debate of the preceding night had
extended, the discussion of this Bill should be postponed. For
his own part, he had no doubt that the measure which it pro-
posed to carry into effect was calculated to do away a great
abuse which existed in Ireland, and to confer a lasting benefit
on the country.
Sir J. NEWPORT said, that notwithstanding the senti-
ments which the Hon. Baronet (Sir T. Lethbridge) had ex-
pressed, he did not believe that the Catholic freeholder of Ire-
land would give him any credit for the new-born zeal which
lie seemed to feel for their interests.—(Hear !)—They would
rather be inclined to suspect that he intended, by throwing ob-
stacles in the way, to defer the passing of that other and greater
measure of which he had been so long the opponent. For his
own part, he (Sir J. Newport) confessed that he was most
anxious to see this Bill passed ; and notwithstanding the asser-
tion of the Hon. Baronet, that it was hostile to the interests of
the people of Ireland, he.was ready to go before that people in
competition with the Hon. Baronet, and abide their decision
on the subject. He should support the measure, because he
believed it would materially aid the success of the other and
more important one of emancipation,. and because it would
prevent the demoralization of which the present system was
the cause.
Mr. WODEHOUSE and Mr. PEEL said a few words depre-
cating any further discussion at present.
Mr. LITTLETON said, he -was in fact prepared with the
. Bill at this moment, and he should be very glad too have it
printed, that all the Members might be in possessio of, the
subject. The discussion might then be taken on the seems('
reading.
Mr. BANKES hoped that a very early day would be fixed
for the second reading.
Mr. C. HUTCHINSON opposed the motion, and said he
would not consent to take this Bill as a condition for passing
the other. He took this opportunity of saying, that with re-
spect to the 40s. freeholders, many of whom he knew, he had.
found among them men of an honest and independent feelings
as the wealthiest commoners in the country. It might be that
there were in certain districts persons of the same class, but of
a different description ; and against them, if it were necessary, a
provision might be made ; but he deprecated the operation of
this Bill on the whole body of the 40s. freeholders of Ireland.
Mr. LIT I LETON explained.
Mr. S. RICE had two questions to which he begged the
Hon. Member for Staffordshire to reply. They were, first,
whether the proposed Bill was to apply to counties only ; and
secondly, whether it was to be taken as conditional upon the
Bill which was read a second time last night ?
Mr. LITTLETON replied in the 'affirmative to both these
questions.
Mr. HUME objected to the introduction of the Bill, without

anyfurtherexplanation than had been given ; because, to admit
the Bill, was, in fact, to admit the principle on which it was
framed, and this was what he believed the House was not yet
agreed to do.
After a few words from Lord ALTHORP and Col. TnExcit
in support of the motion, and some observations from
CRESSET PELHAM, which were wholly inaudible, leave was
given to bring in the Bill.
SPIRIT DUTIES:

On the Motion of the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHE-
QUER, the House went into a Committee on the Spirit Duties'
Acts.
The CHANCELLOR of the 'EXCHEQUER said, he
had upon a former occasion explained to the House the
grounds upon which he thought it expedient to place all the
laws relating to distilleries in England on one identical and
intelligible footing, and to do away with the inconveniences
which were daily found to result from the circumstance of
different laws prevailing in different parts of the kingdom.—
It would not, therefore, now be necessary for him to advance
any general reasoning on the subject, and be flattered himself
that the House would readily concur with him in thinking that
something was necessary to be done to effect this object. It
appeared to him that no alteration would be so effectual as that
whieh should assimilate the distillery laws of England with
those of Scotland and Ireland. He would state generally the
sort of regulations which lie proposed to adopt for this branch
of the trade and manufacture of the country. In the first place
it was necessary to impose certain restrictions on the persons
carrying on this trade; he should be glad if this had not been
necessary, but the large amount of the duties rendered it im-
possible to wave them. In Ireland and in Scotland no persons
were allowed to carry on the trade of a distiller without the
certificate of a Justice of the Peace. This regulation, which
the peculiar circumstances of Scotland and Ireland rendered ,
necessary, he did not propose to adopt in---lingland. The qua-
lifications which he should suggest instead was, that persons
carrying on the trade of distillers should inhabit and pay the
rates of houses of the rent of 201. per annum. This would
facilitate the collection of the duty, while, if persons who could,
distil in a tin kettle were permitted to do so, the Excise would
be cheated at every turn. The next regulation was, that all
persons licensed to carry on the trade of distillers should be resi-
dent within a quarter of a mile of a town in which there should
be five hundred inhabited houses, in order to secure a sufficient
number of Excise officers for the preservation of this branch
of the Revenue. With respect to the size of the stills, it had
been found necessary in Ireland and in Scotland, where smug-
gling was extensively carried on, to use stills of small dimen-
sions, because larger ones were ineffectual to prevent it. In
England there was not the same necessity, and it was there-
fore his intention to reduce the size of stills from 3,000 gallons, '
the present rate, to 400, the dimensions of which they had been
formerly. He would now state to the Committee the altera-
tions which he intended to propose respecting the duties.—
The existing duty was 10s. 6d. per gallon, at 7 per cent. over
proof. It would, he thought, be a great improvement on the
present system to adopt the rule which was observed in Ire-
land and Scotland—namely, to fix the.duty according to the
proof strength of the spirit, and that duty he proposed
should be ss. 10d. per gallon. He would shortly explain
why be had fixed on that particular sum, which might other-
' wise appear somewhat singular. The first idea was to fix a
duty of ss. upon spirits distilled from malt, and six shillings
on that distilled from grain ; but, on looking into the details
of the subject, he found that it would be difficult to make a
distinction between the two kinds of spirit. He was therefore
determined to make the duty uniform, without reference to its
being distilled from malt or grain. It would be in the recol-
lection of the House, that a bill had passed last Session for
.regulating weights and measures, which was to take effect next
year. According to that Bill, the standard by which measures
were to be hereafter regulated was the imperial gallon, which
differed from the ordinary wine measure on which the duty on
spirits was at present taken. 'rile imperial gallon might be re-
presented by six, whilst the common wine g,allon might be re-
presented by five. If lie had fixed the duty on the common
wine gallon at 65., the relation which it would have borne to the
imperial gallon would have been inconvenient, as it would have
left an indescribable fraction of a farthing unaccounted for.—
The duty of ss. 10d. on the common wine measure, however,
corresponded exactly with the duty of 7s. on the imperial gallon;
and thus any intricate calculation would be avoided in the set-
tlement of questions which might arise between the excise-officer
and the dealer. The Right Honourable Gentleman concluded
by moving several resolutions to the elect which he had stated.
Sir JOHN NEWPORT thanked the Right Honourable
Gentleman for the alterations which he proposed to make, which
would have the effect of removing many of the restrictions by
which the spirit trade between England and Ireland was at
present shackled.
Mr. W. SMITH disapproved of the proposed reduction of
the duty on spirits, on the ground that it would tend to dete-
riorate the health and morals of the people of this country. He
begged to remind the House, that it was proved by the evidence
given before the Police Committee in 1817, that there was
scarcely one instance of desperate murder or burglary which
occurred in the metropolis taint was not attributable to the in-
fluence of ardent spirits. Vas it possible, then, that a measure
could be considered beneficial, the object of which was to reduce
the price of spirits nearly one half, and consequently to bring
them more within the reach of the poorer classes? It was,
however, said that the reduction of the price of spirits would not
increase their consumption. He was at a loss to reconcile that
assertion with the argumentof the Chancellor of the Exchequer
on a former evening, when he proposed a reduction of the wine
duties. The Right lion. Gent. then said, that a reduction of
duty would cause an increased consumption. That he believed
would be the effect of the reducticre of the spirit duties ; for he
could not believe that-the poor would be better able to resist
temptation than the rich. Scotland was often referred to as
affording a proof that the cheapness of spirits did not lead to
drunkenness amongst the poorer classes. lie admitted that the
Scotch were sober people, but much of their sobriety was attri-
butable to their poverty. This reminded him of the old story
of Dr. Johnson anti Sohn geese. The Doctor was told by
some person that Solan geese might be bought for two pence a
piece in Scotland. " Ay,"' observed the Doctor, " but where
are they to get the two pence ?" The Hon. Gentleman con-
chided by stating, that whatever might be the result of the
Right Hon. Gentleman's propositions, he would rest satisfied
with having delivered his soul on the subject.
Mr. HUME was of opinion that the reduction of the duties
would be beneficial to the country; but he wished that the-
Right Hon. Gentleman would accompany it by a reduction of
the duty on malt. He could not agree with the lion. Member
for Norwich in the view which lie took of the consequences
which would result from a reduction of the duty on spirits.
The excessive use of spirits was generally the result rather than
the cause of poverty and distress. In France and Ilpiland,
where spirits were very cheap, drunkenness was almost un-.
known. The same might be said of the United States of

America.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER observed, that
he was satisfied the anticipations of the Hon. Member for
Norwich—that the whole land would be one scene of drunken-
ness, in consequence of the proposed reduction of duty—would
prove to be groundless.
Mr. C. HUTCHINSON supported the resolutions.
Captain GORDON thought the country was indebted to the
Chancellor of the Exchequer for the introduction of this mea-
sure, which would have so beneficial effect in the prevention of
illicit distillation. _ .

After a few words from Gen. HART, the resolutions were
agreed to, and the House having resumed, the report was or-
dered to be received on Monday.
MR. RICH'S COLLECTION.

The tinuse having resolved itself into a Committee of Supply,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER rose to sub-
mit a resolution, that there be granted to.his Majesty a sum not.
exceeding 7,0001. for the purchase of Mr. Rich's collection of
coins, curiosities, and manuscripts. He observed, that the re-
port of the Committee which had been appointed to inquire
into the value of this collection was so full, that it was unne-
cessary for him to say any thing on the subject. He felt satisfied
that the feeling of the country was favourable to the purchase of
sueh a valuable addition to the collection already in the British
M useum.
After a few words from Mr. BAN KES, which were inaudible
in the gallery,
Mr. HUME gave the. motion his cordial support, and was
glad tolperceive that this country, in supporting such a splendid
collection as that at the British Museum, was approximating to
the taste of other states in Europe. While on this subject, he
wished to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he
would have any objection to the appointment of a Committee
to inquire what monuments were erected to distinguished in a.
viduals in several places in the metropolis, at what expence,
and from what funds they were kept in order. He was inform-
ed, that the sums taken for admissiqn to see the monuments
in Westminster Abbey were appropriated for the payment
of individuals appointed to take care of those monuments ;
but he also understood that there was another fund from which
those persons, ought to be paid, and which the Dean and Chap-
ter put into their own pockets. lie thought this was a subject
which should be inquired into. •
Mr. BANKES admitted that the expence which the public
were put to in the erection of those monuments gave them a fair
~claim to inquire how the funds received for exhibiting them
were applied ; but he thought the onus of. such inquiry ought
not to be thrown upon his Right Hon. Friend the Chancellor
of the Exchequer. The subject was, he granted, a fair one for
inquiry.
Mr. HUME expressed a hope that some such motion might
be submitted to the House, and that it would receive the sup-
port of Ministers.
Sir C. LONG was not aware of the fund to which the Hon.
Member alluded, for the payment of persons for taking care of

the monuments in Westminster-Abbey ; but if there were any 1
over which the House had a controul, it would be fair to in-
quire into its application. 'With respect to the resolution be-
fore the Committee, lie would observe, that the collection of
Mr. Rich was very rare and valuable, and the parties who had
the disposal of it evinced the most liberal disposition in treating
with Government for its purchase.
The resolution was now agreed to, and the House having
resumed, the report was ordered to be received on Monday-
DISSENTERs' MARRIAGES BILL.
After a desultory conversation as to the time for the further
discussion of this measure, the Bill was re-committed, and
the report ordered to be taken into further consideration on
Monday.
ELECTIVE FRANCHISE IN IRELAND.

Mr. LITTLETON brought in his Bill to regulate the exer-
cise of the elective franchise in the counties at large in Ireland,
which was read a first time.
The Bill enacts, that no person shall be allowed to register
any freehold in, Ireland, unless it be on leases of lives renewable
for ever, except it be of the value of -*
The Honourable iliember said he would move the second
reading on Monday, as the third reading of the Roman Ca-
tholic Relief Bill was fixed for that day, and he hoped that the
discussion of his Bill would be allowed 'the precedence.
The Bill was ordered to be printed.
The other Orders of the Day were then disposed of, and
the House adjourned at lIALI.PAST ELEVEN O'CLOCK to
Monday.

* It is understood that the Hon. Member proposes to fill up
this blank with the sum of 101. instead of 405., as the law now
stands.

PARLIAMENTARY PAPERS.

AMMAR DEPARTMENT OF THE WAR OFFICE.--It ap-
pears by the Paper's lately laid on the table of the House of
Comm-oria, that since the establishment of the above office in
1815, up to 1824, the total amount of disallowances from the
accounts of Regimental Agents and District Paymasters with
the Government was 610,110/. 3s. 4d., of which sum
503,201/. 12s. I Id. has been received, leaving a balance in fa-
vour of the public (after paying the expences of the establish-
ment in that period, estimated at 99,537/. ss. Bd.) of
510,5721. 17s. Btl., inclusive of the sum of 106,908/. 10s. sd.
not yet paid. It also further appears, that in the same pe-
riod the sum of 544,442/. 6s. sd. was the total amount of ba-
lances duefrom the Government, of which sum 483,221/. 3s. 7d.
has been paid, leaving .a balance of 61,221/. 2s. 10d. to be paid.
The amount of balances found- due to the Government in the
same period was 933,990/.. 9s. ld. of which 782,884/. Bs. 3d.
has been actually received, leaving a balance still due of
151.106/. Os. 10d.
LIVERPOOL.—The quantity of cotton imported into Liver-
pool in the year ending sth January, 1825, was 119,067,2501b5.
The quantity of sheep's wool was only 395,0351b5. There was
'exported, in the same period, 5,668,5661b5. of cotton wool,
anti 47,2151b5. of sheep's wool.
IRELAND.—lmported into the port of Liverpool in the year
ending sth January, 1825, 179,904cwt5. of butter; 6,399 tierces
of beef and pork, and 17,670 barrels of the same commodi-
ties, 12,608cwts. of bacon and hams, 635,889 quarters of corn,
and 240,349cwt5. of meal and flour ; 25,025 cows and oxen,
632 horses, 44,879 sheep, 25,120 swine, 1,302,3211b5. of
sheep's wool, 20,761,182 yards of lined, and 8,963 gallons of
spirits.

FINE AR►'l'S.