The Sun.
London, England, 1824-03-06 00:00:00

PLAN OF PINANCE,,

Mr. WESTERN presented a petition tinm a town in ESsex,
we believe BilleriCay, expressing- the dissatisiaction of the in-
habitants with the Chancellor of the ExchNiuer's Financial
•Plans, and their hope that those plans ..would not receive the
sanction of the
.11ouse.—Ordered to be printed.
CO3IBINATIQN LAWS...

. . . .. . _._
..
...'fir.I3ENNET, -precanted a petition from the .Journ;ynre T 1
15. atter* of-London ofid•Southwark praying for the. Repeal of
tile Combination Laws—eitlered to b..-! print:d.
Sita DUTIES. •

Mr.-BARING presented a petition from the Silk-manufac-
•turera of Taunton, against the proposed alteration of the laws
srelative to the silk-Taste. It was, he sail, signed by every
manufacturer (except one,. and his objection was not to the
principle of the petition), and they all concurred in the opinion
that the measure, if persevered in, would terminate in the de-
struction of the trade. • .114 Mr.. Baring) thought the subject
deserving of the most• serious consideration ; for although lie
Was, and ever had been, a friend to the ayetem of freedom in
free trade, yet-beethought that the Lgvialatuee would do worse
• tax: nothing by partial alterations. 'Theyought tirst to alter
t. laws which tended to increase the price ofdebour. long
ereethe corn laws were maintained, it wafteahautd to talk of free-
clietze of trade. The duty of 30 per cad...lse:lld not protect the
manufacturer hare, for it was against a duty of SO per cent.' that
they had to compete. The silk-trade was-so much dependent on
• fashion, and France had so far got the start of us in dying, front
• the. application of chyrnistry to that art, that he feared at first
the situps would be tilled with French sal. Ile could not,
therefore, rely on the principles of general competition in this
article. It was to be considered also, that this was a flourish-
ing trade, and all that the manufacturer resuized was to be
let alone; and after all, it was not a question ofereeiprocity on •
.the part of Franc, for she did not engage to lake ear steel
:,or woollen manufactures in return. It was, therefore, neither
jor,the general benefit, nor for the particular benefit of the trade
concerned : be trusted, therefore, that his illisjesty!s :Ministers
aaroald abandon the plan of interfering with it. He should cor-
tainly vote against it, unless the proper preliminary steps were
:taken by the repeal of the regulation laws; b?tween the master
, and labourer, and also put them in a state not to pay twice ite
much for bread as the foreign artisan paid. At Taunton pm-
. visions were cheap, yet it could beslueNn that at Lyons and in
Switzerland, where they had the raw materials, except India
: and China silks, the price of provisions and labour was so low,
that they could produce so as totally to destroy our rratnufec-
tore. fir thought the Right Hon. Gentleman (the Chancellor
of the Exchequer) had acted rather precipitetely ia not taking
the opinion of any of the manufacturera. Who was the sponsor
for the measure, he was yet to learn, asewellaawhat portion of
the trade bad sanctioned the plan.
;Irire CANN' NO said, he .would not follow the Honourable
alklertibez into the general field of discussion which alte flail
opened ;- but he begged to call the attention of die House to
the situation in. whietr the Hon. Member would place all dio'e
• who were desirous of entertaining the principle of the general
freedom of commerce. Tire Hon. Alember hail laid,. down
principles which would put an end not only to this measure,
—bat to all other branches of trade labouring under similar un-
natural restrictions, for the system was to remain untouched
until' the corn laws were repealed;' for if. the principle applied.
to this trade, it equally applied to the growers-of corn and wool.
But he (Ain Caroling) denied that there was any reason for
exempting the silk trade from The operatiorceif those general
principle.: which the Hon. Member had away.: advocated. •
Mr. DENMAN admitted abut they were not tawalt till all
other regulations had been removed, but he thought the House,
were to inquire what might be removed with the least injury to'
individuals. This would create distress in the great menu lac.:
toeing towns like Coventry and Nottingham -; it.weuld he ane
injustice to them, therefore, to proceed in this measure, 'when'
so many taxes might be repealed without a voice in tha country
being lifted up against it. Who would be against the repeal
or toe probete and legacy duties, end the duties on conreyances
-oflamia or the window taxes? The question was not whether
trade trade should be free or not but what duties should be
taken off

Mr. HUSKISSON said the. Hon. and Learned Gentleman
had overlooked the main arrangement, for the alteration in
eiVay a system of prohibition the most offensive of all others
in its consequences, as under it the officers of the Excise were
authorized to enter the houses, not of dealers only, but of any
person, in search of smuggled silks. The real question was,
whether the system of prohibition should be repealed ?
Hon. Member for Taunton had stated that labour t•as higher
here than in other countries ; but was it higher to this manu-
facture than to other trades and manufactures—in the woollen
and cotton, for instance, and yet in those manufactures we com-
peted successfully with foreigners ? On the authority of a
French writer, who had access to the best sources of intOrma-
tion, he could. state, that the report of silk goods from this
country exceeded the exports of France and from that circum;
stance, the House would judge whether, with a dirty of i 0 per
cent., our manufaCturers would not be quite equal to compet-
•ing'with ,France -in our own market. 'rho llOn. ii,mtleman
(Air. Baring) charg •d the Government with rtsliness, in not
having the authority of individuals in the trade; but had he
forgotten that there had been an inquiry by the other House of
Parliament; and from the report of ther Committee, it would
appear that all the manufacturers who had given evidence•were
of opinion that the system had cramped the trade and,prevent-
ed the flowing of capital to it.
Mr. DEVENPORT said a few words against the altera-
tion.

Mr. ELLICE was-for .commencing the alteration of the sys-
tem in same branch of our industry not so liable to a succe3iful.
competition on the part of foreigners. The silk trade was or
recent introduction • here, and • was not a native manufacture.
The cotton trade was generally referred to as analogous; but in
that trade we had the advantage of machinery. He agreed with
the Right lion. Gentleman in thetadvantages which would re-
sult by removing all restrictions, but he (Mr. Ellice) was for
making the experiment in some branch not so dangerous as the
silk trade; and first we ought to begin with taking off those
taxes which added heavily to the price of labour. The great
objection lie had to the measure was this—that if 30 per cent.
duty were laid on, that amount would never go to the reventie;
Silks could now be smuggled in at from 10 to Li per cent.,
and if they were to be allowed to be sold openly in the shops,
he left the House to judge whether tht swipe, Jr or the revenue
would profit the most. The Corn-laws mrlt soon have the
of the Legislature. • With them ttt 'beginning must I

Ihe made, and then the manufacturers would be less disposed
to throw obstacles in the way of the removal of restrictions.—
At the present moment, whilst the masters complained that,
from the price of labour, they were unable to compete with fo-
rci:mers, the labourers themselvesl complained that their wages
would scarcely furnish thrm with the means of subsistence, Gs.
a we J: being the sum no* paid.
Mr. P 1 /H. said, that admitting as Ite.didthe full value of
the generel principles, respecting the freedom -of trade, lie
would ask of Gentlemen to select any other trade in which si-
milar prohihitions existed. The fact was, our general system
was free; the prohibition was the exception, and not the rule.
Our steel, cotton, and woollen manufactures were free; and
when the Honourable Gentleman would here them begin with
some other than the silk trade, so far from having a system
to begin, we ha:l one to conclude, of which that trade WAS the
remnant. -
Mr. ELLICK and Mr. Pener. mutually explained.
Mr. PHILLIPS gave credit to the Ministers for a sincere
desire to adopt such measures as would be beneficial w the
commerce of the country.
Sir J. NEWPORT was convinced, that no greater benefit
could he conferred on the country than would result front the
measures proposed by his Majesty's Ministers. It was natural
to suppose that difficulties must arise from a change in that
system which had been so long pursued; but whatever they
might be, they should be looked yin the face, and the sooner this
was done the better.
Mr. EGERTON said a few words which were inaudible in
the gallery.
Capt. Al /IBERIA' thought it was incumbent on every inde-
pendent member in the house to rapport his Majesty's Govern-
ment in the tneesure they had devised for relieving the public
burdens, by taking off the duty on silk.
Mr. T. WILSON was as willing as any other lion. Mern-
'tier could be, to testify his approval of the candid manner in
which this measure had been brought forward, but he could
not help at the sane time expressing some-doubts whether the
present :- wee a fit opportunity for carrying it into effect. The
opiriiorehe had formerly expressed respecting the wool duties,
remained unchanged, and applied with equal force to those on
silk. Until by an alteration in the corn laws the people of this
country Should be enabled to eat their bread as cheap as the
people of foreign countries, the repeal of the duties on silk
would fail of the end it was intended to accomplish. He was
convinced of the inexpediency of that measure at the present
Moment, but belied one consolation, namely, that the Chan.
eellor of the Exchequer had expressed his readiness to enter
into a full discussion of the subject. 'When that discussion
should take place, he '(Mr. Wilson) intended to express his
opinions, and the grounds upon which they were formed, at
greater length.
Mr. LITTLETON supported the petition.
Mr. HUM would be glad to know who it was that corn-
.plained of the repeal of these duties. Who were the petitioners
—were they workmen, or masters, or both ? lie would sup.
p oite them to be both. Fir the evidence given before the
CoiriMittee, this feet scented to be- established—that if the
raw material of silk could be obtained upon- as easy terms
as raw cotton,' there was no reason why we should not
excel ether 'nations in the manufacture of silk as we did
in cotton.—(llear.• hear !)—What would be the effect of this
wise -measure ? Why, to take twenty-five per'cent. off the
price of the raw Ifetiele, and to throw much more extensive
employment into the/lends of the manufacturer ; for it could
not be doubted that the- immediate effect of this redtshtiori
would be an increased consumption ; and that therefore every
man now petitioning against it Irons a mistaken view of the
case, would be immediately "benefited by having full em-
ployment; and he (Mr. Hume) would venture to predict
that every silk-weaver's wages would be increased twenty-
five per cent. beyond what they had been for the last six
Months. %%'hat were they afraid of ?•' The home marhet
could not be injured ; for that would -be at least as good
is sites is now. With 25 per cent. less duty, on the rew
trial, We should be enabled to compete with fOreign mar-
kets; while a duty of hl) per cent. on foreign manufacturee
would be a sufficient protection to our trade. It was well
know. M
n that any .articles -were now manufactured in tetindon
and sent to the coast, ,where they were scald .as French goods.—
Why, then, if we could now come so near-the foreign menufac.-•
tures as to cheat the intelligent persons .who fancied them-
selves such good judges, what should we not be ableto do when
the shines were taken off? If 30 percent: was not a sufficient
protection to the home market, the trade was not worth pro-
tecting. lie was of opinion that the general result of- the mea-
sure proposed would be highly beneficial both to the Man-tithe-
turers and the dealers ; and he was sure, notwithstanding
their-present objections to is, that they would hereafter oin in
thanking the Ministers for having passed it against their melit-
anon.

Sir JOHN WIIOTTESLEY thought the representations
made ur tht silk-manufacturers of the inconvenience they wtrz
likely-to experience from this measure-dcsenred attention. Ile,
however, rove principally for the purpose of asking the Right
lion. Gentleman, how long it was intended that the state of un-
certainty and.c9nfusioa which the, intimation of of the proposed
repeal had Occasioned was to continue? FOr his own part, he
thought this measura, as well as the others which had been
brought forward with it, onklit to be even un. Ha was aware,
'that to ask for this would be asking a great 'deal ; he was quite
sure, if the Right Hon. Gentleman would relinquish the- repeals
he had proposed, and the sums intended to be appropriated to
Windsor Castle and the new churches; and thmering those sums
over the four years which his financial plau embraced, would
repeat the window-tax, he would not -only -give greater satis-
faction, be affbrd a much more setisible 'relief to the whole
country.

I,dr: SMl'rll oppused the object of the petition, and said,
t was quite a new doctrine that the "taking off a duty from a
raw material could be injurious to the-inanitfacturers. He ex-
pressed his gratitude to Alinisters for the measures they had
brought forward, and the spirit and energy with which they pro-
posed to carry them into effect--(Hear, hear!)
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, that
after the proposition had been so ably supported by his Right
Hon: Friends, and had received also the powerful and disinte-
rested support of the Hon. Gentlemen opposite-, he should not
thiniC it expedient towaste the time of the House by entering
into a long discussion on it, even if hia strength permitted hint
to do so. Itis only object in rising was, to answer a question
which had- been put to him by the Hen. Baronet, who had just
sat down, -and the Member tOr Coventry, as to the course he
meant to pursue. He was quite as sensible as they could be of
the inconvenience of delay i • and if he were to follow his own
impressions, be should have laid the details of time measure be-
fore the HOuse at an earlier opportunity. But he had reason
to believe, that several parties interested in it wished to have
some communication-with him on the subject. lie had been
occupie:la great part of the day with some of these parties,.and
lie believad there were others who still wished to see him. It
was, however, his intention on Monday next, when the Cus-
toms acts shoultrbe before the House, to give a distinct expla.
nation of the manner in Whicth- it was proposed to effect this
measure, in conformity to the principles he had before stated.
(Hear, hear!)
Alderman BRIDGES supported the petition, and said
hedid not-believe that even 50 per cent. would be an adequate
protection to our trade against many articles of French manu-
facture.

Mr. CUR TEIS spoke against the repeal of the duties on
silk, and said he could tell the Right Hon. Gentleman of a way
by which he cotild set himself right with the *country. If he
would only
say a word to them about the tartson leaiher, malt
and hops,'he would receive a much more gratifying approial
from the neople at large than all the plaudits of his civil bench
or of that'side of the House could afford him...4A laugh.)
Mr. MUNDY also supported the petition. The proposal of
the Right lion. Gent. had created considerable inconve-
nience in the counties of Chester and Stafford, as well as
in that of Derby. ln.D.,•rby he understood that none of the
manufacturers had stock in their looms of legs value than 2001.,
and some of them as much as 2,0001.

Mr. ITALDIM AND trusted that the Right lion. Gentle-
man would persevere in his measure. Nothing could he more
certain than that every protection and bounty was detrimental
to trade ; and that no trade was worth carrying on which could

not support itself. The chief object of tile Chancellor of the
Exchequer in repealing the duty on raw silk would, however,
be frustrated, if he.did not at the same time repeal the Spital-
fields Acts. Thefact was, that many articles were manufac-
tured. in that place 100%. per cent. dearer than at Coventry. It
often happen:A, upon the spur of the moment, that it was better
worth while even to pay that additional charge than to send to
Coventry; but he asked whether, as applied to foreign trade,'
it was possible, tinder such restrictions, that the manufacturer
could compete with other markets ? There was another topic
he Would take this opportunity of mentioning. We were told
we had a free silk trade with India; this he denied •, it could
not be called a free trade se long as the East India Company
could limit the number of individuals who were permitted
to go out to India.—(Hear, hear !)—An instance of the in-
justice of this practice had lately fallen within his own know. ,
ledge. A person was educated in a silk warehouse in this
country for the purpose of goin(r afterwards to India to en-
gage in that trade. It was well known that the number of
persons acquainted with the value 'and nature of silk in
India was extremely limited, and that coarse and fine de-
scriptions of that article were sold at the same price. An appli-
cation was made ..to the East India Company 'to allow the
person he had-alluded to, to be sent out to a private house in
India, carrying on trade there, and the application had been
refused. He did not complain of this, because their act justi-
fied the Company in this, but it proved that they did exercise
such a controul. It had been intended to present a petition to
the Board of Control, but this was abandoned, because he was
told that there was not the least chance ctf its being heard.
Before he sat down he would ask the Right Hon. Gentleman

why he proposed to make the duty on Bertta.' raw silk 3d. per
lb. and that on Italian.raw silk 61. per lb. liehoped, since the
House had recognised the sound principles of free trade, they
would act upon them by establishing an equality in the terms
upon which raw material should be received in England.
Mr. PORTMAN supported the petition.
Mr. WYNN, whO had given way to the last speaker, said
lie did not remember since be had enjoyed a seat at the Medal
rf Controul any instance like that which had been alluded to.
The Board had frequently given- permission to persons to go
out, after it had been refused by the Court of Directors. In no
awe in which-the individual had the certainty of obtaining full
employment was permission refused to him.
Mr. 11A I,DI3IAND said, the person of whom he spoke had
been educated for-the purpose -of going out to the house Of Pal-
mer and Co., at Calcutta, as a clerk. ;When the application
was made for permission to the East India Company, they an-
swered there were a sufficient number of young men unem-
ployed at Calcutta, and that if Messrs. Palmer wanted sleeps,
they might simply themselves there.
Mr. WYNN said it was not usual to grant permission to
persons going out merely as clerks, because they were not sure
of employment one day after their arrival. It was, besidee, the
necessary policy of the Government of India to suffer the
natives and half-c,tietes to fill such offices as they were compe-
tent to ; and if Europeans were permitted to till these offices,
the natives would he deprived of employment.
Sir T. LETHBRIDGE supported the petition.
Mr. EVANS (as we understood) was of opinion, that if the
assessed taxes bad been taken off, to an amount equal to that
of the remitted duties, it would have proved a measure much
more beneficial to the community than that other remission, Or
the remission of an equal amount of any indirect taxation what-
ever.—(Hear !)
An Hon. Mites:melt (whose name, we did not learn) said, he
should have a Petition to present to the Douse, the subject of
which it might be very proper to mention at this stare of the
•present discussion. It prayed for the repeal of tire existing
duties on the trade between England and !rebind. 'These were
at present on such a footing, that cotton goods were frequently
sent from Ireland to the places of their manufacture in England.
Mr. BARING, in addition to the important fact that had
just been stated by the Hon. Member, would beg to remind the
House upon the general object of reciprocal dirties, that the
question of' dation, as between this country and foreign states,
was a totally different and distinct one from that of reetric-
lions on the trade between different' ports of the same empire.
lie was of opinion, with other Hon. Gentlemen, that the low
wages rind dense population of Ireland might prove the means
of introducing manufacturers into that country with great bene-
fit and effect. It had been said by an Hon. Member who
opened this debate, that he (Mr. B.) had been guilty of a great
abandonment of the principle% of free trade which he had for-
merly advocated, in now coming forward with his expeptionitO
them; but he begged to say, that whatever might have been the
view which the political economists of that louse had taken
of the subject, ha himself heti never carried those principles
further than to advocate a free trade of the raw material, and
a free transit trestle of every other description ; and his object
in supporting the principles of free trade to the extent and un-
der melte conditions, was, that this country might become, as
it were, an entrerpOt for the commerce of all the world. But
he never had maintained, that without any reciprocity whatever
in the system of other European nations, Great Britain ought to
open a free intercourse, as in manufactures, with the Continent.
The argument of the economists, (as he might very properly
term those Han. Members who had most entertained such spe-
culations), and of other individuals out of the House who were
of the :ante way of thinking, went to this,—that every article
caught-to be got where it could be got at the cheapest rate;—
that ifa the people of Milan could furnish them with certain
silks more cheaply than any other people, they had better get
the
would otherwise aerwti
commoditythat capitz:w
it;ricoitln 3sefilialanr;e abneteinthewhetoialliyOuesnolf
ployed upon this silk transaction, they might employ to greater
Advantage elsewhere. That was the principle of the Gentle-
men he spoke of; but lie never carried it to that extent, for he
was convinced, that if they carried on a free unrestrained trade
with the Continent, while its ports were, in regard to many
commodities, shut upon us, the consequence would he, that
where our manufactures had tite. advantage of theirs, they
would take them ; but where theirs exceeded ours, they would
compel us to take them, or exclude us.
Mr. DA VENPORT was unfriendly to the new system Of
reciprocity he that extent to which it hadbaen carried, and par-
ticularly as •to the silk trade. He was tearful we should lose
both the substance and the elindow,—that is, the trade and the
revenue of 700.,0001e or 800,0001. which our Government had
been accustomed to tier:ye ironsit.
upThe petition,
to be whichpw
rinsaed front Taunton, was then brought
, and orered t.
Mr. W. SMITH, after a few prefatory observations, brought
up a similar petition from the mitchante, manufacturers, and
others interested In the .worsted and silk manufactures of the
city of Norwich.--Laid on the table,atitt Ordered to be printed.
ftEctpIIOCITY OF DITTIFS.•
CIJRTEIS said, that a duty was inittc*d- in France on
British vessels of a certain de%cription, from which French ves-
sels of the same kind v;rerc'exempt in this country. Ile wished
to know whether it was in the contemplation of Minister/ to do
any thing on the subject..
Mr: HUSK /SSON rand that by the Reciprocity-err Duties'
Act, his Majesty in Council was authorised to impose on fo-
reign ships a countervailij'g duty equivalent to any additional
duty which a Foreign Power might think tit to impose on Eng-
lish vessels. As duty of tide kind having been impoSed by.
France, he should feel it his ditty to propose an Order in Coun-
cil
mount for t.
• Hehe establihad sh
no ment of a countervailing duty to an equal
a 1
eoubt that France, when this matter was
communicated, weuldzsce the Policy of removing the duty al-
.luded to by the Hon. Gentleman.
GREAT. !HUTA iseNAND SOUTH AMERICA. •
Sir J. 31ACKINTO''" ,said, that having carefully per-
used the papers which trt3re last night laid upon the table of
the House, he rose to propose to the Right lion. Secretary
for Foreign Affairs one (,)1' two questions upon eubJecte eon-s
nested with them. The first of these questions would be, wile-
flier any answer had been received from the Court of Madrid
to the Dispatch from thi"°Yerninent, dated the 30th .tan. ?
(near!)—lf such an answer had been received by his illa-
Jesty's Government, he Presurned there could be no objection
on their part to lay it before the House. Ills second ques-
tion was, whether his 31a.Lestra Government possessed' the
decree, or, if not the original even an authentic or accurate
copy of the Decree said to have been Made by Ferdinand
VII., professing to :regulate the commerce of vast countries
in South America that had ITV ceased to acknewledge his
authority ? If such copy was in the possession of Ministers,
he supposed there could be no objection to its f proottet.on. He
should also be ..desirous--and to this he could anticipate no
objectiona-that there shmild be laid before the House a copy
of the treaty entered into between Great Britain anti Spain in
the year `1810.; which treaty was referred to in that dispatch
of the 30th of January, as granting to Britisinsubjects a right '
of trade with the subjects of Spain in the two hemispheres.—
(Here, hear! )-ICow, he knew it 1,43 possible that that treaty
might have been printed, or have been, in some shape or other,
already laid before Parliament. if
-- so, he was not aware of the
fact ; but he presumed that tile treaty alluded to could not be
that which was made with Admiral Apodaca, for that was
made in 1809. If it had not been printed, he should either
move that it be printed, or give notice of a motion for he pro-
duction, according to the answer which he might receive to the
questions which he had addressed to the Right Hon. Secretary.
Mr. CANNING observed, that to tine questions of his
Honourable and Learned Friend he would answer separately,
but he would invert the order in which those questions had
been put. And first as to the supposed treat; between Spain
and- Great Britain. No such treaty was in existence to the
best of his knowledge. In the year 1810, when this country
proposed to interpose her mediation between Spain and
her Colonies in America, it was merely upon an- understand-
ing between the two Governments that the coast law of
Spain was suspended as between the subjects of the two nations.
No instrument, as far as he had ascertained, was in existence,
in which this agreement was recorded. Any motion, there-
fore, by his Honourable and Learned Friend upon the subject
of this supposed treaty would be unnecessary, for there would
be nothing to produce. As to the second question propounded
about the decree, he knew of that only as a wetter of public
notoriety; but he really could not say whether it had been yet
communicated to his Majesty's Government in that authentic
shape that would entitle it to be considered as a document in
their possession. Ile (Mr. Canning) rather thought it had not
been so communicated, but that any knowledge ofit which might
be possessed by his Majesty's Government was derived from its
having appeared in the ordinary way in public journals. If,
however, such a decree had been communicated to them, they
would undoubtedly not object to lay it before Parliament. As
to the third question, whether any answer bad been received
from Spain in reply to the dispatch of the 30th of January, he
had no objection to state all that it was in his power to state
about the matter. He believed that an answer simply ac-
knowledging the receipt of the dispatch had been received
by this Government. In reply to the remaining pasrt of
what had been addressed to him that evening'by his Honoura-
ble and Learned Friend, ire would merely say, that there were
circumstances which would prevent his (Mr. Canning's) stating
to the Mouse at presentany thing further as to the precise state
in which this country now stood with respect to America. We
understood the Right Hon. Gentleman to add, that the dispatch
in question. was not laid before Parliament while it was yet upon •
its way to Madrid, because, had it been laid on the table at an
earlier
period, it was obviously possible that the Colin of Madrid
might have read the important dispatch in question in the
public papers of this country before it reached theol'in its more
authentic shape. It was upon this account he begged his Hon.
and Learned Friend to 'postpone his 'motion. The moment

that an official answer should be received to that dispatch, it
should be laid before Parliament.—(Hear !)—The scope of his
lion. and Learned Friend's motion (for though it was shaped in
this manner, it clearly went to this extent) was to induce his
Majesty's Govervment to lay before Parliament such documents
and papers as might shoW to the. House the ptincipl es upon which
Government had hitherto acted, and intended in future to act,
in regard to America. But he freely told his Honourable and
Learned Friend, that if the communications which Ministers
had already made on this subject had been such as to entitle
them to the confidence of Parliament, he should resist every
attempt to extort further information, or to compel the produc-
tion of further papers relative to these matters under the pre-
sent state of circumstances. If, on the, contrary, the commu-
nications which Government had made had not entitled them
to the confidence of Parliament, his lion. and Learned Friend
would be at liberty to take his own course upon this important
affair.

Sir J. MACKINTOSH, in explanation, said he had listened
to every-word that had fallen from the Right Hon. Secretary ;
but as at present advised, he saw nothing to induce him to alter
his original intention, which, at a future day, he should be dis-
posed to carry- into effect.
GAOL ACT AMENDMENT BILL.
On the question that this Bill be read a second time
Mr. G. BENNET intimated his intention of opposing seve-
ral enactments of the Bill in Committee. Re called the atten-
tion of the House to the severe inequality of the punishment of
the tread-mill (to the discipline of which, properly applied, he
was friendly), owing to the absurd varieties of construction
upon which those mills were built in different parts of the
country. The Hon. Member then referred to some calculations
which had been made of the degrees of labour in some tread-
mills, compared with others. 'From these, it appeared, that
taking the height of the Monument to be 172 feet, the persons
working in some tread-mills ascended the height of that build-
ing 32 times, in others, 83 times, and others, aain 96 ties,
in the course of one day's work. • He next adverg ted, to a lemtter
from the keeper of Lancaster-gaol, in which it was stated that
10,000 feet of labour (of ascent on. the wheel) was sufficient
fur the labour of one man in the course of a day, and that!
by a calculation it appeared that a day's work of 12,000'j
feet of ascent was equal to the labour of- walking thirity-
seven
miles on level ground. In the (Anumittee he would
purpose to limit the labour of the men to 10,000 feet. and
that of women to 8,000 feet, in tile course clone day. With
reSpect to inferior prisons belonging to local jurisdictions,
be observed that most of them were destitute of the ordinary
conveniences of a prison; some were without bedding, some
without allowance of fire, and others without any employment
or religious instruction. To obviate those evils, he would
move in the Committee, that the provisions of the bill should
extend to those places—that the local Magistrates should be
obliged to commit the prisoners to the county jail, and pay a
certain portion for their maintenance, anti that they should be
obliged to send lunatic prisoners to sonic asylum.
.11r. PEEL said that he concurred with the last speaker en-
' tirely in the propriety of not sending untried prisoners to the
tread-mill. The last act gave the Magistrates the power of
putting tireen tb such work, if the parties wished it ; but it was
misconstruction of that Act to say, that Magistrates could
compel untried prisoners to work, by threatening to withhold
from them the prison-allowance, if they refused. He was sur-
prised at this construction of the Act, the words of which were, he
thought, so plain ; hut to prevent any future mistake, he would
introduce a clause, that no untried prisoner should be compelled
to do any work against his will, but that whether he desired it
or not he should not be put to the tread-mill.—(llear I
respect to the plan of fixing a maximum of labour, he did not
think it would' be productive of any good. If 10,000 or 8,000
feet of assent were taken as a maximum, a Magistrate would
have no discretion ; and what might be an excessive degree Of;
labour to one man, would be comparatively light to another. !
The calculation of 12,000 feet of ascent on, the mill being equal
to 37 miles of walking on level ground, was most extravagant
and erroneous. It was founded on an assumption of the ascent
on the wheel being perpendicular. lie denied that the labour
at all corresponded to perpendicular ascent, or that it was equal
with that of dragging up the body at every step. But he had
not heard—what would be a more decisive objection—that the
labour of the mill was generally prejudicial to health, and he
knew of none other which gave a more equal division of la-
bour. As to smaller jurisdictions and local prisons, he
thought the Honourable . Member's proposition of oblig-
ing the local Magistrate to commit to the O)ttnty
in general be rather a disadvantage than a convenience' to the
party committed. He wished that the power of local jurisdic-
lions could, without any violation of present interests, he trans-
ferred to the judges of the land : but as they at present stood,
hpreesdeidntniotti-
Itlhwinolculed he proposed, change would be a benefit. Thenot extend to interior prisons, but he begged
it not to be understood that he was on this account indifferent
to the state of those prisons—they might be the subject of a
separate measure. With respect to the last point, that of luna-
tic prisoners, he did not see how the evil complained of could
be remedied by the Bill

.Sir T. BAILING was net averse to the use of the trc.atl-mill
as a means of punishment, if subjected to proper regulations,
by which excessive labour might •be avoided. Instances of
great abuse had occurred from the want of such regulations.
ne was a case of a woman committed in Surrey, who, though
only a short time after her acconcletment, was, when sent to
prison, put on the mill, from which she was soon after taken in
a state of great exhaustion.
Mr. 11. SUMNER complained, that the Hon. Baronet who
spoke last had not given a fair account of Mrs. Loder's case.—
Silo was committed for having had an illegitimate child, which
was the third which she had borne to three different men. He
would make a statement to the,Hotise which would prove that
working at the tread-mill hats been beneficial to Mrs. Loden—
On the 31st of October she was weighod—(a laugh.)—and her
weight was 8 stone 2 pounds. She was weighed again on the
13th of December, having, in the interim, Worked on the mill,
and her weight had increased 4ilpounds. On the 2d of June
she wax weighed again, not having been on the wheel since the
13th of December, and it was found that she had /oat 2 pounds.
—(:1 laugh.)
Mr. WESTERN, as we understood, expressed an opinion
unfavourable to thearead-mill.
Mr. COURTENAY agreed with the Hon. Member for
Shrewsbury, that the state of the small prisons was deserving
the serious consideration of the Legislature. He approved of
the introduction of the clause to prevent the prisoners committed
previous to trial from being. employed on the tread-wheel.
Mr. Alderman WOOD condemned the practice of placing
women on the tread-mill. He thought that Mrs. Loder hail
been very hardly dealt with ; and for what ? Because she had
had three children by three fresh men.—(A laugh.)—lt was
very singular, that whilst all the country prisons were filled with
men committed on charges of bastardy, or for offences against
the Game Laws, nothing of the kind took place in London.—
(A laugh.)—lle hoped to see the day when no English Magis-
trate would be found who would set a female to work on the
tread-mill.—(llear 1)
The Bill was then read a second time.
THE MUTINY BILL.
On the question that the House do resolve itself into a Com-
mittee on the above Bill,
Mr. HUME rose and objected to the measure, because it
authorized the infliction of corporal punishment on 73,000
men. His attention Was particulary called to the subject by
a circular recently issued by Lord Bathurst, recommending
the total abolition of flogging in the West !Indies. He
could not ...understand why a species of punishment which
was considered improper to be used towards slaves, should
be inflicted upon freemen. Ile was convinced :that • the prac-
tice of flogging degraded the army. The Honourable Mem-
ber next observed, that the inhabitants in the neighbourhood
of the King's Mews were greatly annoyed by the cries of
soldiers who were almost daily flogged there. Independent
of the corporal punishments, there were regulations connect-
ed with our military system, which made it surprising that the
bill before the House should so long have passed without objec-
tion. One, immediately, which lie could instance, was the ar-
rangement as to the sale and purchase of commissions. Surely if
there was one being more than another whose word ought to be
undoubted, an officer of the army ought to stand in that estima-
tion ; and yet there was a regulation existing at the present nio-
meat which enforced the necessity of telling a falsehood upon
almost every man who came into the service. Every officer who
purchased a commission, and every officer who parted with one,
was compelled to declare on honour that he neither took nor
gave more than the regulation price; while it was notorious
to the whole army—and must be notorious to the Duke of
York himself—that, in nine cases out of ten, more was paid than
the parties declared to. Suppose an officer to be challenged in
a jury-box with this declaration—what would become of his
evidence—would credit be attached to it ? He (Mr. Hume)
did hope that, for the future, no officer would be called on to
give any such assurance.
.Upon the subject of the corporal
punishment, lie was loth to detain the House too long; but he
hoped that his Majesty's Ministers, while they were protecting
the black slaves, would not forget the white ones. lie heard
that there were some ships of war in our service, in which dis-
cipline had been maintained for years. without the infliction of
a single lash. He heard that this had beep done in some
regiments ' • if in one, why not in all ? Of late years, a system
had been adopted of placing soldiers in solitary confinement ;
he wished to know to what perio4Ts the confinement was used to
be limited, and whether' Government had received any .report
as to its effects? The plan of solitary confinement was one which
he approved, provided the.power was not left open to abuse;
but he was surprised to hear that, in some instances, men who
were put into.tonfinetnenVlbecited their pay ; and that that pay
actually went into the pockets of the officers who sentenced
them.—(Loud cries of No, no.")—Well !he should be glad
to be told what was the practice of the Guards, and, indeet, of
the army generally, in that respect. The -Hon. Member sat

down, by moving an instruction to the Committee, to insert a
clause in the Mutiny Bill, abolishing flogging in the army. Tf
his amendment, in the present stage, was informal, he woo/d
move it when the House was in Committee.
Sir HBNRY lIAftDINGIi replied to that part of the Hoo-
Member for A berdeen's speech which referred to the punish"
ment of soldiers in the barracks of the King's-Mews. He
begged to state, that during the last 12 months one man onlY
lied been punished from the regiments occupying those bar-
racks; but he thought decidedly that the power of flogging
was essential to the discipline of the army.
Mr. HUME explained.
Sir It. WILSON had always considered corporal punish-
ment to be equally cruel, degrading, and unnecessary. In
Germany, in France, and even hi Prussia, it was no longer
practised. If it was to be got rid of at all,' it must be got ri of
by positive law ; or else, where a commander recommended as
disuse, regimental officers might throw the blame upon him ef
any accidental disorder that. followed. The present moment
was most favourable fbr abolishing a punishment which wag
disgraceful to the nation, and ruinous to the character of the
army ; we were not now. as in time of war beating about the.
country to enlist the refuse of mankind ; 'but if the fear of
flogging were removed, we might compose our regiments of
men to whom the disgrace of dismission fronythe service would
be a warning against misconduct sufficient.
Colonel WOOD observed, that the present subject was-
a very good one to make a speech upon ; but, as far 3-1
his experience had gone in the command of a militia regi-
ment, he thought he could not . have maintained disci-
pline without the poWer of corporal punishment. The HO-
nourable Member for. Westminster, (Sir Francis ..Burdett)
had no doubt effected good by the attention, which he -had for-
merly paid to the question; and he (C6lonel WoOdi firmly be-
lieved that the Hon. Member would more recently-have touched
upon it, if he had not been satisfied that no farther benefit wale
likely to result from his exertions. With respect to solitary
confinement, the Commander-in-Chief's notice had been draw,'
to that point of arrangement; and the utmost period of ir9-
prisonment was limited to six weeks. He (Colonel Wood),
however, strongly objected to sending men, by way of puni'sia-
meet, to the tread-mill; and so (while Honourable Meinbers
were talking of the honour of the service) mixing refraecory
soldiers up with common felons.
Mr..lOllN StillTH, apart from every question of military
detail, wax oppoacd to the principle on which military flogging
proceeded. Torture inflicted upon the body could never pre--
vent men from committing crimes ; it only produced obstinacy
in the sufferer, and perhaps • a spirit of brutal revenge. His
objection- was, that the pUnishment was at once cruel and in-
effective. Other and milder measures could not too soon be
carried into execution.

Mr. 310Nt;TiwasOppoeed to the system of corporal punish-
ment. It was admitted that the practice had diminished within
the last 20 years, and he did not hear, any where, that the dii-•
cipline of the army had fallen off in consequence. The fault
of our system was, that we held out too few rewards to the sol-
dier, and so were compelled to use compulsion to induce him to
do his duty. In France, where commissions were given aces-
, sionally to private soldiers, and where to be dismissed from is
regiment was consequently a loss, the use of the lash did not
appear to be found .necessary ; and it had been aleo dispensed
with in a regiment of our own (the Blues) in which there was
a fund instituted to reward steady conduct.,
The House then went into a Committee.
Lord PA LMERSTON advertri to one point of t'ic.
Honourable Gen.leman's argument—that. of the right of
the Crown to dismiss officers 'without -the intervention
of a Court-Martial. Upon that subject the opinion of
Parliament .had been most clearly declared, that it was an
inherent prerogative of the Crown, necessary to the preserv-
ation of the constitution. As to the arrears of pay in the eases
of solitary confinement, they went to the stock-purse of the
regiment, to defray the expences of recruiting, hospitals, and
other things. The punishment of flogging was ancient--eit was
derived from the Roman army to the Braish. It was neces-
sary, not only to the discipline of the army, but, to take that
power a'ray from the prerogative, would be to endanger the
constitution. Theobservations on foreign discipline must be
taken with some allowance. The French army had not duo
punishment of flogging, but they were less tenacious of life.
—Surely no one could wish to see capital punishments in-
I creased in the British army. While h.! was, with the army
of occupation in France, he heard of several men of the
Russian 'forces dying from the severity of flogging. In the
Prusiden army there were two classes. On the first- offence,
the men were degraded to the second from the first, in which
they were not subject to corporal punishment. In the second
class they were subject to stripes, which were :graduated by a
scele—an ensign could inflict 10, a lieutenant 20, a captain 30,
a major 40, and so on. This was not the discipline to be de-
: sired for the British army. 'He differed, in short, on funda-
mental. grounds from the proposition of the lien. Gentleman.
The power of the Crown to order and dispose of the forces by
sea and land bad been repeatedly and constantly recognized
by statute.,:. _To interfere with that power in the deta;lsb •of
the army was nothing lens than a . gross 'abuse of •the powurs of
Pailrilyia.n‘liern.t.SMlTH protested against the'pri..Aciple
by the Noble Lord. A mare monstrous proposition had never
been made to the Holm; whose right of interference was so -
emphatically preserved by the mode of providing for the main-
tenance of the navy and army. He was of opinion that military.
flogging was a blot upon the service, a stain upon the nationald
character. He attributed the preservation of the custom to the
love of power, and the reluctance to let it go inherent in human
nature.

Alr. lILTAIE moved a clause for abolishing corporal punish-
ment altogether, any thing in the Bill to the contrar notwith-.
standing.
The Committee divided on the clause.
For the Motion - - - - 24
Against it - - - •SO
Alajority against the clause
26
The Bill passed through the Cominittee—Report to be
brought tip on Wednesday next.
r. BROUG-HAAI moved for the production of the copy of
the minutes on the trial of the. %lissionary Smith in Demerara.
Ordered.
The, Annual Indemnity Bill was read a third time and passed.
31r. HUSKISSON said that the Chancellor of the Exchequer
would certainly bring on the subject of the sugar dutieS on Moo.
day next, as they would othewise expire on the 24th.inst;.'
file ATTORNEY-GENERAL obtained leave Co bring in
a bill to alter and amend the law's respecting insolvent Debtors.
The bill was brought in and reaara tirst time, and ordered to
be read a second time on Monday next.
The other Orders, of the Day were then disposed of, and the
House adjourned at HALF-rASTONE O'CLOCK.