The Sun.
London, England, 1823-07-01 00:00:00

USURY LAWS.

Mr. serjeant ONSLONtr gave notice, that he should renew
hia motion upon this subject next Session.
:11r. H. G. BENNET hoped that it would be early in the
Session.

SPITALFIELDS ACTS.

3h. P. 11100 RE presenteda-petilitnifrom the Weavers of
Coventry, praying the repeal of these Acts.

MAD-HOUSES.

Mr. HUME presenTeitipaitionfil;ni a person named Mit-
ford, stating that many acts bf cruelty were inflicted on persons
confined in private Mad-houses, and praying that the House
would inquire into the subject- The lion. Member spoke shortly
in favour of the petition.
Mr. HOBHOUSE supported the prayer of the petition.
lie believed the subject to he well deserving of attention. In-
deed he thought Ministers would do well to consider whether it
might not be advisable to put down private mad-houses alto-
gether. The keeping of private mad-houses had become are.
gular trade; and lie thought there could be no impropriety in
:his mentioning a person of the name of Warburton, who carried
on that trade most extensively. Ile seriously thought that it
was a question worth considering, whether it would not he hotter
to abolish private mad-houses altogether, than to allow them
to exist under the present system by which they were reptlated.
Mr. fiROUOII.AM. said, that abuses could be ehewn to
exist in Private Mad.houses, he would not be one to oppose
Inquiry, or any measure far. redressing those abuses. He
• could not, however, .refrain from observing, that the case of
the respectable physician who had been named by his Hon.
`triad wesdeserving of some attention, as well as that of this
petitioner. He knew nothing of Mr. Warburton, except what
he knew of him in pliblic ; and be was bound to say, that when
ho bad seen him give his evidence in the witness box, his de-
ineaeorwas highly creditable to him. Ile had often heard it
regretted that that Cientleoin had not been examined in par-
ticuler cases, as they occarred in Courts of Justice; and it
was hutlair to infer from this that lie was considered as a per-
son of much professional skill. The allegaaons of petitioners,
to the House on subjects like the present ought to be heard
with many grains of allowance, for it often happened that per-
sons who had been cured of that most dreadful affliction alluded
to by the petitioner, imbibed a dislike of those who had ad-
ministered the very means by which they were cured. It was
vot long since that lie knew of a ease wherein a man had
brought an action against his keeper, who had cured him, to re-
cover damages on a charge of crnelty while he was placed under
restraint. He did notsay that the House should shut their ears
against petitioni. like the present. •Ho merely meant to say,
Om. complaints should be received with great caution. With
regard to what had fallen from his Hon. Friend, the Member
for Westminster, he thought that, oneelleetioa, his Ilon. Friend
would see the inexpediesicy of abolishing private mad-houses,
though it might be a question whether they might not be im-
proved. While on his legs, he would take that opportunity
of expressing the disgust lie had felt at the perusal of a work
lately published respecting private mad-houses ; .a work which,
even tf every statement it contained were true, was a dia.
grace to the press. It gave the names of many unhappy Judi-
viduale who bad been confined in those places, and many
ineedotes of' their families. It was a shocking and disgraceful
publication.
TIODHOUSE arid Mr. BROUGHAM mutually explained.
Itli..Secretary PEE!, said, that if a prima facie case had been
made out, he should not oppose an inquiry into the subject.
He could not, however, by any means agree with the Hon.
Itolectiber for Westminster, in thinking that it might even be a
question for consideration whether Private Ala-houses might
not be abolished with advantage. To abolish Private Mad-
houses would, in many cases, he to aggravate the evil which
it was intended to cure. It was well known that the confine-
meat of a great number of persons .together, thus afflicted,
often tended to increase the severity of their complaints. The
confinement of mad persons by their relations, which would,
in case of an abolition of private mail-houses, he often resorted
to, would be still more objectionable in may cases.—(Hear !)
Msny statements had been sent to him, containing complaints
of the manner in which people were treated in private mad-
louses. Some Of these statements were accompanied by draw-
ings, professing to represent the mode in which these unhappy
persons wee confined. lie had, in consequence, thought it
hie duty to make inquiries into this subject.; and the result of
tiust inquiry had satisfied hint that those complaints were, in
gqineral, witbout.foundation. In one of the cases he recollected
it was stated that a Mau had been plunged into a cold bath in
the Apt); of winter. On inquiry lie found that this was a part
of thsetreatment actually prescribed for the patient; and that
most of the circumstances complained of were to be referred to
that discipline which, was absolutely necessary in the treatment
of the disorder.

Mr. BEN cmltititied the statement of the. Right lion.
Secretary. . .1-le had himself often had erroneous statenients for
warded to him on the subject. At .the Same time lie thought
it was desirable that the House should take some measures for
placing the establishments of this description under • limp
to er con-
troul. With- regard the. book alluded to by his lion. anti
Learned Friend, thought: it was incumbent on Arr. Warburton
to prosecute the author. He (Mr. IL) knew himself that many
of the statements it contained were untrue; but unless Mr.
Warburton took legal measures to vindicate hiri character by a.
prosecution of the author, the public would be led to believe
that he forbore to do so because the statements in general were
well founded.
Mr. WYNN also thought the subject called for inquiry.
fie did not, however, agree with the lion. Member for West-
minster, as to the policy of abolishing private mad-houses alto.
gether.
The. petition was then read, and, after a few words from Mr.
HUME and Mr. Bpouort,tm, was ordered to lie on the table,
and to be
_printed.
Mr. 110TIIIOUSE presented a petition from Chester-le-
street,. against West Indian Slavery.—Ordered to lie on the
table.
Mr. HOBHOUSE presented a petition from the parish of
-St. Ann, Westminster, praying for the entire -Repeal of the
Assessed Taxes. He could scarcely hope that the Chancellor
of the Exchequer would comply withthe prayer of the petition ;
blithe trusted that that Right lion. Gentleman would be enabled
to make a cOnsiderable,zaduption of those taxes in the course Of,

neat Session. While upon- this subject be begged to observe
that he understood many persons had been assessed for shop
windows ~Which ran into alleys; although he had been pre-
viously kiven to understand that this assessment would not be
nforced.

The CHANCELLOR of, the EXCHEQUER said tha
assessments of this description applied only to windows- of a
certain width. Ile would, however, make inquiry into the
subject.
Lord G. CAVENDISH presented apetition from Derby-
shire in favour of the law for repealing the Combination Act.—
Ordered to lie on the table.

Mr. W. SMITH presented a petition from. Alton against
Slavery.—Ordered to be printed.
Mr. W. SMITH presented a petition from 1,200 Weavers
of Norfolk, in favour of the Bill for repealing the Combination
Act.—Ordered to lie on the table. _ _

Mr. W. Sll ITI! presented a Petition from upwards of 6000
of his own Constituents of Norwich, to the same effect as that
of the last Petition.

Mr. P. MOORE said that the foregoing Petitions were the
result of the Bill he bad brought into the louse ,• and he had
no doubt that many thousand other Petitioners would also ad.
dress the House in its favour. The person who was most ini-
mical to the Bill had not stated his objections to it, although he
had been invited to do so.

The Petition was then ordered to be printed.
FOREIGN POLICY.

Sir J. MACKINTOSH begged to say that he postponed a
question he intended to ask of his Right Hon. Friend the Fo-
reign Secretary, merely in consequence of the absence _of his
Right Hon. Friend.
SCOTCH JURIES..
Mr. KENNEDY moved the third reading of the Scotch Ju-
ries' Bill.
Lord BINNING opposed the motion. The Bill, he said,
proposed to enact that Juries should be named by ballot, a
proposition to which he thought- the House would not be dis-
posed to agree. He had a strong objection to the principle of
Balloting for Juries. It was the practice of many politicians
to run down the administration of Justice in Scotland. He was
convinced of this in consequence of the speeches he had heard
from the Hon. Member for Aberdeen, and the Noble Member
for Lanark. He did not feel the force of the objection which
had been urged against the selection of Juries by the Judges
of Scotland. The Juries of that part of the country had long
been known for their intelligence and independence, and for
differing in opinion from the Judges much oftener than Eng-
lish Juries did. He should oppose the third reading of theßill.
Mr. ABERCROM BY said the bill had already been fully
discussed, and the principle of it had been sanctioned by the
House. His Noble Friend had said that lie disliked ballot, but
be had given'no reason for his dislike. The ballot.was in his
(Mr. Abercromby's) judgment, the best recommendation to
the bill, fOr it gave the best security which could be obtained
against partial influence, The Noble Lord's objection could
only be properly taken in a Committee; and as he had let that
opportunity pass, he could not now complain of a particular
defect which he had neglected to take the means of correcting.
Mr. Secretary PEEL said that he thought tli,e arguntent just
used by the Hon. Gentleman would not induce the House to
pass the bill if it were a bad one. Seriously, he believed the
bill would be productive of mischief, and that if it were car=
ried, the Hon. and Learned Gentleman himself Would wish to
see it amended. By making the lists alphabetical, it would
result that the juries would often be of the same names. The
first list, for instance, would necessarily be all Abercrombies,
(A laugh.)—After remarking upon other defects of the mea-
sore, he recommended the Hon. and Learned Gentleman, for
the sake of his own reputation, to give further consideration
to the measure, even if he were sure of a majority, before lie
pressed the third reading.
Sir JOIIN MACKINTOSH said that he was much sur-
prised to hear the Right Hon. Gentleman, after admitting the
necessity of the Bill upon principle, come forward and oppose
it at this stage, upon the ground of, a few possible-.inconve-
niences. As the Right Hon. Gentleman had said that he
wished this to be considered as it question apart from general
political feelings, he was surprised that the Committee had not
the benefit of his understanding and authority.
Mr. Secretary CANNING said, that the impression upon
his mind was that his Right lion. Friend only agreed in the
necessity of removing a particular kind of selection. But upon
this the Hon. and Learned Gentleman took another step, and
assumed that he condemned all selection. It appeared to him
that his Right Hon. Friend had only eqnsented to part with the
present system because it was faulty in theory, yet unimpeach.
able in practice, if something could be substituted in its place,
with a tolerable certainty of being successful in practice, and at
the same time to be free front the theoretical objections. But
he perfectly well remembered that in the former debate his
Hon. Friend objected decidedly to the principle of ballot,
and voted against it upon the second rending. It was, there-
fore, too much to expect, when the Bill came for the third
reading, with the ballot, that he should give it his support.-..
To the principle of ballot he (Mr. Secretary Canning) enter-
tained the same objections.
. _

Mr. KENNEDY said, that he should not trouble the House
with any further observations, although, if time permitted, he
had no doubt of being able to offer a satisfactory renly to the
objections of the Right Honourable Secretary for tbe Home
Department.
Mr. Secretary PEEL explained.
After a few observations from Mr. FORBES, the House
divided, when there appeared—
For the third raacling - 60 •
Against it - . . 56
. Majority . —1

The Bill was then read a third time and passed.
SCOTCH COMMISSARY COURTS.
The LORD ADVOCATE moved the third reading of the
Bill for regulating the Scotch Commissary Courts,
Lord A. HAMILTON complained of the Bill having been
advanced to this stage by the Lord Advocate, without giving
an opportunity of speaking upon the question to any Member
of the House. Ile also expressed his regret at seeing the
House in such a thin state upon so important a subject.--
He should, however, proceed to state his objections to the
Bill, in spite of the non-attendance of those who were absent,
and of the non-attention•of those who were present. The Noble
Lord then referred to various measures which had been pro-
posed at different periods upon this question. Be did not
object to the principle recommended by the Report of the
Commissioners of Inquiry. But the Learned Lord had de.
parted from those recommendations, or not attended to them at
all. He did not believe that his Majesty's Ministers, if they
examined the Bill, could possibly give it support. It was so
completely at variance with all the measures of Legislation
such as that House was generally accustomed to sanction, that
he could not conceive how the Learned Lord had expected it
to pass. It was not to make a law, or to enforce the power of
that House, but todelegate its power to others. The Bill pro-
vided that certain persons should make such regulations as they
thought proper. Upon the subject of compensations, be wished
to ask the Noble Lord how he could propose to allow them,
and to say that the Bill was founded upon the Report of the
Commissioners, when that Report stated that compensations
ought not to be allowed ? Another objection was, that the
Clerks had the power of regulating the fees in their own Courts.
Among the monstrous provisions of this Bill was one which
enacted, that the Court of Sessions should legislate for itself
in all time to come hereafter. This was no less than delegating
the functions of Parliament to this Court. Now, if the
wisdom of that Court were such as to justify such distinction,
why had not the Learned Lord produced them some proof of it ?
But, if he could be surprised at anything which happened in
that House at the end cf June, he should be surprised. that such
a Bill had got to a third readingavith so few Members prepared,
to stand up in their places and object to it. Indeed lie did be•
lieve that the question would at length. be left with die Right
Honourable Gentleman in the Chair, andhimself as the only
audience to his argument. Nevertheless he should be able to
tell his constituents that he had done his cluty.tawards them in
making that opposition which they had instructed him to 'offer
to this Bill. Another cause to which he strongly objected was,
that which gave the Baromi of the Exchequer the power of
granting any compensation they might think fit to persons
whose claims they considered legal and well-founded. This
was a power of granting away the public money which lie could
notthink the House of Commons would ever delegate from
their own hands. Ile maintained that this was an improper.
Bill to pass, and it .would be
.discreditable to his Alajesity's
Ministers to support it..
Mr. KEITH DOUGLAS supported the Bill. It possessed
so many adVantages; that the Noble Lord himself, he was per-
muscled, would not wish that it should be lost. It was well
known that through' the inefficiency of the Commissary Courts,
many frau& on the public were cerninitted, and under this
view the House would not do its duty if it did not pass the Bill.
KENNE'DY objected to the Bill, as granting inordi-
nate powers to the Courts of Session. The Bon. Member
stated that the Sheriff -Substitutes had all the business to do,
and were very inadequately paid. They were a most useful
and respectable body of men, and particularly as this Bill went
to impose additional duties upon them, this was the proper oc-
casion to provide for their more adequate remuneration, which
indeed the various civil and criminal functions of their office
already., entitled them to. He thought the best thing to he
done was to postpdrim the Bill for this Session, when these
matters must be more fully taken into consideration.
After a few words from the LORD ADVOCATE it) reply,
and Mr. AnEncuounY, the House divided, when the num-
bers were,
For the Third Readies; - 511
Against it - 21
'Majority - -35
The Bill was then read a third time and passed.
On the motion of the LonD ADVOCATE, the Sheriffs'

Courts Bill (Scotland) was then ordered to be read a third time
this day three months.
DISTILLERIES BILL.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved the
further consideration of the Report on the Distilleries Bill.—
Ordered.

Upon the motion of the CItANCEI.I.OItd the EXCTIEQUEIt,
the Bill was.onlered to he recommitted.

The House having resolved itself into a Committee,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, that he
intended to move certain amendments which had been drawn
up in concert with the persons interested in the Bill both in
Scotland and Ireland. He also meant to introduce a new clause
giving to Excise the power of closing the worm through which
the. spirit passed into the ultimate receiver, unless it should
appear that the spirits would be injured by such a proceeding.
Mr. C. JIUTCHINSON said; .that the distillers strongly
objected to the new clause which the Right Hon. Gentleman
intended to introduce. He hoped the Right Hon. Ceentleman
would consent to postpone it until a future stage.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he had
no objection to postpone the clause in question.
Sir It. F'ER(IUSSON was glad that the Right Hon. Gentle-
man would postpone the clause; he understood from distillers
that the stopping of the worm would have the effect of spoiling
the spirits.
Afterafew words from Mr. S. RICE,
Mr. WALLACE observed, that with the exception of the
clause respecting the stopping of the worm, all the clauses
which his Hight lion. Friend proposed to introduce had been
framed upon the suggestion of eminent distillers.
Mr, • HUME - lamented that the bill contained no pro-
vision for preventing smuggling, which would certainly he
carried on to a great extent,. because the duty on spirits in
Scotland was only two shillings and sixpence, whilst in Eng-
land it was 7s. It was the duty of Parliament to take
away the temptation to smuggling. All the spirits which he
drank were smuggled.— (A laugli.)—lt was the same with his
pocket handkerchief.—(The lion. Member drevi a yellow silk
handkerchief from his pocket, and held it up amidst continued
laughter.)--fie never uiied any but smuggled handkerchiefs;
and he-would bet a wager that if lion. Members would spew
their haindkerchiefs, they wouldbe found to be smuggled also.—
(Many Members exhibited their pOcket handkerchiefs.)--Ay,
there they were, in every direction.- Was it not monstrous that
law-makers should be law-breakers?—((treat laughter.)—He'
meant that they should be compelled to be so.—(A laugh.)—
It was a serious question. A man who began by smuggling
would be led on to the commission of the greatest crimes.—
(Continued laughter and cheers.)—lie wished it to be under-
stood that he did not consider the receiver of smuggled goods to
be so bad as the person who smuggled them.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER remarked,
that when the Honourable Gentleman (Mr. Hume) pro.
duced his smuggled handkerchief, he took the precaution of
making the alarming experiment before Gentlemen not
likely to take advantage of his breach of the law.—(A laugh.)
—He hoped,-however, that the time would shortly come when
they could more attentively look to the question respecting the
silk articles, with a view
.to a proper adjustment of that sub-
ject. With respect to the general principle of the Spirit Inter-
course Regulation, it had been only reported upon the Com-
missioners ; but he should give the consideration his best at-
tention, and next Session he hoped to see it placed upon a clear
and intelligible footing.
Mr. HUME was glad to hear this promise to attend to the
subject next Session.

General FEROUSSON was anxious that the Scotch distil-
lers should be allowed three or four months, to acquire that
stock, which would put them upon the same terms In the market
u the Irish distillers.
Mr. WALLACE thought that the apparent difficulties would
be easily obViated in practice.
Mr. W. SMITH said, that the English distillers only desired
to have the whole. trade placed upon a fair and equal footing.
Hitherto the Trish and Scotch distillers had been engaged in a 30
years' contest with the revenue, while the English distiller was
exposed to peculiar restrictions and disadvantages. Let the whole
system of the trade, its . manufacture, and its export and im-
port, be put upon general and reciprocal bases—that was all
that the English distiller required.. The Honourable Member
then pohited out the • immorality which attended a too great
facility of the use of spirits among the poor, which was so finely
illustrated in Hogarth's print of •"'Llin Alley,". and others by
that great graphic moralist.
Alter a few further remarks from Sir R. Fergusion, Mr.
Monck, Mr. Campbell, Mr. Bennet, and Mr. Hume, the clause
on which the conversation arose was agreed to, as were the re-
maining clauses of the Bill. The House resumed, and the Re-
port of the Committee was ordered to be received to-morrow.

ELECTIVE FRANCHISE BILL. • •.
Mr. 001.7LBURN moved that the Order of the Day mettle
Irivh Insurrtietion Act should be read.
Lord NiTtiENT claimed precedence for the Elective Fran.
chine.

3lr. GOULBURN had no objection to give way to the No.
ble Lord, provided that he should not be debarred after that
was disposed of, from proceeding with ,the Irish Insurrection
AO; on account of the lateness of the hour.
Lord NUGENT then moved that the Elective Franchise
Bill should be recommitted.

The motion was then agreed to, and the House resolved itself
into the Committee.

Mr. BANKES opposed the Bill at considerable length.
He objected to giving the Catholics the Elective Franchise.
It had been . coots, el, on behalf of the Irish Catholics,
that having given them the right of returning Members to Par.
Bement, they could not with Propriety withhold from them
the privilege of sitting in Parliament. As this was asserted
doing what bad been done
ft
oor bteh
thee the
ant
he coel
issc
saryi
ncorrseelqa
rul
den, c f
•le was unwilling to consent to
place themselves in the same situation with respect to the Ca-
tholics here. lie replied to the various arguments which
had been urged in :support of this measure. Ile spewed that
the grounds on which Catholic Emancipation was claimed
lbr the Irish Catholics were at. variance with those on which
the Elective Franchise were claimed for the Catholics of Eng-
land. In Ireland, the numbers of the Catholics were so great,
that it was said their demands ought to be granted—in I.:ng-
land they were so few, that it was argued all they claimed
might be conceded without danger. Thus the numbers of
Catholics in kreland, and the paucity of them in Eng-
land, were severally urged as reasons for complying with
their prayer. Seeinno adequate reason for making the Ipro-
posed alteration in t law, but feeling that there were many
reasons, and strong ones too against it, lie should give the pre-
pia
Mr. Ern,r atupported the Bill.
Mr. Secretary
decided negative.
pre-
sent er. fals.uorei
?EEL, also spoke in support of the measure.
J. smi said, the English Catholics were a most re-
spectable body. He court' not agree to the argument of the Mem-
ber for Corfe Castle, who thought Catholics were not to be trust-
ed with offices. It was erroneous to suppose that diffilrence in
religious feeling made a man disaffected to the Government.
Quakers were in general good subjects, although their reli-
gious persuasions were adverse to the principles of the Consti-
tution. They made no resistance under oppmssion,' as they
termed it, yet they had the feelings of other men. If any one
took a Quaker by the nose, he would most probably find strong
resistance. A Quaker, insulted some days since in an inn yard,
said to the person who offended him, Friend I will not strike
thee, but r. may abate thy heat. He then .put him in the horse
pond, and when the man came out said, Now, Friend, thou
art cool, lie supported the Bill.
Mr. PEEL said, from the first time he discussed the ques-
tion of Catholic Claims, he admitted that the Roman Catholics
of England ought to have the same privileges as the Roman
Catholics of Ire4nd. He thought the Elective Franchise might
safely be given to the Catholics of England. It would, in his
opinion, be desirable to associate 'Catholics with their Pro-
testant brethren. As to. the influence of Jesuits at spi election,
he thought a Roman Catholi6 voter dressed up, with ribbons,
and mixing inthe saturnalia, would be in no enviable situation.
There could be no
danger in allowing Roman Catholics to vote
for candidates who are Protestants, and therefore he should
vote for the committal of the Bill. •
General GASCOYNE lind a good opinion of the English
Catholics, but that was no argument m favour of the Bill.
The question was, whether they ought to take another step
towards Catholic Emancipation. He thought no one could
deny that the Bill, if it should pass, would advance the Ca-
tliolica a step further towards the point at which it was their
wish to arrive. If the people of England could he consulted,
he was sure nine-tenths of the population would oppose the
concession. The advanced state of the Session, and the few I
Members in the Howie, was a sufficient reason for making a
great Constitutional question, like that before the House, stand
over to next Sessimi.
called upon the House to consider
the Petitions which had been presented against Catholic Claims.
It was too late for the consideration of a plestion of so much
'importance. If the Noble Lord would withdraw his Bill, and
bring it forward early next session when there was a full at-
tendance of Members, he should not press his opposition.
Dr. LUSHINGTON supported the Bill.
Lord BINNING said, if the Catholics of Scotland had been
included, it would have been fatal to the Bill. The Noble
Lord expressed 'his acquiescence in milting that respectable
bode from the Bill.
Mr. GOOCH considered restrictions on the Catholics neces-
sary. Übe was a Catholic lie should say it is my duty to make
as many convicts as I can. He thought the Catholics as dan-
gerous as ever, and he should be sorry to destroy the bulwarks
raised by our ancestors. He should vote with the Member for
Code Castle.

ARI nx It, whose name we could not learn, spoke in favour
of the Bill.

Mr. BANKES, jun. said, by supporting the Bill they were

PRICE 0
TlllB DAY AT