The Sun.
London, England, 1824-05-29 00:00:00

zormneree. And though it was so uncalled for, this mea-
f:ire would in its operation involve the destruction of above
:".4400 brokers and underwriters. If, instead of enlisting, his
stiojesty's Mini►ters in this cause, the Hon. Member for Wey-
meuth had induced them to lower the policy-duty, he would
have done much more for the commerce of the country than
could be effected by this bill. Let the House look to other
companies. Had any good been done by the competition among
the bias Companies or the Water Companies? In the case of
the Water Companies, though there was an appearance of com-
petition at first, yet after a time they came to Parliament, and,
complaining that they were on the brink of ruin, they got an
advance of 50 per cent. above the rates paid before they existed.
—As an individual merchant not connected with any of the in-
terests concerned, he must say, that in the course of a pretty
exteirsive course of dealings, he had never met with any of those
iossea or inconveniences which had been so much dwelt upon.

Mr. BUXTON said, that after the personal attacks which
bad been made upon him—(Cries of " No, no.") He must
-contend that it was a direct personal attack to: ay that he felt
and thought differently where his own interests were concerned.
He appealed to the candour of the Chancellor of the Exchequer,
whether in the measure which he had introduced relative to the
trade in beer, he (Mr. Buxton) had been found in the number
of those who were his opponents, either in or out of the House.
He was placed in a situation of great difficulty—public duty and
private interest were conflicting; and he would appeal to that
Right Hon. Gentleman to say to which he (Mr. Buxton) had
submitted.
Alderman THOMPSON begged leave to disclaim any idea
of personal disrespect to the Hon. Member for Weymouth.

nr. LUSHINGTON said, that if he were of opinion that
the two chartered companies did of right enjoy any of the pri-
-leges contended for, he would be last man in that House to
take them away without compensation. Notwithstanding the
peat authorities which had been arrayed against him by the
Bon. Member who had cited the opinions of Sir Vicary Gibbs
• and Sir Thomas Plomer, he should still contend for the cor-
rectness of his own opinion ; and he would tell his Honourable
Friend, that he had very little value for any legal opinion, if
he (Ed not, at the same time, see the case on which that opi-
nion was founded. He knew enough of the nature of opinions
given by gentlemen of his own profession, and if his Hon.
Friend would lay a case before two lawyersi he would pro-
bably get different and conflicting opinions. What was the
case in 1719 ? The Crown had not the power to exclude
Joint Stock Companies from doing business': it was necessary,
• therefore, to have an Act of Parliament. The Act accordingly
was passed; but what was there to shew that the Parliament
intended to tie up,its hands, after the conclusion of the period
of 31 years? But the 16th section of the Act gave a power to
the Crown to set aside the charters, if found to be injurious, with-
out inquisition, by seise facia:. The plain intention of the Act,
therefore, was to confer a power on the Crown of revocation
after the 31 years had expired, which the Crown did not then
-possess as the law stood. If his Hon. Friend so understood the
Act, surely it was from such premises a most singular conclu-
sion, that therefore Parliament intended to tic up its own hands,
and for ever, end to deliver into the hands of the Crown that
power which was always vested in Parliament under all circum-
stances whatever. The two companies had in fact enjoyed for a
period of sixty or seventy years, that which might with justice
~have bden taken from them at the end of 31 years. As to the
policy of the question, he had always been desirous of giving
every possible degree of freedom to trade, and had always given
his support to the measures of the Right Hon. Gentleman op-
polite for effecting so desirable a purpose. But it seemed the
Honourable Member (Mr. Wilson) thought that we had al-
ready got so perfect a system of marine insurance, that any
farther improvement was quite unnecessary. It was said
there was no evidence, but had the Honourable Alderman
(Wood) read the report of 1810 ? He seemed to think that
-there never was any evidence on the subject, but that the
Honourable Member for Weymouth had got up. and in-
- -troduced a measure never heard of before, forgetting, as it
iippeared, one of the most able and correct reports ever
wade. What was the fear, if this Bill should pass ? Why,
that, from the over competition, the rates of insurance would
be reduced too low. But if the rates of insurance were at present
toe high, they ought to be lowered ; and if they were at pre-
' sent at the lowest pitch, this Bill could not reduce them any
lower. Looking at the water companies, he was old enough to
remember, that in 1807, on the formation of the water com-
panies, the first effect was to reduce the value of the New
''River shares from 10,000/. to about 3,000/. That, he conceived,
was a great benefit to the public, who were the consumers,
though it was an injury to the New River ,shareholders. In
point of Justice and policy, be thought there never wasi.. Clearer
question than the present.
Mr. PLUMER said, that although the advocates of the Bill
declared it was for the encouragement of competition, yet the
effect of it would be to destroy competition ; for if 0 or 60
Joint Stock Companies were formed, was it to be supposed the
1,500 or 1,600 individuals who were at present engaged in it
(mulct continue to carry on their trade ? If these charters were
only to be considered as leases for 31 years, why, he would ask,
introduce the words " perpetual succession ?" The Bank and
East India Company were in that respect differently situatea,
-far neither of those great bodies had those words in their charters.

Mr. LOCKHART said, he thought he could relieve the Ho-
nourable. Member from the difficulty respecting the words
perpetual succession ;" for if he would read the Act of Par-
liament, he would find there was a clause in it to render this
perpetual succession determinable. He (Mr. Lockhart) was
favourable to the measure, as it would, he thought, give the
public additional facilities.
Mr. C. PELHAM said a few words, but in so low a tone of
voice, that it was impossible in the gallery to catch their import.
Mr. MANNING considered the measure unnecessary, from
-the reduced rate at which all risks were at present underwritten.
• Mr. ROBERTSON entreated the House to look narrowly
at this measure, so fraught with danger to the comfier-
-.cid interests of the country. Mr. Fox's famous India
BiII, which at one period agitated every trading town in
the empire, was not so pregnant with danger to the State. What
-wee the names that stood. foremost upon the lists of this
new Company ? Mr. Baring, Mr. Rothschild, Mr. Irving,
Mr. Alexander, and others—the whole united money interest

of the empire. A company thus formed was infinitely more
•dangerous than a chartered association of underwriters, per-
sonally responsible, and acting under limited restrictions. It
would, in its branching out among the shareholderS, even-
tually engross to itself all the underwriting of this great city.
Now the commerce of the country was at present rather a
great agency business than any thing else; and so far from sanc-
tioning a company of this engrossing nature, Parliament was
bound to take care that the interests of those foreign mer-
chants who sent their consignments to this country should be
protected in the most effectual and the least objectionable man-
ner ; and this was only to be done, in his (Mr. Robertson's)
oisinion, by the present system or underwriting. Unhappily,
however, his Majesty's Ministers were, latterly, disposed to
lend too fond a year to any suggestions coming from that mass
of wealth which had been put in,motion of this occasion. It
was notorious that some of the individuals of whom it was com-
posed were the. great Loan Contractors for every power in
,Europe that proposed to raise money by borrowing in foreign
:markets. This itself might be an evil; but it was not ap-
parent that all those who joined this Underwriting Company,
-by the embarkation of their capital in the project, were in fact
taking shares in those very loans ? But this measure now before
the -House formed but one link in the fatal chain which his Ma-
jesty's Ministers had been for some time forging, and which
would operate, if it should be completed, to the destruction of the
whole commerce of the country. His own experience had but
• leo strongly exemplified to him the tendency which they seemed
• to have to encourage commercial projects of a novel and most
.havardoss character. There had been a Committee sitting up
stairs on the navigation laws not long ago; and so far as it
was proposed to review and consider the system, he (Mr. Ro-
bertson) fully concurred with the Committee. What was
the recommendation of that Committee? Were they for mo-
difying these laws ? No ; modification -would not do : the
Gvvernment must have them destroyed ;L.-those very naviga-
tion laws which had is a system been for so many years esteem-
ed Gf sues beneficial consequence to the country. The next
proceeding of his Majesty's Ministers was the famous Recipro-
city Act. As a proof of the benefit of that measure, he need
but very lately a treaty between this
only mention that
av
edsusteylsowf
country and Holland had been published,w under which it very
evidently appeared that our ships
tehraent(bput7;
erseLnpoewr
for the reciprocity of duties,
cent. more in the ports of Holland
to pay in British ports. So much
that it had been said would be established between
us and our
European neighbours. Under such a system it was obviously
impossible that our shipping interest could long continue to
subsist. The 'Honourable Gentleman was next advertin
.other Commercial Bills introduced by the present Government,
when
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER rose to order.
He was sorry to interrupt the Honourable Gentlemntwrs,
however, was really not speaking to the question;
casing all the plans of commercial policy which had occu-
pied- the attention of Parliament during the last three or four
years.
Mr. ROBEItTSON =tended, that it was of great conse-
.quence to his view of the case, to show that the system of com-
mercial policy upon which his Majesty's Ministers had so long
been acting threatened the most•disastrous mischiefs to the
.country, and that. the object of the present Bill was itself one
_of those mischiefs.—(Cries of " question, question.")
The SPEAKER. said, that if the Hon. Gentleman thought
be was n.ot. out ()corder in entering upon the while commercial
pie)
of the country whether with the intention of demoristrat-
*g •It to be a light or a wrong policy, he was In error. 'The

question before the House regarded the second reading of a Bill
having a specified object.
Mr. ROBERTSON deferred to the chair, and concluded by
expressing a strong disapprobation of the Bill.
The gallery was then cleared for a division; and the numbers
were—
For the second reading, Ayes, M I Noes, 33 I Majority 18.
After a few words from Mr. P. GREIIFELL, whom we found
on his legs at our re-admission, the Bill was read a second time,
and committed for Monday next.

BEER DUTIES.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved the
order of the day on the third reading of the Beer Duties bill.
The Right Hon. Gentleman brought up several additional
clauses, regulating the future qualifications of persons empower.
ed to brew, and providing for the licensing ate-brewers, who
had hitherto been confined to the brewing of ale, to brew small
beer also. It was already provided that the ale should not be
retailed at the same premises on which it had been brewed : and
these clauses contained a condition that the small beer should
not be retailed on the same premises where the ale was to be
retailed. The permission for persons to retail without certain
heretofore accustomed qualifications, ,to take effect from and
after the sth of July, 1824, &c.
Mr. Aldernian WOOD complained that these clauses were
inconsistent with the enactments in the body of the bill ; and
expressed a wish that they had been introduced at an earlier
stage of the bill, in order that the parties interested might have
had an opportunity of considering them before they were pro-
posed for tne sanction of the House.
Mr. HUME thought nothing would more clearly evince the
defective system of the law of Beer Duties than the fact that
the Right Hon. Gentleman or his colleagues had already been
obliged to introduce five or six different bills on the same sub-
ject. He did, therefore, implore the itight Hon. Gentleman,
in justice to the great mass of the people of England, next year
to alter the whole of such a system entirely. Let there be one
duty on malt only, which would operate at least equally on the
rich and the poor; and let people -be allowed to brew as they
liked, and in what quantities they liked.
The clauses were considered in a Committee, and reported.
Read a first, second, and third time, and added to the Bill by
way of rider.
Lord PALMERSTON rose to move' an amendment to this
Bill, which he would also put in the shape of a clause. With-
in the precincts of the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge,
all licences for the sale of beer were granted by the Vice Chan-
' cellors. As the House must see how important to the disci-
pline and good government of these precincts, it was that such
licences should be continued on their present footing instead of
proceeding from Excise Officers, he would move to exempt
the places in question from the operation of that part of the
Bill which regarded the grant of licences of Officers of the
Excise. •
This clause was adopted, and the Bill, as amended, was read
a third time and passed.