The Sun.
London, England, 1823-04-12 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

Sir IL HARDINGE took the oaths and his seat as Mem-
ber for the City of Durham. The Ron. Member had vacated
his seat on accepting the office of Clerk of the Ordnance.
A person from the Chamber of London presented a Re-
turn of the Amount of Duties composing the Orphans' Fund.
Sir W. LEMON presented a petition from the inhabitants
of the town of Penzance, in Cornwall, against the proposed
equalization of the duties on East and West India sugar. •
Lord LOATIIIER presented a Petition from 1,200 of the
inhabitants of Ulverstone, praying that no further concessions
might be made to the Roman Catholics.
bir J. .11OUGIIEV presented a petition from the Shop-
keepers Dudley, in Worcestershire,shire,praying that
the Duties o
town o f
an d
Pedlers' Licenses might be aug-
mented.

Sir JOHN NEWPORT deprecated the prayer of the
petition.
r inhßaAbilltaiAß3,loPfrethseenteCditya petition from the Traders
of Carlisle, praying for the
raeferalotoi;ji the Insolvent Debtors' Act.

DUTY ON- CA ND LES.
Mr. SYKES gave notice, that he would move for the repeal
of the Duty on Candles on the 20th of April.
Sir F. BLAKE presented a petition from the spirit-dealers
of Berwick-upon-1 weed, praying that they might be allowed
to import Scotch whiskey upon the payment of a moderate
duty.
Sir F. OMMANEY presented two petitions from the inha-
bitants of Barnstaple, one complaining of the insolvent debtors'
act, and the other the duty on coals carried coastwise.
Sir J. N presented a petition from the woollen..
manufaetureErltr oPflClitlir tenny, praying that the protecting duties
upon the blanket-manufacturers might not be subjected to any
sudden alteration. _

Mr HUME presented a petition from the merchants and
manufacturers of Arbroath, praying that the protecting' duties
on West India sugar might not be repealed. The Honour-
able Member observed, that he could not concur in the prayer
of the petition
Mr. HUME next presented a petition from a very numerous
body of men—the hackney. coachmen of the metropolis. The
petitioners complained that they had been nearly ruined in con-
sequence 'of a clause which had been smuggled into the last
Stamp Act, and which permitted the drivers of the short stages
atoll taakereumpedfayrefsorwiththeinir
thdeisßtrieillss,oftillovality, and they prayed,
p
ornament' would pass
a Bill to reduce the number of hackney-eoaches from 1,000
to 801).

DUBLIN GRAND JURY.
Mr. WETHERELL said that he had received a Petition
which he now rose to present to the Howse, from the' Grand
Jury of the City of Dublin, who gat upon the recent questions
which arose out of the outrage offered to the person of the Lord
Lieutenant at the Theatre. The time at which the petition
had been put into his hands, would not allow of his having
the necessary communication with the parties before the sub-
ject came on to be decided by the opinion of the House on
Thursday next. That beMg the case, he could only simply
lay the petition before the House, and by such a course he
was not to be pledged to any particular part in the discussion
which would then take place. He hoed, therefore, it woulft
be considered by.the House, that the having performed a duty,
the refusal of wliich would have been discourteous to the par.
ties Who did him the honour to request it, did not constitute a
pledge either directly or indirectly, as to' his future conduct
uptin the question.
Mr. HOBHOUSE said, that from the statement of the
Hon. Gentleman, the House had yet to learn what. the Petition
was about. He thought that die manner in which the Petition
had been introduced to the llouse was a sufficient proof that
the present Member for the City of Dublin was unable to at-
tend to the duties of both' the situations which he occupied.
The Hon. Member iniuht at least have told the House what
was the prayer or complaint of the petitioners.
Mr. WETHERELL said that the Hon. Member for West-
minster must have a peculiar apathy with respect to assing
events, if he did not know the subject of the Petition. Ilse could
Dot have been aware that the lion. Mamba wished to have the

petition read twice, and as the Clerk would read it in the re-
gular order, he had not thought it necessary to do so himself.
The Clerk then read the Petition as follows :
" To the Right Ilonourable and Honourable the Knights.
Citizens, and Burgesses of the United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Ireland, in Parliament assembled.
" The Petition of the Grand Jury of the County of the City
of Dublin, at a Commission of Oyer and Terminer, held
at Greet-street, on the Ist of January, 1323.
" Humbly Sheweth—That your Petitioners having been int-
pannelled and sworn on the Ist day of Jan. last, where charged
by Mr. Justice Moore, the senior and presiding Judge, 'at the
Commission, and were. by him apprised that in the course of
their official duties, bills of indictments would be preferred to
them against persons charged with having participated in the
riots which were alleged to have occurred at the Theatre
Royal, on the 14th of December, 1022, in the presence of
his Excellency the Lord Lieutenant. That his Lordship
did most particularly impress on your Petitioners the im-
periims necessity of confining their attention to the • evi-
dence -that should be submitted to them, and discharging from.
their minds any. impression which they might previously
have received from the public rumour. That bills of indict-
ment were on the first day of the Commission preferred to your
Petitioners against ten persons' by which they were charged
with a conspiracy to riot and assault, and insult his Excellency
the Lord Lieutenant, at the Theatre Royal, and by which they
were also charged with having committed a riot in his Excel-
lency's presence.
" That, in support of those indictments, a great number of
witnesses were sent to your Petitioners, not being to close the
said examination on the Ist, adjourned to the' d of January,
when, after examining other witnesses, and deliberating on the
evidence, they ignored the bills for a conspiracy against all
the parties, and ignored the bill for a riot agatnit all of them,
except George Graham and Henry Handwitche, as to whom
they found. the bill.

61 That your Petitioners are informed, and will be able to
prove, that as soon as the proceedings were communicated to
his Majesty's Attorney-General, who was then in Court, and
engaged in an important prosecution, he rose and addressed the
Bench in substance as follows MY Lonna—Upon a case
the mast interesting that ,ever occurred in this country, two
bills of indictment have been sent up to the Grand Jury of the
City of Dublin against five persons, one set of bills charging a
'conspiracy to cause a riot at the theatre, in which the person of
the Lord Lieutenant was outraged and insulted, the other bills
charging a riot generally. Upon the first indictment the Grand
Jury of the city of Dublin have ignored the bills against all par-
ties. Upon the second indictment they have found a riot com-
mitted, implicating two of the persons in the indictment, Gra-
ham and one of the liandwitches ; it is needless to observe to
the Court, that according to the technicalities of our law, a riot
cannot be committed by only two persons, had even hills been
found for a riot only against all the parties, I would then have
felt it to be my duty to adopt the line of conduct I am about to
intimate in'the presence of the Court. I will not arrogate to my-
self the office of arraigning the Grand Jury of the City of Dub-
lin ; they have discharged their functions in the presence of their
God, under the sanction of a solemn oath, taken in the face of
their country—to.that God alone are they accountable. Hut I
have also a duty to perform—l will, without anticipating the
guilt of any individual, state solemnly, hi the presence of this
crowded audience, that in all my readings—in all my experi-
sence—in all the annals Of this unfortunate country—l never did
find a case so fully demonstrated, of the foulest conspiracy to
riot, of so much atrocity, as scarcely to be heightened by the ag-
Ravation, that its avowed object was to insult and outrage the
epresentative of the Miles Majesty in the public Theatre.
I will exercise'the prerogative that the Law and Constitution
has given to my office ; I will discharge that duty honestly, and
with the blessing of God, fearlessly, unintimidated by that gang
which have formed themselves into a faction to beard the
King's GOVernment, and to overturn the laWs of the country,
and even to insult and outrage the very person Of the King's
Representative in Ireland, and pursuing the.course of outrage
and violence from the hostility that they had taken up against
that venerated Nobleman, for zeal and firmness in carrying
into effect the King's intentions towards Ireland, of allaying
the dissension, and healing the wounds that have afflicted this
unhappy country. The course of conduct that my duty di-
rects me to pursue, will be ,in the execution of the prerogative
annexed to my office, to tile cx-officiainformations, and speedily
to bring before the country all the parties charged in these in-
dictments.',

Petitioners were not present at the delivery of the
Address, nor were they until Saturday, the 4th of January,
able to satisfy themselves that the above statement of it was
substantially correct.
" That they heard that one of the Learned Judges had on
Friday, the 3d, expressed surprise at their decision, and they
felt that it no longer bectime them to remain silent, and that
they owed it to themselves as individuals, and as a body en-
gaged in the administration of justice under the sacred obli-
gation of their oaths to remonstrate against imputations, the
severity of which they felt the more keenly, us well becauie
they seemed sanctioned by higher authority, as because they
were precluded from the power of refuting them.
" That the Petitioners, though fully satisfied that the tan.
gunge of the Attorney-General was calculated to impress every
one who heard it with the conviction that he intended to impute
to them, not an error of judt,nuent, but a violation of their oaths,
did yet believe it possible that there was .Some mistake in the
report of his observations, and they therefore determined to ad-
dress the Court in terms of remonstrance; which at the same
time they should unequivocally repel the charge of corruption,
should leave room for explanation, and enable the Attorney-
Gederal to do them the justice of withdrawing the heavy
charge which his address, as reported, was manifestly calculat-
ed to convey.
" That under the influence of those feelings they on Mon-
day the Bth of January, addressed the Court by their foreman
in the following words
My Lords —We the Commission, Grand Jury of Oyer
and Terminer o'f the County of the City of Dublin have learned
with deep regret;) that the discharge of our official duties with
respect to certain Bills of Indictment, has been made a sub.
hect of animadversion by his Majesty's Attorney-General, and
as been pronounced by this High Court to have been a matter
of surprise; we hope that neither the Court, nor with its sanc-
tion his Majesty's First Law Officer, intended to convey an
putation that our judgment was influenced by fear, favour, or
affection. A charge of such a nature, without adverting to the
enormity of the crime, which it would impute would be even.
tinily. unjust for our oathi of secmy, which forbids the disclosure
of the grounds of our judgment, would render the vindication
of that judgment, and if necessary, the satisfactory refutation
of such a charge impossible. It must be recollected that to us
exclusively is the Evidence known on which our judgment was
founded, and we therefore trust that this High Court will re.
ceive the declaration which we now solemnly and unanimously
make, that our decision was the result of a laborious scrutiny of
the evidence, of a conscientious-consideration of its weight, and
of a sincere anxiety to adhere to the directions of the Learned
Judge, who so fully and so clearly detailed to us the nature of
our ditties? and the principles by which we were bound to be
approbation of the manner and Mr. Justice Moore, having been
regulated in discharging them.
ple'as‘ Tedhattotlei ex pr.
his Judge,
sub-
stance of their remonstrance, and to declare that as far as reo
lated to what had fallen from the Bench, the language of the
Court had been grossly misrepresented, your Petitioners feel
themselves no longer entitled to impute to his Lordship any in-
tention of censuring their conduct.
"'That this remonstrance, thus publicly made in open Court,
has, as your Petitioners believe, been communicated to his
Majesty's Attorney-General, whose omission to notice or re-
ply to it induces them to conclude that the charge intimated by
his observationsis persisted in ; and, under the circumstances,
your Petitioners are advised that a Petition to Parliament is
the only course by which they can constitutionally obtain any
sort of redress. They do, therefore, humbly submit, that the
address of his Majesty's Attorney-General, though it professes
Apt to arraign, does, in fact and in substance, arraign your
Petitioners ; that it does most distinctly declare, that the
case was one in which the foulest conspiracy had been fully
demonstrated ; that these unwarrantable reflections of his Ma-
jesty's Attorney-General press with the greatest severity and
weight on your Petitioners, because by the law of the land they
are deprived of the means of demonstrating their injustice,
bound'by the solemn obligation of an oath to the observance of
secretly ; they are not at liberty to divulge the nature of the evi-
dence they have heard, or the reasons of judgment they. have
pronounced. That the Address of the Attorney-General, in ad-
dition to thegeneral charge of corruption against your Petitioners,
contained an insinuation that they had found Bills for a riot
.against two only of the prisoners indicted with &knowledge that
by the rules of law such finding would be abortive, arid with a
criminal design of defeating any further proceedings thereon.
But your Petitioners not only solemnly deny the justice of such

.13ittc...g,tv.NeN6E:

an imputation, but utterly disclaimed that knowledge of' the
law which it supposes, and have since found upon ifiquiry, that
the technical difficulty suggested by the Attorney-General,
presented no obstacle to the prosecution of two persons, against
whom the Bills were found, 'and that the Crown might have
proceeded to trial, and obtained judgment against Them, al-
though the Bills preferred against the others had been ignored.
That your Petitioners having no other mode of means of re-
dress, have at length reluctantly been compelled its an act of
dlity not only to themselves, their feelings, arid their charac-
ters, bit to the free and due administration of public justice to
submit the consideration of their case to the wisdom of your
Honourable House, .in . full reliance that whatever shall be
deemed necessary or expedient to prevent the recurrence Of
such an evil in future, will be adopted and applied. And yolir
Petitioners will ever pray. . . . . .
" For and on behalf of Self and FelloieJutors, ,
(Signed) . " GEORGE WHITEFORD.-
" Dublin, 7th of April, 1ii23."
.
Mr. PLUNKETT addressed the House, but was frequently:
inaudible. lie did not intend, in offering the obstervatirs
which he thought necessary upon this occasion, to anticipate
the discussion of Thursday next. If he were dispoSed to ob-
ject to the Petition,,he found himself authorised to do set by
errors in its form; but that was not his intention or desire.---.
Had the petition contained a direct charge that he; in the did-
charge of hisnfficial duty had imputed corruption to the mo-
tives which actuated the conductor the Grand Jury, he might
have rested the refutation Of that charge upon the Petition it-
self ; • for no person who bad heard it read could understand by
his statement that he entertained any such intention. When
the Grand Juty returned their finding upon the Bill of in-
dictment, he was in Court, and heard it delivered. And from
the petition it would appear that he had taken the determina-
tion to proceed by an ex-officio information under the feeling of
beat and resentment, in consequence of the nature 'of that find-
ing. The fact was, that when on the previous evening he was
informed of what the witnesses had expressed as to the manner
of their examination by the Grand Jury, and when other facts
were communicated to him which he should not now state, he
had the honour of consulting with the Solicitor-General and Mr.
Townsend upon the subject, and it was then decided that an ex-of-
ficio in fonnatinn should be filed incase of the bills being ignored.
This did not look like the proceedinga of warmth or resentment,
and most certainly the course pursued could not have grown
out of any such feeling, upon the finding of the Grand Jury......
A great attempt hail been made out of doors to excite a belief
that he had acted with partiality and under the influence of
party feeling, with regard to the political or religious sect of
the persons implicated in these transactions, instead of faith-
fully and conscientiously discharging his duty as a public offi-
cer. He did think that a reference to his whole life might be a
sufficient answer to any such accusation : but he nevertheless
thought it necessary to state, that the Solicitor4eneral, ' hose
w
feelings upon the religious ;point 'ere diametrically nosed
to his own; had concurred in all the measures that had been
adopted towards the persons accused Any bias which that Hon.
and learned Gent. might have, must necessarily be the other
way, at they disagreed totally, and as widely as possible upon
that question. But Upon the determinationor enforcing. the law
against whatever parties transgressed it, they were aN Completely
and entirely agreed. The statement contained in the petition, as
being that which he delivered to the bend), was very much like
what he did say ; and he would appeal to the candour of any
Gentleman who heard it read; whether there' was not a distinct
disavowal of all intention to impuign the motives of the Grand
Jury. The petition, however insinuated that be had ime
puted corruption to them, and they complained that he had
not explained himself to the contrary, "as bad been done by the
Judge. But he must here state that the Grand Jury had sup-
pressed (not intentionally of 'course) what the Judge actually
said upon that subject. The Judge denied 'any imputation of
corruption on his part, hut stated that he did express his sur-
prise at the findihg. He further added, that if he (Mr. Plun-
kett) had been made to say any thing which questioned the
motives of the Grand Jury, he. had been grossly misrepre-
sented. With regard to his having made, himself, no explanation
to this effect, he was not in Court at the time the application
was made by the Jury. Therefore, even if an apology had
beeniduc, he could not see how it *as to have been made ; but
feeling, as lie did, that no appology was called for, it was'. still
more unlikely to have been offered lie contended that hl3
statement to the Petty Jury at the subsequent trial confirmed
his petition. Ile then stated thatlie abseliik... I tit im accusing
the Grand Jury, because they werenot neat) ti.eie trial; but
that when the opportunity arrived, he would 110 t 1,,, wanting in:
the discharge of his duty upon that point. Ariel she Bill had
been thrown out, he would now candidly confess, that the
conduct of the Grand Jury formed a ttnaterial, though nut a
principal ingredient in determining hieupon the course which
he afterwards thought it right to pursue. But he did not con.
sider himself warranted in stating that at a time when he had
no right to charge diem, because they had not the power to
answer- Now the case was different, and he felt himself au-
thorised and called upon to state publicly, drat their conduct
had a material influence upon his mind, in deciding hint to
preceed.upon an cx-teAcio information. Vet even now he did.
not attack them. He only stated this, being thrown on his de-
fence by the petition before the House. His. determination
was influenced by the communications made to hint of the con-
duct of the Grand Jury towards the witnesses, and of other"
facts which he should not now state, and which he should never
state unless he had at the same time an opportunity of verify-.
ing them. He must now say, that the conduct of the Grand Jury
towards him was of a very different description. They called,
for the censure of the House upon his conduct, and endeavoured
to throw obloquy upon him, and to impeach Ins motives, by a
petition, which proposed no means of coming to a decision upon•
the question. if that had not been their intention, they would
not have put the petition into the hands of his Hon. Friend,
who had presented it, as he performed every thing which fell
to his duty, with the greatest propriety. Wby way it not given
to some onourable Member who was acquainted with the
circumstances of the case, from local connexion ? Why was
it committed to the hands of a stranger ? The fact was, that
it was presented for the purpose of paving the way for a motion
that was to come on in die ensuing week, and to excite a
prejudice upon that question. There was no one other fact, to
which he would beg the attention of the House, and which had
been suppressed in the Petition. There were two counts in
the bills presented to the Grand Jury, which had only a very
slight difference. The one charged the two persons with a riot,
cum multus aliis, and the other was limited to themselves. The
Jury returned their finding upon the last, and ignored the first
count. That circumstance, he was now free to confess, had a
considerable influenci on his mind with regard to Ida subse-
quent conduct. ! .

The Petition was ordered to be printed:
MESSAGE.
A Message from the House of Lords announced their Lord-
ships' Assent to several Bills.
NAVAL AND MILITARY PENSIONS.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, in moving
the committal of the Naval and Military Pensions Bill, had to
offer a few observations in explanation of its objects. There
had been considerable doubt as to the wording of the .pct of
last year, relative to the power given to the 'Trustees for ne-
gociating the sale of these pensions. It hatl been supposed
that the Act limited their power to sell to the succeeding
year; but it had been considered more advantageons to
the public, that the whole of the pensions, which would list
five years and a half, should be transferteti by one bargain.--
The Government had therefore agreed to take as a ba-ns of
such sale the price of Long Annuities on the lst of March,
the day on which they closed ; and on that day they were
worth 181.175. lld. It had been agreed upon this basis, th.it
the Bank should take the whole upon advancing in the five
years and a half 13,089,4194 But as this was not to be ad-
vaneed at once, but by instalments, it would be only equal to
a first advance of 11,888,194/. According to this calenlation
they would be paid 41.21. Id. per cent. being equal to 487,78 W.
the permanent interest of 11,883,184/., this arrangement inight
have been made
.according to the strict letter of the Act of tent
year, but for one year only, and the trustees might have been;
allowed to alter the agreement at the expiration of each y cow
But as these advantageous terms had been obtained on the parr
of the public, it had been thought advisable to secure their
tinuanee.
Mr. GRENFELL rose to oppose the measure, and moved
that the Bill be committed that day six months. He was not
at all disposed to quarrel,with the tertus upon which the pen-
sions were proposed to be sold. He might, indeed, ray that die
Right lion. Gentleman had not justified the necessity of mak-
eotattlnici,syertlvpieelroreswoilene;
did not mean to impute blame to the Bank of England on itc-
tefilut(nu'rgrtea:nle(etnirirmeanyrneaapanregweillocedtr:"e'tsilon°twi?gintie!relYitillt Y;ile3sfat:Tirlilktla'ilnbC°l)o''r:netlujittlim): vantage. He
COUnt of this transaction, on the contrary-, he thought it praise-
worthy. His objection was to the whole pri,iciple of the Bilk.,

Ort would to 'in theleodlleatiatiof tthe none, that when the
Bill of last year was passing dtroughs Committee, he proposed
clause which was adopted by the Government; and, as he
believed, with a sincere intention of acting upon it. This
clause appointed the Sinking. Fund Commissioners to be trus-
tees for the sale of the pensions. Such was the only proper
way of proceeding, for the transaction was nothing more nor
less than a loan of public money. When the Government found
that the plan of selling to public companies, would not succeed,
he proposed this in the most friendly feeling, and thought they
-would act upon it to back out of their situation. Would any
body suppose that the Bank would do what they ought not to
do—lend this money without an expectation of profit ? Would
any other persons do so ? It was because there was an un-
-doubted profit to be derived from the loan, that he would give
that advantage, whatever it was, to the public, by the means he
•recommended. Upon these grounds he should resist the mea-
sure. He would not consent to give to the Bank those advan-
tages which they had the means of securing to themselves.—
There was another view of the subject, which he begged ear-
neatly to press upon the attention of the House. By this Act
they would depart for the first time since the year 1694, from a
}principle laid clown in an act of William and. Mary, that the
Bank of England should have no dealing with the Public
Funds. The Bank would certainly become dealers and jobbers,
not meaning to use the word offensively—in the Funds, if this
• measure were carried into effect. He moved, as an amendment,
that the Bill be committed that day six months.
Mr. ROBERTSON supported the amendment, and la-
mented that the measures of the House, with regard to loan
transactions, always pressed most severely upon the Landed
Interest.
Mr. fIALDIMAND opposed the motion for going into the
'Committee.
• Sir F. BLAKE supported the Amendment, and contended
warmly that the measure was a positive .contradiction to the
principles of the Right lion. Gentleman, that there could be
no Sinking Fund which was not actual Surplus. lie,described
it as being—
.-- A monster of such frightful mien,
" That to be hated needs but to be seen."
Mr. HUME said, he should like to be informed by the
Right Hon. Gentleman what would be the situation of the
public at the end of this transaction. He contended that it was
any thing but beneficial to the country: Ile had also to remind
the House that there was a chaise in the Bank Charter ex-
pressly stipulating that that Company should not speculate in
the Public Funds. It had been promised last year that these
Annuities would be sold publicly so as to invite competition ;
but they were now made a private job. The public would lose
a million and an half if the Funds should rise, as there was
`no doubt they -would ; for their present depression was occa-
sioned by an apprehension of war. The whole arrangement
gave the Bank an advantage over the public, and Government
ought therefore at least not to have made the contract for a
period beyond the year for which the money was wanted.
Mr. ;MABERLY said that' the present contract made the
Bank, for the first time, purchasers and sellers of stock to an
enormous amount, and thus enabled them, by bringing that
stock into the market, very materially to affect the price of the
Funds. :Whether the principle which occasioned the prohibi-
tion in the Bank Charter against their stock-jobbing was right
or wrong, it was of little consequence to discuss; but as the
principle still existed in law, a departure from it ought not to
have taken place without a strong necessity to be satisfactorily
explained to the House. He thought the Sinking Ftind
should, in the first instance, have had an opportunity of mak-
ing the bargain. As it now stood, he had ,no doubt it would
lead to many public disadvantages.
The CIIANCFLLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, that
public competition had been invited to this subject in the
course Of last year. It was found that the matter was too
Momentous to be undertaken by private individuals, and the
treaty was then opened with the Bank on the express ground
that individuals had declined embarking' in such a speculation.
Mr. MABBERLY and the Crra?CEt.r.onof the EXCIIEQUER.
mutually explained.
Mr. BARING thought sonic reason might to be giyen why
the Bank were turned into a great Stock-Jobbing Company,
notwithstanding the terms of their Charter. He had no doubt
that the present was an improvident bargain, and would be
attended with great loss. Ile thought the transaction was a
delusion to deceive the Country Gentleman on the score of re-
mission of taxation, and to deceive the public creditor on the
score of national faith. People of the most opposite politics
were agreed in opinion as to the imprudence of this arrange.
ment, and he really hail hoped that the Chancellor of the Ex.
chequer, with that good sense which distinguished him on all
occasions, would have yielded to the general impression. it
must require a case of strong necessity to justify the putting I
of the Bank in the situation of Stock-Jobbers, and he saw no
such necessity made out'in the present instance. The whole
transaction was, in his judgment, absurd and ridiculous ; and
in point of time, it was made moat improvidently, when the
Funds were at so low a price as 73., occasioned by a tempo-
rary depression. Ile was determined to give the measure
every opposition, and should therefore vote for the Amendment.
Mr.opposition,
said, that most of the points in the speech
of his Hon. Friend who had just sat down, were proper to be
urged last year rather than On the present question. They
went entirely to the principle of the arrangement, and that had
already been adopted by Parliament. The question was not
now upon the principle : but whether a certain contract with
the Bank should be ratified. With regard to the objection
which had been taken by several Hon Members, that this
transaction was a Tartlet violation of the Bank Charter, he
would observe that if there was any weight in the objection,
it was rather singular that it had not been taken last year. He
did not see, however, that it was necessary for the Bank to
become buyers and sellers of Stock under this Bill. They
ought, and perhaps would divide the Funds among their own
Proprietors. Many years ago the Bank had subscribed for
what was called the Loyalty Loan; and no objection had been
made on that occasion to their being dealers in Stock. Indeed
if the letter of their Charter were strictly adhered to, it might
be doubtful whether the Bank could advance any Loan. Then
with respect to the observation of his Hon. Friend, that the
contract was made at a time when the funds were disadvantage-
ously low, it could not but have occurred to his lion, Friend,
that every pecuniary arrangement must he made with reference
to the particular circumstances of the time, and that there must
always be some such circumstances to induce the .tlifferent con-
tracting parties. The bargain, in the result, might prove ad-
vantageous or disadvantageous to the Bank or the public. At
present it was impossible to decide; but a bargain more favour-
able to the public could not have been made at the time in
question.
Mr. GII.ENFVI.I., Mr. ITUSICIBSON, and Mr. lIALDIMAN,
severally explained.
After a few words from Mr. J. MauTtl; the House divided,
when there appeared :
For the original motion - ufi
For the amendment - • 44
Majority - —ll
The House then went into a Committee, in which some ver-
bal amendments were agreed to, after a few words from Mr.
011ENFELL and the CHANCELLOIt of the EXCIIF.QUEIt. The
House resumed, and the Report was ordered to be received o
Monday.