The Sun.
London, England, 1823-05-29 00:00:00

N.

PRICE SEVENPPNCSi

. _ .
—......t
House had been for a long 'time, and until yesteiday, en- mind them now and then amidst the gloom of that dark
gaged in apcertaining the fact, whether a Sheriff had or had system which surrounded them, of their free and nett-
not packed a Jttry ; but in the present case, the practice. of sal rights. How much more deplorable was the condition
packing, so far as nomination meant packing), was admitted of the English Catholic. The meanest peasant exercised
and justified.: He really trusted that the evil complained of that right which the noblest bosoms in the land burned
would be altered by law ; and that the House, whatever might to enjoy, but could not without committing perjury, or basely
be its politidal feeling, would not refuse to do justice to the conforming to another religion. It was not permitted that the.
matter irquestion. Roman Catholic should vote for a Member of Parliament,
Mr. PHILLIPS defended the conduct of the blaster of the and yet in the present state of the representation he could pur-
Crown Office, and said that there was no man in that House chase Old Sarum to-morrow, and send two Members by his
less capable of packing a Jury than that Honourable Gentle- own nomination. And this actually existed in practice; for
man. In ninety-nine cases out of a hundred, he did not the two late Members for Worcestershire were both proposed
know the persons whom he nominated to be jurors; acid in by Catholics. The late Lord Beauchamp was put in nornina-
the case of the petitioner he did not know one of them. The don, for two if not three Parliaments, by a Catholic Gentle-
Master, however, had no objection to enter into any arrange- man. The other Member, Mr. Lyttleton, was also seconded in
meat -which should be the means of giving satisfaction to all' his nomination by a Catholic Gentleman. And, strange to
patties. say, the former of these Members always voted against any
Mr. M. A. TAYLOR said his Hon. Friend, the Member concessions to the Catholic body. Perhaps he should be told,
for Aberdeen, had expressly &dared that he made no charge that in point of fact Catholics did already vote at elections,
without any question being asked tnem. But he thought this
personally against the Master.--(klear, hear I)—The grievance
was however universally complained of; and his Han. Friend could not be advanced in opposition to the Bill, because they
had merely urged the mischief which might arise, in the event should be giving a great privilege, and leaving the practice at
of a Master hereafter filling the office not having the high chi. elections nearly where it Is. The Bill which he meant to pro-
meter of Mr. Lushington. The remedy would be by putting pose was an exact transcript of the Irish Bill of Me. It
Special Juries on the same footing as Petty Juries were on now, would still leave the English Catholics one shade below the
and taking them by ballot. Mali Catholics in privileges ; and how far they wuuld still re-
Mr. CREEVEV spoke in high terms of the character of main below the note:ea/it Diseenters it was needless for him to
Mr. Lushington; but observed that the complaint was; that mention. It washes his intention to interfere with the Test Act
any Master or the Crown Office might pack a jury if he except to prevent its being administered with regard to tile
pleased. offices included in the Bill. In this respect he should leave
Mr. Pit tr.urs explained. the Catholics in the same situation as the Dissenting Protest
Mi. BENNET said there could be but one opinion as to cants, trusting to the wisdom of Parliament for the sauce an-
the character of Mr. Lushington. The complaint, however, nual indemnity. It was high time that the case of the English
was against the system, and not against that Gentleman. It Catholics should be taken into consideration. At present
was sufficient that the Master for the time being had the power their existence was scarcely recognized. They were in the
to pack a Jury. He (Mr. B.) had the means of proving that same situation as a former Lord Chancellor of Ireland de-
Government had actually interfered in the nomination of a scribed the Irish Catholics to be. He said there was no such
Linos as a Catholic in Ireland. They were unknown to the
law, and not supposed to exist save for reprehension and pe-
Jury. If a Committee of Inquiry were agreed to, this fact
rialties.—(A laugh.) —He should now place his Bill in the
could be clearly established. The Report of the Committee of
. hands of the House, and those who did not think that there was
the Common Council of London, made in 1817, stated that out
of upwards of 400 names of London Jurors, no less than 200
were disqualified by nonresidence; that the Jury Book was 'and thing in the English Catholics peculiarly hostile to our
imperfect in many instances; and that persons who made a present i
stein of civil Government, could not in com Mon
trade of serving on Juries were generally chosen. The Re. Justice allow them to suffer these peculiar exclusions. He
moved for leave to bring in a Bill to regulate the adminietra-
port added that the Solicitor of the .Jury had interfered in the
nomination of a Jury between the Crown and an individual tion of tests and qualifications for the exercise and enjoyment of
charged with libel. Unless the subject were protected against certain offices and privileges.
Mr. S. WORTLEY rose to second the mention. He should
this interference, the very source of justice would. become
corrupted.reserve any argument he might think fit to offer until another
The ATTORNE Y-OENER A L said, that no complaint was occasion; but be was at a loss to suppose what opposition
could be mode to the Bill. When they Considered who the
made against the. Master in this case, and the lion. Member
opposite did not state his intention to propose any specifhc mea persons were to whom the measure applied, there ought
sure on the subject.. If such a measure should be introduced
to be some very strong considerations to induce them to con-
to the notice of the House, it would be his duty to give it every
tinge these exclusions. He should not say more at present
attention ; but at present he thought nothing could be proposed than to state the hearty pleasure with which he seconded the
which, if adopted, would' at all improve the present mode of motion-
striking juries. It was the same mode which had been adopted .Mr. WETHERELL expressed his admiration of the can.
for centuries. In any instance wherein a case" of partiality dour and openness with which the Noble Lord had brought
forward time measure. lie should not at present give an °pi.
were made out againSt the Master, the Court would relieve the
n
party. By the present practice the Master took the names
io n a sto .whetiter it would raise the English Catholic to an
indiscriminately from the book furnished him by the Sheriff:, equality with the' Catholic of Ireland, or whether it placed him
lie never heard before ..of the case of interference alluded to on a higher footing of prisilege. With regard to making them
eligible to the Magistracy, it would appear at first sight that
by the Hon.-Member for Shrewsbury, and lie challenged that
Honourable Member to prove it. He was satisfied uo such
their education, talent, loyalty, and all that should recommend
interference had ever taken place. The petitioner, it ap- them to i participation in that part of the British Constitution
peered, complained of the law generally ; but not ofinjus. rendered such an act unobjectionable. But when the Noble
lice in his own ease. He had been acquitted on two out of Lord argued that the elective franchise, depended upon the,
right of property, he begged to deny such an inference.--
If.ol
lid
inquiry.it),
elthe
the four prosecutions against him, anti of course lie did not
titin was, whether the same reasons existed for granting them
complain of the Juries who had acquitted him. He (the At.; These concessions had been granted to Ireland, and the mite-
torney-General) saw no reason whatever for altering the este..
blished practice. here ? At present he should not give an °pluton ; but, after
having examined the clauses of the Bill, he hoped that in con-
wasMr. BRIGHT thought the question raised by this petition
with the opinions he had always supported upon the
particularly deserving of attention, because it relieved the 3igtencl
1 general question, lie should be able to glue it his support. .
House from the attack on personal character on the one hand,
and the defence of it on the other, . The abuse complained of Mr. W. BANKER. (Cambridge University) said that this
measure did not come forward as the prayer of the persons
had been coMplained of forty years. In 1777, Mr. Home
Tooke complained of it, when the Jute! were selected who af- whose condition it went to change, but seemed to be the mere
terwardetried him 'fora libel. The Master of that day ad- project of the Noble Lord himself. It did not appear whether,
milted that he selected the naives principally front his knowe if it were•granted, they would receive it as a boon or not. ' In-
' ledge of their personal Character. Ile (Mr. Bright) thougbt deed the Noble Lord hail 6tated his opinion, that they irkould
justice ought to be so administered that even a convicted man disdain to ask it. With regard to appointments to the Magi-
should not be able to justify his conduct against the finding of stracy, he was disposed not to object ; but he would imitate
'a etury.--In the Court of Exchequer the same men were the candour of the Nohle-Lmd, and declare thug early that he
frequently summoned over and over again on
thenJries in Crown did not think the elective franchise multi be safely granted.
cases. Ile was decidedly of opinion that subject culled , .
Mr. PLEIr said that he had on a former occattion expressed
himself not unwilling to consent to it meloutre for teking into
pettion was then read, and on the question for Its beingtable.
consideration the propriety of placing the Bennett Catholics of
Mr. 11011110 USE said he thought it highly objectionable England on the mine footing as those of Ireland. Consistently
in principle that the Master of the Crown C)ffice should hold it
with that declaration, therefore, he felt himself bound to ad-
mit the first proposition of the Noble Lord for leave to bring
in the Bill. He made this concession not merely in consistence
place removeable at the pleasure of the Crown. Ile should like'
with that declaration, but because he felt. it to he reasonable
inst Sir Francis Burdett by sending him to trial before
to ask theAttorneyeLleneral to asly, as a Gentleman, whether
he did or did not believe, that he had nearly ensured a convic-
that the measure should at least he fairly considered. The
tion aga
rt Leicestershire Special Jury. The Attorney-Oeneral had Noble Lord had adverted to three points, in which the Roman
denied that a better mode might be suggested of striking Juries.
Catholics of England stood in a different situation from those
A better mode, that of taking Juries by ballot, had already of Irelaud t the elective franchise,,the-lklagietracy, andeadmis-
sion to office. With regard to the elective franchise, he' was
been suggested.—(Hear, hear !)—Special Juries in general
were not of the antiquity mentioned by the Hon. and Learned willing to admit the English. Catholic to that privilege. Ile
had always considered the distinction taken by Mr. Burke be-
Gentleman, for they were originally formed in order to the
deciding of queetions relating to merchants' accounts. He tween the elective franchise, and admission to office, us sound
thought the subject loudly called for inquiry; he should and judicious. In a speech on the subject of the Catholic
warmly support a, motion for such an object; and lie trusted
claims, Mr. Burke said, that if the Roman Catholic* were
such a motion would be made by the Member for Aberdeen. admitted to the right of voting for Membere of Parliament, it
did not necessarily follow that they 'should be admitud to of-
Mr. J. WILLIAMS expressed his surprise that:the Attor.
fice. He must observe, that the Noble Lord would find some
ney-General had defended the present practice on the ground
diffictilty in placing the Roman Catholics of England and Scot-
Of its anthluity, rather than that of its propriety. It was the
system which was complained of; and it was no anetver to that _ land on the same footing, because by the Art of Union the
complaint to say, that the individual was a person of high chit- Roman Catholice of Scotland could not exercise the elective
racier. He waeconvinced that. they should never have fair and franchise. He was disposed, after mature consideration, to
satisfactory trials in such cases, until this large discretion were ..admit the Roman Catholics of England to the same privileges
taken out of the hands of this Officer. The Attorney and So-
licitor-General were the proper authorities to bring forward a with regard to vOting, as the Roman Catholics of Ireland ; but
lie should strenuously resist their being themselves elected. In
measure upon the subject' but if neither they nor his lion.
Friend did it, he pledged himself to undertake the task at some this respect they would standin the same eituation as the
Clergy, who were qualified to elect, though they were disqua-
early period.
:- i
Mr. HUME replied, and the Petition was ordered to il fled from sitting in that House. Time Right Honourable
Gentleman proceeded to advert to the abuses of the elective'
be printed. franchise in Ireland, where the itystern of fictitious voting con-
Mr. HUME presented a similar petition from J. U. Trust, forced no advantage whatever on the wretched individuals who
a bookseller, in confinement in 'Neivgate.— Ordered to be were brought forward solely for the purpose of supporting
printed. the political Influence of their landlords. It must be ati-
milled that the state of England was _so entirely different
Mr. IIUItIE then gave notice, that early next Session he
would move for it Committee to inquire,into die practice of
front that of, Ireland that if the grantiog of the elective fran-.
striking Special Juries.—(Hear I) chise in Ireland, had, in some restpecue been attended
111.ESSAGE. with mischievous consequences the saute danger couhl not
. .
fairly he inferred in England,
.wliere the minority of Catholics
A Message from the Lords announced that their Lortlahlpa
was notoriously. so small. Nl'itli regard to the Magistracy, be
had agreed to several Bills.
agreed with him lion. Friend (Mr; Dankest, that it might
ADJOURNMENT. , be advisable thin Ronan Catholics ithould be associated with
Mr. Secretary CANNING moved, that the House do, at Protestants in the exercise of Magisterial duties. On the clues-
its rising, adjourn to Friday. Agreed to.. tion of admission to offices he wished to reserve him melt; Ile
ENGLISH CATHOLICS. , should not object to making English Roman Catholics eligible Lord NUGENT rose to bring forward his motion for rester- to the same subordinate offices to which Irish Roman Cathe.
ing a part of the rights and privileges of the Catholic subjects lies were admissible, provided they were placed in no better
of this country. If he thought this immure would prejudice, situation than Protestant Dissenters. If it were the object of
or even interfere with the great question of general Emancipa. the Noble Lord to open the haute offices to theni as to the Ca-
tion, lie would not for the word think of proposing it to the holies of Ireland, subjecting them, in the seine manner
}louse. This was the feeling, he was quite sure, of all thosewhom as Protestant Dissenters, to the operation of the, Annual In_
the Bill would most concern. But he thought it necessary to demnity Act, he should not object to such a measure. If it
say that lie hail had no communicaton with them upon these!). introduced no new. principle which might furnish an argument
jest. What he should feel it his duty to urge on their behalf wag for further concession to the Roman Catholicit of I rehuni, if it
entirely his own, and not a prayer from them, which he believed introduced no.relaxation of the, Corporation and Test Acts, or
they would disdain to offer. If he failed to convince the alteration of the existing law with regard to Protestant Dis-
Ilouse in what he Should advance, it would be the failure of centers, he ehOuld be disposed to accede to it. All theme points
the weakest advocate in the strongest cause. There were ' involved details, which would properly come under contdera.
points peculiar to this question to which he should confine him- tion in a future stage of the Bill. Ile entirely rontearred in the
self, and none of world interfere with what way culled observations which had fallen from the. Noble Lord us to the
the great Catholic Question, on the. grounds upon which that great respectability of the Roman Catholics of Ungland, and question was proposed. It was well known that by an Act of it was this consideration which induced liim to feel sum strong a
1793'the Catholics of Ireland were restored to the enjoyment disposition to
mac concessions in their ilivour.
of certain privileges. A very short time before that the last Mr. OURNE V supported the Ili% and part icularly es pressed
penal law had been removed in reference to the right of pier- his anxiety for the mica of the test and abjuration oath.
chasing and inheriting property. The right of voting at .Nlr, BANK ES man, he had always ta)ntended tight the ex-
•elections was therefore conceded as a consequence of the re- istin exclusions of Roman Catholics Were an int!,‘,Nil part of
etoration of the right of possessing property. The Act to due Constitution. He was sorry that the stimerlotieNtte.y
which he had . alluded wax passed under singular eircum- compelled hint to differ twit" NI .Right Ilan. rill" , 1u(t.A,,..111 1; 'l.l-
- The country had been placed in circurnetances of I,(lleurnoaifidellowgeaenetetiliiiiitutpt4ttii(l3antotr
ri;!/:111.11U5AL,,,,,,,,),,Tint:,,,,,,,,,,;,„2,-ai1inti,,,,,,,,,,,;.,,,..:
danger from the digesters of the A merichn war, anti from
the pmgreSB Of-the French 'Revolution.
to
unanswerable if the tiritiqt l'arlia. •
with the great disposition to emigrate which existed in.ireland, should have etreidervilt
It .104oacinIces.s.m._
, (Hear, hear li—lie
rendered it necessary to conciliate the Irish t'ttholics. He intuit. had I,2e.eiinl.atpasrttilef
ttitt,t,_ly
These circumstances, !non or the right of voLnigl
/ wile' parties to it, huts he be-
'slipsCl a lash now in that flotnie who gae it his
mentione,l this to chew: that those Acts were considered to boy-
„kylew the m
stow e benefit upon the Catholics,' and _were not tiengerous to tieve4 theee wa
,t
.1s
slimly 0
°proms
the
vitqviture
in
those Wll.o_ Brewed Mein. Wiley were conceded as UNSice of- sanction. Ile should feel 1 I 1 t
Air. W. S3ll Tll supported die Bill.
ascendancy. In two Very important reapects the Roman:a-
Sit J. 111 ACK 1 N".11.)till highly eppletaleti the Bill, which it
,tholies of
_England suircred Under teestrienons which were im-
feritig, and they producc4 no had results to the Protestant mss future stAges.
piled upon no other :Chats of his Majestysleets,_ _
iv us ' meisure which, with reference both to the principles or
It could not vote et elections, nor could they d the Corn- et
ei , They was the object of ins Noble Friend's ituttion to ietreel ace. It
cruel and unjust exclusions, had these privileges to re- spirit of' constitutional government, was worthy of the atiop-
mission of the Peace. Evert the Irish catholies, with all their civil and religious juvtiee, and in conformity with the equal

ti mof the British Legislature. It was indeed difficult to un-
derstand what reasonable ground of exclusion there could be
aga'nit the Roman Catholics of England from those circum-
tcribed privileges enjoyed by their religious brethren of the
sinter country. He denied that the Catholics had been ex-
cluded from voting as forty-shilling freeholders on the ground
of their religious tenets. That exclusion had been carried
into effect against them by an Act of William and Mary,
passed shortly after the vaplosion of the great assassination
plot. Neither could he admit what he had heard advanced
In the course of the debate, that it was a fundamental point in
the British Constitution, that difference of religion constituted
a ground of exclusion. It was only a reason for exclusion
where the Christian religion was concerned—where the shades,
of difference laid the foundation for endless warring. But all
who would forswear the Roman Catholic religion were admis.
sible to the benefits of the Constitution, whether he were Ar-
menian, Copht, or Hindoo. He protested, therefore, against
any such false principle being assumed (el the present OCCA-
• :don, to serve the purpose of opposition to the Bill of his Noble
:Friend. it was afalse position, Urged too for the same pur-
pose, that any man who voted for this Bill must change his
opinion on the greater question.—lle should consider the pets.
- severance of the Government and Parliament in an obstinate
reftU al to agree to assimilate the condition of the Catholics of
the two countries as one of the pointed forerunners to the
downfall of the Monarchy.
Mr. WETHERELL and Sir 3. 311Acimrosit mutually ex-
plaineil ; and after a few observations in reply from Lord
_Nu oEN P, the motion was agreed to without a division.
DUTIES ON MALT AND BEER.
Mr. MABKRLEY rose to submit the motion of which he
had given notice relative to a Committee on the excise duties
levied on the two important articles of consumption, beer and
malt. His object was to persuade the House to appoint a Corn-
mittce to examine into the bearings of the question, in the con-
fident expectation that such an inquiry would lead to the result
-of making the tax on these articles more equable on the general
ransomer. He was satisfied that it would be found that it
was unfair to make the.poorer classes of the community pay a
greater tax on the same article, of necessary consumption, than
the rich man. And that this was the case, no doubt could
be entertained, when it was considered that a heavy duty
was levied npon beer, comprising that depreciated quality
of its small beer, most in use amongst the lower orders,
-whilst the wealthy orders of the land paid no duty beyond that
of the malt, which was the ingredient of their stronger beve.
rage. The poor man paid a penny a pot more than the rich,'
who was enabled to brew his own beer. It was, therefore, his
opinion, that to equalize the burthen of this duty, the tax
levied upon beer should be transferred to malt, and this, he had
no doubt he should be able satisfactorily to prove, if a Com-
mittee were granted to him. Ile understood it was to be op-
posed, and in doing so, he called upon the Chancellor of the
Exchequer to say why he did not so regulate his taxes
that they should press equally and justly on all classes and
gradations in wealth. The quantity of malt ditty annually col-
lected he believed might fairly be stated at 11,200,000/., and
the collection of it at 140,000/. • and he must also assume that
if the collection of the beer duey were to be added to the malt,
-the saving to the country would be 280,0001. a year. The
quantity of malt consumed annually appeared to be about 2tl
millions of bushels. Of this the public brewer used six millions
for strong beer, and for 1,600,000 barrels of small beer per an.
num might be added the difference to makeup eight millions of
bushels. For the distillery of spirits might be put down 400,000
bushels, and for vinegar 100,000—thus leaving a balance
of about 17,000,000 bushels unaccounted for, which exactly
sheaved the extent of the advantage of private breweries over
public. Thus it was obvious if the beer duty were taken off,
and two shillings additional 'laid upon malt, all these private
breweries would be touched, and the rich thus made to pay
thatavhich the poor only bore the weight of at present. Ile had
sheain that, by such a course, the revenue would not be hurt,
and a good principle of legislation introduced. Besides which
the trade would be thrown more open to competition, by the
means of trade becoming cheaper. He concluded by moving,
" that a Select Committeehe appointed to consider of the pre-
sent mode of taxing Malt and Beer separately, and whether it
may not be expedient to collect the same amount on Malt alone."
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said be was
aware that it motion for inquiry was always very captivating
in that House, and although it might be contended that the
very arguments he used were reasons for going int% the Com-
mittee, he should nevertheless state them. One of the Hon.
Gentlemen's arguments was, 'that by his arrangement much
',expellee of collection would be saved. In this, however, he
was mistaken, for the expence really appeared much more
than it was. The tables of collection were necessarily arbi-
trary and imperfect, because those who collected the Alta duty
,collected duties on several other articles of Excise. Thus
it was, that although some saving could be made, the whole
charge would not be saved. Again, with regard to the Re-
venue, by augmenting the duty on Malt, the temptation to
• evasion being greater, greater vigilance would be required..
This would operate against the amount of saving, and thus.
that argument of the Honourable Gentleman was not a very
weighty one. The Honourable Member, too, was wrong in
supposing that It was the wealthy landlord alone who brewed
:at home. On the contrary, it would be found that many agri-
, culturisis brewed their own beer, and that it was a very pre.
velem practice to give beer in the shape of wages to their
men. Upon. this supposition. it was, that the Honourable
Gentleman assumed that his proposal would shift the bur-
den of the duty from the poor to the rich; but he would
-see that it wOuldin reality have the very. opposite operation
in those cases. One of his objections against the_proposition
H G
'of the Hon. (gentleman was in point of, time. The way in
which it affected him in that respect was, that he was about to
introduce measures relative to the duties levied on Irish spirits,
'and as that was a serious branch of the revenue which would
entail serious inconvenience should the experiment fail, he did
-not wish to enter at the same time upon another experiment
affecting; the revenue. He did not mean to say that if he had
ant' revenue to spare he would not like to appropriate it to the
relief of the beer duty. He looked at that duty simply hi a
fiscal point of view, as a matter of finance and revenue. As,
therefore, the Hen. Gentleman had failed in chewing that them
-would be any great saving in the collection—that the poorer
(lasses would be benefited by the change, or any other advan-
Aage of a leading nature, he could see no reason for supporting
the motion.

Sir JAMES MACKINTOSH could not help remarking
on the fallacious reasoning of the Right Hon. Gentleman, who
gratuitously assumed the argument of his Horn Friend to be
'that this was a question between the poorest and the richest.—
Whereas in reality it was stated to be between all the poorer
classes and every gradation of the rich portions of the commu-
nity. This was a measure affecting all the industrious branches
of the country ; and there certainly could be no reason far not
.appOinting a Committee on the subject. The Right Hon. Gen-
Almon treated the question as complicated ; but that was a
reason for having a Committee to throw light upon it. But
least of all could it be admitted that the Right lion. Gentle-
man should found an argument against his lion. Friend, by
impugning his own official returns.
Mr. J. BENETT could not consent to any motion tending,
in the present state of agriculture, to increase the duty on malt.
Mr. HUME assured the Eight Hon. Gentleman that he was
-.himself mistaken in supposing the returns ho had quoted were
miscalculated. lie knew that, in making out those statements,
the CoMmissioners did their utmost to ascertain accurately the
proportion of the cost of collection belonging to the duty on
malt with reference to the other duties collected by the same
individual. A great saving would be made by adopting the
proposal of his lion. Friend. The poorer classes of the commu-
nity were intimately concerned in it, and on that account, as
well as the doubt and misinfinmation that seemed to exist on
the subject, sufficient ground hail been laid for going into a
Committee. Not one of his Hon. Primp; arguments had been
touched, whilst the Right lion. Gentleman had not a leg to
stand upon. 'l'ho tax upon beer had been proved to be unequal
in its operations, and therefore it'w.as unjust. Ile had no ob.
jection to the Right lion. Gentleman's fiscal regulations, as he
called them, only he called upon him to proportion the amount
of his taxes by the degree of comfort they abstracted from the
'awes on which they fell.
tiir JOHN NEWPORT observed that the effect of remov-
ing the duty on beer and increasing that upon malt, was to pro.
:mote the private brewing. He knew that That had been the
effect of such a regulation in, Ireland, for in that country, hi
thirteen years, the consumption of London beer fell off front
420,090 barrels to 30,000, showing the extent to which private
brewing was resorted to when the duty was raised. He found
that his lamented friend and the friend to Ireland, Mr. Grattan,
'in 1792, 'made a similar Motion, with the view, as lie stated it,
of removing all the oppressive excise regulation on beer. He
should certainly vote for the motion dins Hon. Friend.

Col. It 001) opposed the motion on the ground that the
.proposed change to the levying of the duties would curtail the
extent of private brewing, and greatly affect the labouring
peasantry of the nation. To raise the duty on malt would be
a strange step, after having so lately diminished it. Such
measure arould have the effect of interfering with those return-
ing habits of industry and good order which were attendant
upon the people of this nation, being able to indulge in whole-
some beverage without leaving their own fire-sides to seek it.
Mr. WODEIIO USE Could not agree to the motion of the
lion. Gentleman opposite for a Committee upon this question.
'He was more disposed to recommend him to withdraw his mo-
tion at present, upon an understood pledge that the Chancel-
lor of the Exchequer would next Session come forward to give
his serious attention to all the laws affecting the duties on malt
and beer. Nothing was more evident than that these laws
wanted revision, and that the matter was but little understood,
even the quarters where it ought best to be known. It was
clear to him that the consumption of malt had considerably
diminished for a long time past, as well as in Raol, as Scotland

and England ; and he must, therefore, express liis surprise that
the highly respected individual at the head of the Government
should continue to take the opposite of this fact as a sure
ground upon which to rest the views which he entertained on
dais and many questions.
Mr. WESTERN said, that had the motion been for taking
off the duty on Beer, or on Malt; he mould' have acquiesced
in it; but as it was with a.;view to increase the duty on Malt,
he certainly could not give his support to, ii. All private
brewing, which upon allhands it was admitted vas so bene-
ficial to the labouring poor, must be cut up by additional
two shilliugs a bushel on malt.
Mr. BYNG opposed the motion on similar grounds to the
preceding speaker
Mr. RICARDO said, it hiulleen Proved that the Beer Duty
was an-unequal tax, and that of itself was a, sufficient reason
for removing It. No lesi objectionable mode of accomplishing
that, it appeared to him, could be devised than the present, by
whkli nothing would be lost.
Lord ALTHORP wax willing to admit the principle of
equal taxation with his Hon. Friend who lied just sat down ;
but he contended it should be decided by a snore extended and
comprehensive view of the state of taxation. It should be
„borne in mind, that if the rich paid less in this individual par-
ticular, they were in some degree entitled to it, seeing how
much larger a portion of the taxes they contributed than the
pobrer classes, He could not consent to add 2s. to the duty
now imposed upon malt.
Mr. Alderman WOOD supported the motion. A Com-
mittee would shew that it was almost impossible to increase
,the duty on Malt.
Mr. MONCK spoke in favour of inquiry. He considered
the Malt Tax a Land Tax. The landholder paid more in the
operation of taxation than the fundholder.
Mr. G. BENNET considered an unequal tax was an unjust
tax. He supported the motion for inquiry. He could not see
why one class should pay twenty shillings duty, whilst another
was to pay fifty.
Mr. MABERLY replied. One class, he said, paid 24. per
gallon, and the other class sd. ; that was a state of things which
' could not continue.
The House then divided—
, For the Motion
Against it -
-Majority
PUBLIC BREWERS.
Mr. F. PALMER brought forward his motion respecting
Public Brewers, and moved for leave to bring in a bill to en-
able the public breWer to retail his beer in quantities of less
than four gallons and a half, provided the same is not sold on
the premises of the public brewer.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, the ob-
ject of the Hon. Member had in view was already provided for
by the law as it then stood.
Mr. MONCK, supported the motion, and thought a short
bill on the subject would be beneficial to the public.
Mr. HERMES opposed the motion. There was no neces-
sity for any bill on the subject.
Mr. J. BENETT made a few observations in favour of the
motion.

• 27
• 197
• -92

Mr. F. PALMER said, his object was to explain to the
public what was not generally known. A penalty of 50/. had
been recently levied on a public brewer for retailing beer. To
explain what he considered ambiguity he wished to bring in the
Bill. The lion. Member, however, after the statement of the
Chancellor of the Exchequer, did not wish to press his motion,
therefore withdrew it..
Mr. R.. MARTIN moved to bring in a Bill to regulate the
issuing of writs of capias at le,gatum, in Ireland.
The question being put, the House divided—.
Ayes . . . . 43
Noes . . 23__

-
Majority . . —2O
Leave was accordingly given to bring in the Bill.
The House Went into a Committee on the East India Acts,
and Mr. Wrzor obtained leave to bring in a Bill to regulate
the Trade to India.

.....
The Poor Laws Bill was read the, second time, and com-
mitted for Friday se'nnight.
The other Orders of the Day were disposed of, and the
House adjourned at ONE O'CLOCK'.

A LIST OF THE MINORITY
ON MR. MABEIILEY'S MOTION,

For a Committee to Inquire whether the Duty now levied on
Beer could ho transferred to Malt.

Bennet, 110n.11.G. Leader, W. Wood, Alderman
Bernal, Ralph 1%1 aberlY, W. 14. Williams, W.
Crompton, S. Martin, J. Williams, J.
Cradock, S. Newport, Sir J. Whitmore, W. W.
Denman, T. Phillips, G. jun. Wigram, W.
Fergusson, Sir R.C. Rice, T. S. Whitbread, W. D.
Folkestone, Visct. Ricardo, D.
Grattan, J. Roberts, A. W. TE,T.t.vina.
Hutchinson, lion. Roberts, Colonel Hume, Joseph
C. H. Robinson, Sir Geo. Moberly, J.
Hobhouse, J. C. Sykes, D.

PARIS PAPERS.

(From the Moufteur.)

ARMY OF THE PYRENEES.-'-FOURTH CORPS.
" ntroxT FROM HIS EXCELLENCY THE MINISTER

SECRETARY OF STATE TO TUE MINISTRY Or WAR.

Gznown, MAY, 19, 1023—at Midnight.

" Illoxarzuk—A Report of Gen. Donnadieu, dated Castel.
Teraol, 10th, six A.M. announces to me, that General Roma.
gosa and the Ist Battalion of the 10th, have pursued the enemy
as far as St. Felin, driven them out of that village, and esta-
blished themselves there for the night.
" General Romagoaa having returned to Castel.Tersol about
six o'clock this morning, reports that a great number of the
enemy had perished, and among others the Colonel of the Re.
giment of Leon.
" General Donnadieu is to march to day upon Mina, who is
at Salient.

" A report which I have this moment received from General
Curial, states that Milano, having about 3,000 men at this time
under his orders, has retired from Saint Celoni upon Arangs
de Mar, whence, without doubt, he will direct his retreat by
way of Mataro upon Barcelona.
" I have the honour to be, &c.

" The Marshal Duke de Cornegliano, MONCEY."
( From the Quotidirnne.)
PAUIS, MAY 26.—The Spanish battalions charged with the
siege of Santona, who had been neglected to be supplied with
provisions and clothing, were reduced to 200 men—theATreater
part of the soldiers having returned to their homes. The be.
sieged, in number 2,500, profiting by this circumstance, made
a sortie in the night of the 18th, and surprised the 11 and 3d
battalions of the besiegers. It is stated that the latter lost 280
men killed, drowned, and prisoners, amongst whom were the
Commandant of the 2d battalion, the two majors and adjutants,
but nothing is officially known, except that all the soldiers have
returned home, and that in consequence the siege is abandoned.
[From the Pikte of Tuesday.]
PAWN MAY 27...:-News from Madrid of the 10th inst., say
that every thing is tranquil in that capital, where the conduct of
Abiabal has excited general surprise, which, nevertheless, has
not provoked any measure against him.
Gen. &yes has been sent with 60 carabineen to the advanced
posts of the French army, to treat for the surrender of Madrid.
They are unwilling to leave till the French enter, and they wish
to have 48 hours, in order to evacuate the town without being
disturbed. This information is positive.
The following rumours are afloat this morning. According
to the reports founded on a letter from Spain, Abisbal having
wished to harangue the tinny, and declare the sentiments con-
tained in the Proclamation which has been printed, was arrest-
ed, tried, and shot,
It is also said, that on Bessieres presenting himself before
Miulrid, a violent :combat took place between the soldiers of
the Faith and the Constitutionalists, in which the latter had
the advantage. We merely give these reports because they
appear to obtain a little credit, but we do not vouch for their
truth. •

Another report says, that immediately on the dispositions of
General Abisbal being known to the troops under his orders,
the liveliest indignation displayed itself against him ; the
Officers bitterly reproached him with his conduct in the Isle
of Leon—conduct whicii should have deprived him of all con.
fidenee. He became the prisoner of his soldiers, and only
owed his life to the protection of some of the Chiefs. It is
thought he will be transported to Seville to give an account of
his conduct.

It is asserted that the Duke of Angoule►ne has refused a ca.
pitulation to the inhabitants of Madrid.

( From the Quotidie!zne.

It is reported that the troops under the command of Abisbal
to the number of MO have rebelled against their Chief so much
had they been irritated by his Proclamation. Abisbal became
their prisoner, and immediately after the officer who was at the
head of the staff set off' for our head quarters, hoping to obtain a
capitulation. His Royal Highness the Duke of Angouleme re-
fused to receive him, and continued his movement upon Madrid,

where it is believed the Duke of Reggio must have arrived on
the 23d instant.

iFrona.the Pilote.l
We announced yesterday the evacuation of St. Ander by
General Longa. EVacuation is not'the word, since the Royalis
General only quitted the place, upon' his soldiers baying aban.
doned hiM on the arrival of the Constitutional Chief Campello,
whom they joined.
The garrison of Santana made a vigorous' sally on the be-
siegers (troops of the Faith). The loss of these last has been
immense, more than 600 men. The garrison entered Laredo,
and took the provisions and ammunition from the besiegers.—
Alarm is spreading itself at Bilboa; it would not be surprising
if the Pastor (Brigadier Jauriquy) were to present himself there
soon with Campello.
A detachment that sallied forth from Lerida, met a corps of
Royalists, commanded by Illiralles; the Constitutionalists were
Victorious, after a very brisk action. The Royalists have been
cut to pieces, and their Chief killed on the spot.
It is with extreme regret that we find by our correspondence
from Gerona, details of the action which General Donnadieu
had to maintain against General Roten, details which show
that our loss is much greater than we at first thought.
The Constitutional division was entrenched on some woody
heights ; its positions were formidable. With all the impetuo-
sity of the French character, General Donnadieu immediately
ordered the attack. His order was executed with the enthu-
siasm and courage which distinguish our troops ; the enemy
sustained our attack with great sangfroid ; and not until after
a firing which lasted more than four hours, did General Roten
quit his possition to fix himself in those that were still stronger.
The ardour which our troops have shown in this affair have re-
ceived the greatest praise. It was impossible to struggle with
more advantage against the strength of position, the know-
ledge ilof locality, and the courage of the warlike soldiers 'of
General Roten.