The Sun.
London, England, 1824-05-15 00:00:00

SAT U R DAY, MAY 15, 18424.

PARLIAMENT,

!LOUSE OF LORDS, MAY 14.
A return from the Custom-house of all the exports to South
America during theyear 1821 was presented at the bar.
Mr. BRQGDEN and others, from the Com Mons, brought up
the Irish Postage Bill, and several private Bills, which were
read a first time.

IRELAND.
The Earl of LIVERPOOL' gave notice, that on Monday
next he would move the appointment of a Committee to inquire
into the state of certain districts in Ireland.

ALIEN BILL.
On the motion of the Earl of LIVERPOOL, this Bill was read
a third time.

Lord GAGE rose, and doubted whether he was now in order
in opposing this bill. His objection, however,- was not so much
to the principle of the measure as to the power it gave to the
Executive Government. According to this bill, the gallant
Mina, and the equally gallant Alava, might be arrested, sent
out of the country without a moment's previous notice, and
even placed in the power of their greatest enemies. Such a
case, he admitted, was not likely to occur; but' it certainly
might happen that a Pole or Italian refugee might be demanded
by Russia or Austria. What would be done by the Govern-
ment if an Ambassador of either of those Powers made war the
alternative of not giving up the body of the alien ?
The Earl of LIVERPOOL ohs-04W, that such a demand
was not likely to be made by any Power. He had, however,
no hesitation in saying, that if his Majesty's Government were
threatened with such a condition, they would engage in war
rather than give up the alien.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH said a few words in objection to
the power given by the Bill:
Lord GAGE had on a former occasion proposed that aliens,
on being ordered out of the country, should be allowed to go
wherever they pleased, at their own expence, but that amend-
ment had been rejected. lie would propose another amend-
ment, to prevent aliens from being sent into the hands of their
enemies.

• Lord QLIFDEN spoke strongly against the power given to
Ministers by the Bill, though, while the liberty of the press
existed, he had not much fear of seeing that power abused.
Lord HOLLAND recommended the moving an amend-
ment on the Bill, and observed, the Ministers, by continuing
this measure, exposed themselves to the demands of Foreign
Powers.

The Earl of LIVERPOOL could see no probability of
Russia or any other Power going to War on such a ground. If
any Power had a great love and desire for war, it would be
easy to find some other pretence for hostility than that al-
luded to.

Lor ELLENBOROUGII had not the least suspicion that
the power given by the Bill would be abused, but nevertheless
objected to the measure.

Lord HOLLAND would place no confidence in any man, as
it was the business of Parliament not to grant undue powers.
He believed it was not wished to abuse the power granted, but
it- might be abused without any such intention. The Bill
was in its nature altogether unconstitutional and oppresive ;
but he admitted that having once placed such powers in the
hands ,of Ministers, it was extremely difficult to frame any
clauses by which that power should be regulated. Unfortu-
nately, according to the Bill, the alien might be sent from this
country to the very place where his life was forfeited, either by
law, or any despotic decree by courtesy called law. Thus the
life of the alien was placed in the hands of Ministers. At the
same time he. was aware how difficult it was to introduce any
provision which would effectually correct this evil, if the. power
of removal was given at all.
Lord GAGE said he would take the liberty of moving that
the Bill be recommitted.

[Here a desultory conversation arose, in the course of which
'it was remarked, that the Bill had already been read a third
time, .of which some of their Lordships seemed not to be
aware. It was then suggested that Lord Gage should move an
.amendment by way of rider.l
The Earl of ROtiSLYN moved that the debate be ad-
journed during pleasure, (to give time, as we understood, for
Lord Gage to prepare his amendment.)—Ordered.
The LORD CHANCELLOR presented petitions from the
Operative Weavers and the Engiae,weavcrs of Spitaltields
against the Silk Bill, after which the 4bate on the.4lien
was resumed. .

Lord GAGE moved a clause, as a rider, the object of which
was to provide that no alien should in any case be, without his
own consent, transported to any dominions under the authority
of the Sovereign of his own country.
The Earl of LIVERPOOL thought that the Noble LOrd
could not fail to perceive that this clause would have no effect
with reference to the object he had in view. It was necessary
that the Government should have the power of forcing aliens
Out of the country, or there could be no dependence on their
going out. Ile objected to the restrictions wished to be im-
illy,tiadfieyrcoi. ,
P4Tlsaeitnile:itroicrlloollltalgrttleinsiahctnesilirstsiat3oidnii Not
The Bill was then passed. Majority •
Incoonibrilttoheleittlasems2iere:rtiolenset—nd•Slp2aniards to
Lord CLIFDEN presented a Petition from the Noblemen,
Gentlemen, Land-owners, Scc., of the county of Kilkenny, '
against the Tithe-composition Bill.
SILK BILL.
The Earl of LAUDERPA LE having moved the Order of
the Day for the second reading of this Bill, proceeded to ad-
dress their Lordships in its support., lie began by referring to
the Statutes•of the 13th, 82d, anti 53d of the late King. Hav-
ing explained the nature of the restrictions impoied by these
Acts, he adverted to the Dublin Society, from which a Peti-
tion relative to the Silk Trade had lately been presented to the
House. That Society, as for as he could judge, was composed
of Lords and Gentlemen, who under an Act of Parliament
made it their business to settle the wages of labour. Thus it
appeared that Parliament had vested this Dublin Society with
as much power as Parliament itself possessed. When freedom
was made the rule with respect to manufactures, it- would surely
only be necessary to state the existence of such laws to get them
repealed. He could anticipate no opposition front the side of
he
the because, in the sentiments he
of trade, his Noble Friends near
telitleterltlEtoiluiesde orenspwehcitcinhg
hint always concurred. At another time, he-might have ex-
pected to meet with registanee from the other side of the House;
for though the speeches of the Noble Lords who sat there had
for some time teemed with the most perfect theory of commer-
cial freedom, their practice had hitherto been very different.
This Session, however, he had had the satisfaction of seeing the
commencement of a more consistent conduct; and he hoped
they would not on the present occasion act in direct opposition
to their avowed principles, but that on the contrary they would
endeavour to carry them into practice. A Bill, the same as that
which he now propoSed, had passed a second reading last year.
Having, then, already sanctioned the principle of the mea-
sure their Lordships would not surely act so inconsistently as
to refuse a second reading to the present Bill. A measure
had already passed, by which all the restrictions were to be
removed in the year 1826 ; and lie wished their Lordships now
to consider, whether it would be right to pamper those restric-
tions until the time when the foreign-importations should take
place, which would render all the precautions they had taken
abortive. It was hoped that by the mae • efy which the
of this country could afibrd to put in i ion, we should be en-
abled to out-sell everycountry; but h ished to know what ? capital
en-
couragement the master manufactuAr would have in employ-
ing his capital to improve a trade from which he could derive
no benefit. By the exercise of the ingenuity and industry of our
manufacturers, this country Might hope to enjoy the advantage
of an export silk trade ; but while the law remained in its pre-
sent state, that was impossible. Their LOrdships knew that
the British manufacturers of muslin had 'outdone the
article; and
manu-
facturers
of India in that though wages in
France were low, they were not low in the .same proportion
as wages in India. There was, therefore, no reason, if the
restrictive laws were repealed, why the manufacture of silk
might not be brought to such a state in this country as to
render it as great an object of export as cotton. But it was said
the journeymen would stiffer by the alteration he proposed. On
this subject, he begged leave to say, that he stood there with
the wish of equally supporting the interests of the journeymen
and the masters. It was, indeed, impossible
to separate these
interests in the view he took ; for he well knew that if a free
trade existed, the master could. not obtain an advantage, With-
out at the same benefiting the journeYman ; but
the regulations
he wished to do away pecluded the operation of this principle.
Suppose the journeyman to apply, tinder the Act he had quot-
ed, to a Magistrate for an increase of wages, the Magistrate
judged of the necessity of the rise by the price of the quartern
loaf. If at the lagt adjustment the loaf was -13 d., anti at the
time of the application it was 10d., the Magistrate thought he
did enough if he raised the wages of the weaver one-fourth.—

But nothing could be more iejurious to the interest of the jour-
neyman weaver than this fixed price for the article he made.—
On an increased demand, he would obtain higher wages, but
he was tied-down by the price of the huartern loaf. On the
other hand, when the' trade became languid, the master could,
not afford-to pay the fixed' price'; he withdrew his capital, ash
the journeyman was thrown-out of employment. Another hard-
ship created by the law was the restriction respecting- appren-
tices. A weaver could have no more than two. Thus, when
old age or infirmities had rendei.ett a man, who had deiotAi
himself to a profession which required the exertion of grlat in-
genuity, incapable of earning a livelihood by the labou; of his
hands, he was prohibited from supporting himself by teach-
ing others. He might haVe a large family of childretf,- and. in
that case it would be natural for him to wish to employ them ;
but the journeyman must sacrifice his paternal affection to the
restriction of this impolitic law. The 'Noble Earl, next called
their Lordships' attention to the regulations in the weavers'
price book, and pointed out the injastice of only tie same price
beinga
With regard to Ettic-- y work. it
never was carried on to a less. extent than at the moment he
sa allowedyard
orphearlyfa a rd
y forard. certain articles, wheber the width
was addreSsing their Lordships.. When that .work was reou-
t
w
hated by law, the labour Of two persons was necessary ; but
since machinery was introduced, one was sufficient ; yet,- not-
withstanding the advanthge gained by machinery, this branch
of the trade had declined; because the master was obliged to
continue to pay for two persons, though he needed only one:
After alluding to several other circumstances, in whiCh the
disadvantage of the restrictive system .was experienced, the
Noble Earl concluded by expressing ahope that the observa-
tions he had made would induce their Lordships to proceed to
the second reading of the Bill. .

The Earl of IIrESTIIIORI,AND opposed the motion for
the second reading. From every thing he had heard, and what
he had heard was confirmed by the petitions on the table, as
much alarm preyailed now among the industrious population
of Spitalfields as last year. It would be better to see what
effect the law lately passed would have before their Lordships
proceeded farther. He thought it a very serious matter rashly
to disturb the minds of great masses of people. The silk-trade
was not said to be at present in a state of distress, and.conse-
quently there was no ground for immediate interference. To
put an end to long-existing regulations was a thing which
ought not to be hastily done. He would let the matter stand
as it was this year, and therefore moved as an amendment, that
the Bill be'read this day six months.

Lor ELLENBOROITGH thought the present the best time
for removing the restrictions, and intimated his deterniination
to vote for the Bill.

Their Lordships then divided on Lord WESTWESTMORLAND'S
amendment—

Content, 8 I Not content, 23 I Majority, 15.
The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered to be
committed on Tuesday.—Adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

Mr. HERBERT presented a petition from the Rev. Martin
Joseph Routh, It esident of Magdalen College, Oxford, against
the St. Catherine's Dock Bill.—Referred to the Committee un
the said Bill.

Mr. LAAIBTON presented a petition from the inhabitants
of Mile-end Old Town, praying to be heard by Counsel against
the Mile-end °hi Town rates on the table.
Alderman WOOD presented a petition from the Governors
of Bridewell Hospital, against the Thames Tunnel Bill.—Laid
on the table.

Sir R. WILSON presented a petition from the Churchwar-
dens of St. John's, Southwark, praying to be heard by Counsel
agalnst certain clauses of the South London Docks Bill.—Re-
ferred to the Committee on the Bill.

The gallant General also presented a petition from the Rev
J. C.llamblin, against the said Bill.

Alderman WOOD moved the second reading of the Thames
Navigation Debt Bill.

Alderman C. SMITH objected to the measure as a mere job.
Alderman WOOD said, if it were a job, it was the most ex-
traordinary one that was ever heard of. It was a job that
would benefit the public by reducing the tax on coals, and
which would render the navigation of the Thames free several
years sewer than that object could otherwise be effected. It
would effect a saving of 120,0001. to the public.—_The Bill was
then read-a second time.

The British Annuity Company Bill was read a second time,
and committed.

BOSSINEY PLECTION.
Sir M. RIDLEY appeared at the • Bar, with the Report of
the Committee on the Bossiner Election Petition. The Re-
port, after describing what parties were eligible to vote for the
Members of Parliament in the borough of Bossiney, went on
to state, that J. S. Wortley, Esq. was duly elected, and that
J. R. Tunny, Esq. was not duly elected. The Committee
termined that the petition did not appear to be frivolous or
vexatious, and that the opposition to it was not frivolous or
vexatious:

'POOR LAWS' (SCOTLAND) AMENDMENT BI
Mr. MAXWELL presented a petition from the Presbytery
of Paisley, as we understood, against the above Bill.
Thc... LORD ADVOCATE defended the existing system
of Poor Laws in Scotland.

Lord A. HAMILTON supported the Bill for.their amend-
ment.

Mr. HUME wished to give the power of assessing to the
Clergy and the Heritors,instead:ofleaving it in the hands of the
Elders, who were not themselves liable to assessment. 'He de-
sired, also, to deprive the Magistrate of the right of ordering
relief, and to transfer that power to the Elders, from whom he
took the privilege of assessing. He further suggested that the
Bill for amendment should go on, and that the full discussion
should be taken at the second reading.
Mr. HOME DRUMMOND expressed himself hostile to
the Bill.

Mr. KENNEDY defended the principle of the Bill, but re-
served himself for discussion on a future occasion.

Sir GEORGE CLERK regretted that the Bill should he
pressed, and said that the feeling in Scotland was decidedly
against it.
Mr. Al XWELL was decidedly opposed to approximating
the Scotch Poor Laws to those existing in England.
The petition was then read, and ordered to lie on the table,