The Sun.
London, England, 1812-03-10 00:00:00

DRJJRY.LANE'I'IIEATRE AMENDMENT BILL.

On the question for t he ,third reading of this Bill,,
The Du.ke of NORFOLK rose,' and declared his
disapprobation of the Bill in its present shape.—
There were some clauses 'which he thought highly
neces,ary to render it worthy, the concurrence of
their Lordships, and which he meant to propose.—
His Grace took a view of the progress of the 'rata-
sure,includingthe a.e.l of-last Sessions, from its first
Ilse to the Bill' now, in its last ,stage before their
Lordships.- The real faa was, that -a:principle of
exclusive right was claimed and acted upon, in
these measures, and while, it was
,kted upon, the
people of England, of of the metropolis, could have
only two houses adapted for the species of amuse-
went tb.which the Bill referred. The very great
difference between the British- metropolis in the-pe-
riods in which the patents were granted, audit the
present (lay, formed a material pint of the considera-
tion. The population of the metropolis was not
then one-third equO to what it.had .now become,
and the faOS proved, that under the monopoly, the
Proprietots or Managers could not, with their two
Theatres,- accommodate such an increased popula-
tion, so, -as to hear a just. proportion to the powers of
the hilman voice or the human eyes ; in come-
quence, they were obliged to have recourse fo exhi-
bitionsof amoSt 'unprecedented extraordinary
such as the introduction Of the monsters of
Africa, and °ther, distant c•itueS, upon the stage,
forining-loathsomie or disgUstiog sp-ttacles. These
praerices were to be attributed, to the monopoly.—
Grace then 'adverted to the private boxes, the.
principle,of which he, seemed tl disapprove. The
people of England, -he observed, had a right to a -
general admission to a public-Theatre—no part of it
should be•exclusively appropriated to the rich.
shOuld therefore propose the exclusion of the
vain clause. It was upon ilus• giineral ground that
lie ohjetted to such exclusiye:appiopriatioos;- with
respect to the rise in prices, the. e6nsideratinn was .
very different looking a, lire comparative value of
money, it was what the proprietors had,a right to
do; but when, from the effects of exclusion, whole
ranks of boxes were• seen empty, the oppoSitibn
which was wade:.to- the practice, wai, ,unon the
principle which he had referred,- in his mini, '
fully juqifiable-; and in consequence of the oppo-
sition that was made, the number of ttrese private ei
boxes,.were greatly reder.,.(l. His Grace concluded
by knot 0,7, for the omission of. those parts of the
clause relauve to tic appropriation of private trox.
to• which he had adverted, for the purpose of intro-
dicing an enaCtment modelled agreeably-to hi's idea
upon the sabjed, and providing that the' 'approffrsa-

.His Grace proceeded to.observe, it bad' been his
intention to have secured boxes for tire di?titipuisb-
ed persons alluded to by the NOble Ear;, swim.
others ; at the stme time he retained his convittrons
as to the general right of the public. fie coucwred,
with the 'Noble Kul-as to-the attention proper to be
paid to this widow of tine person, who was So grtat
-an
.ornament to the_ stage, and country. He
then adverted to the pokers giVeri
_Ore Bill to the
Committee. .With. respect to the leasint, the •boxes
in question for twenty-one-years, I.e proposed to
amend this provision by 'substituting one year" for
the numberproposed, which would ittford ati oppor.
tunny fcr Conipe itiOn at the end of a year.
moved to this„effed— .
The Earl of t6SSLYN 34;119 rov, and' obserye4,
that_. the proposed reply: l. 01) was necessary, in or-
der to procure tbelmoney rrquisite for the
taking.
The Duke of NottrotK then adverted to the Cdn-
sideraticm of die .pdtents, anti s!rongly objected to_
the Bills ;ending to render them valid. fle.ath'erted
to the distin4oif bet weon patents Of cotrimercirl
and those of another nature.; and' aliudcd to the
circumstance of one of his ancestors, an Earl of
Surrey, who enjoyed a p.itept for licens.ng pubitc-
houses in London and Westtniniter. If t h errs
to stand goodi the successors of thatl'N,bleman,
from the powers conferred,.would be among
the richest persOns in the realm. He knew 'it was
nut expi-essly statet! in the Bill that the patents
should obtain, but %hey were recited _in the
pream-
ble, and they cons,tituted one of the leading leaturc.'s
.in the Report signed by an Honderable Gentleman,
and it had- gone; forth, that upon this Report thu
'Ael was founded. He was averse from conferring
`any new ri,,,hrs as to the patents, but that Hwy should
stand upon tlrefOoting they did before.

The Earl ct RossLv r contoaded, . there were no
wordi in tke Bin tending to audio; ise, recognise,
or establish the "I)owers.9.4t.theSe patents.
The Eall of LAUDEOALE Concurred hi a great
part of \ghat had fallen horn the NAle Duke; ha
felt with !him, as to the principle of monopoly, it
was in al.l instances equally vicious, and he would b
one of the last tOsupport this 11111 if it went to va•
patents;" hut as this was a.p. int which
pet hat s several No>le Lards had not sAiciently.
Consi4red, lie would propose that the further (Ifs.
cussi.o.n Of the pant he postponed till% to-

Lofd EaSkiNc'declared Isis opinion, that the Bill
would not add to the validity of 'tha patents \vivid'
involved a principle of law, to be decided upon by
'all' the Judge;, should the s'ubjed betutar a matter
bi..legd inquiry: •
Earl GREY seemed. inclined ' for an adjonrnment
,of- the diScussion, as he was one yf those who had
not suflicientlj', perhapt.i,e6:-!sirk,red th;s part of the
sabjet. SoMe Nol_11:.; a!:&Learned.Lord could per-
haps •speak decisively upon the point. Lord Ile-
d;_ts,aale thought that nothing in the Bill coOld have
the-r-11,;611 Sil TOStd "by the Noble Dol;e. The for-
mer 13,11 stated the patents in the stu:e -Way and
tmlesi; -the clause could extend to the former Bill, the
considennion he thou•ght would rat her raise-a dotibt.
Ilie._delay •of one '4,ly, (or the. purposes of furtl.ee
coubrdectation could not be materidi. •
I.qaD CitANcriuma was of opinion the Bill
eonll have no effect on the'queStion of monopOly,
h;rt was not authorised by the last Bijl,. It the
terms did riot apply to the former Act,• it.t,tould he
considtred that • every•thing dare upon the faittt of
the former. Am, Was upon the faith t tat the ['males
'should have the bentAits Of that Ad, whatever I tie.y
Were. sTiris Ati Could' not, put the question of the,
monopoly Li.-leond whit rhe former Act had given.
The Marquis of DOUGLAS was of opinion the
proposed delNy should be acceded to.

Lord EtzskiNE pointediy observed, it w.:} impßs-
sible the but. recitation of the Patent
any validity to it.
The Lail of I,AupEttnstE spoke in explanaticn, as
(Id Lord Redes;;Jle, vhu urgtd the consgkratiou,
that unless thTs Bill should pass against a certain.
daj', the forittel 1 iil, from its own -en 4.tinerit, would
be dotte'aw.iy alt; ;ether.
litter a tew tlnt.t)er remarks from Lord Erskine:

and his Grace of Norfolk, the question was put, on
the proposition for adjourning the debate, and sub-
sequently on the arn.zndment proposed by the Noble

Duke, and both negatived A'ito=iu, a division. "Af-
ter which the Bill was read a third time, and passed;
as was also the Nottingham Watch and Ward Bill.
The other Bills' on the table were forwarded, and
the House adjourned to-morrow.

HOUSE OF COMMONS:

bIONDAY, MARCH 9.

Sir A. PIGOT gave notice that, he would move to-
morrow for le:iv- to bring in a Bill respetting Infant
Suitors the G.urts of Equity:
_ _ _ _ . _

, Mr. M. A. TAYLUR moved, that the Com-
mittee on Chaucery Suits should have !care to sit,
notwithstanding any adjournment of the House,
and that the evidence taken before the last Corn-
:Dian should be refcrred to the 'present.—Agreed
to.

Mr. WILSON (frf,nl Chelsea Hospital) presented
accimnts of the Prize Money, which were ordered
to lie on the table.

Mt% CROKER postponed the Marine Mutiny Bill,
and gave notice that his Right Hun. Friend, the
First Lord of the Admiralty, would move in the
Committee of Sivi:ply an estimate for breaking wa-
ter in Plymonth Sound.
The Annual Indemnity Bill went through a Com-
mittee, abd the Report was ordered to be received

'. Mr. KENUICK presented a Petition from cer-
tain Masters in Chancery,. praying for leave to
bring in a Bail to enable them to lay out 5001. Ki-
m:tally in tire purchase of ground contiguous io the
Court. .

The notice resi etiing the Marriage Adt, was post-
poned to Wednesday:

BANicERS' EMBEZZLEMENT BILL.

Mr. Daummo ND moved ;be second reading of the
Bankers' Ewbezziement

- - -
Mr. iVlOrtats expiessed Lis regret that the objec-
tions he had formerly stated to this Btil were rather
strengthened than removed by consideration ; nor
did he think it capable of any modification in a
Committee, which could re:der it-fit be adopted
by the Ho,tse. The great objettion to it w, s, that
it operated as an unnecessary t-iJettsioo of the penal
code, in order to protect individu3l4 who, by the
exercise Of: an orcurnyy degree of circumspection,
would iirtatect themselves. It would also lead to
greet embareasurteitt in Courts pt Equity, and in
many'elses ayi6-lation of that fundarnent.d maxim,
that no person should 'le obliged to criminate him-
Self. He could not gtve his consent to make a breach
of trust liable to the penal code.
Mr. WILSON and Mr. H. SMITH spoke oil the
same side.

Mr. Daummoom said the existing law was found
to be insufficient, and he saw no t.arm which was
likely to tujloW !torn permitting the Bill to go into
a Committee.

The Biil was then read a second time, and order-
td to be committed ou Friday be'nnight.

FRAME WORK BILL

On the motion at Mr. Secretary Ryder, the Lords
Amenlments to the frame-work Bill were taken
into considetalion.

The SPEAKER Called the attention of the House
to the amendment of the Lords to the clause for
punishing those who, having frames broken in their
houses, did not inform in t 4 hours. The Commons
hid rendered this offence punishable by fine and
,imprisonment, to which the Lids had added the
words " or either," thereby altering the penalty.
This he behaved was an interference the House
was not in the habit of alltming. The amendment
was rejected.
Mr. W. \VYNNE said, he understood the effeet of
tpis Bill had already begun to strew itself in Not-
tinghamshire, by shutting up gll sources of informa-
tion, and the opinions of many of the Magistrates
were hostile to the measure.

Mr. RYDER said, that it many Magistrates disap-
proved, there were many who aprroved of it. He
knew of no sources of information which the Bill
could shut up, for it was the peculiar misfortune of
this case that there were no sources open.
Mr. W. WYkNE said, he did nut allude to such
information as could be brought into Courts of Jus-
tice, but merely so private sources.

Mr. J. Salmi siid, it was the general opinion that
such sources were 0os:A by the,Bill.
Mr. RYDEIL said, no description of information
had reached the Government; it was rather
Gull to suppose that the Bill could close a door which
ivasneveropen.

Sir J. NB-%t P. UHT disapproved of sanguinary pe-
balties• arising out of the passionsof-the tiloment,
which he maintained never effetted their Object.
' The 'CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER denied
that it was ever represened,. that by making the of-
fence a felony, the discovery of evidence w6old be
facilitated. The prinCiple upon witt, ti the nolsure
went, was, that by increasing the penalty, ;lie dis-
poition to commit the offence would be lessene.l.
_ .

After some further observations from Mr. C.
Adams, a Committee was appointed to prepare a
paper containing the
.grounds of their disageetnent.
Tne Committee having retired for a few minutes,
Mv. Ryder brought up the Report, which was
agreed to, and Lord Walpole was sent to demand a
Conference with the Lords upon the subject.
The Committee on the Penitentiary Houses Bill
was postponed to Friday next.