The Sun.
London, England, 1823-03-25 00:00:00

THOMSON'S CONSPECTUS.
4
New Edition, greatly improveiL With an Appendix on Poi-
sons, a Selection of Extemporaneous Prescriptions. and an
Analysis of Mineral Waters.
This Day was published, price ss, a Pocket Edition of
ACONSPECTUS of the PIIARMACO-
MIAS of the LONDON. EDINI3URGII, mid Dlll
LIN COLLEGES of PHYSICIANti ; being a Practical Cuu.
pendium of Materia Medica and Pharmacy.
By ANTHONY TODD THOWON, F.L.S. &c.
Printed for Thomas and George Underwood, ps, Fleet-
Street ; and Burgescaud Hill, Great Windmill-street.

PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS MARCH 24.
The House met at eleven o'clock in the morning. The
Royal Assent was notified by Commission to the Mutiny Bill,
the Royal Marine Mutiny Bill, the Lime Exemption from
Toll Bill, the Arms (Ireland) Bill, the Yeomanry Corps (Ire-
land) Bill, the Portman- square Improvement Bill, and a few
other local and private Bills.
The Commissioners were the Lord Chancellor, the Earl of
Shaftesbury, and Lord Viscount Alelville.
Mr. Irving, from the Custom-house, presented Annual Ac-
counts respecting Trade and Navigation.—Ordered to lie upon
the table.

A local Bill was brought up from the House of Commons
by Lord Granville Somerset and other Members, and read a
first time.

MISCELLANEOUS.
Earl BATHURST' presented a Petition from certain Com.
missioners of the Turnpike Roads in the County of t;louces-
ter, against the General Turnpike Act.. Laid on the .table.
The Marquis of HERTFORD presented a Petition from
Cornwall, against tha.COST Duties. Laid on the table.
Lord SALTOUN presented a Petition from the inhabitants
of the Island of St., Vincent's, Nevis, and the *Virgin Islands,
complaining of Colonial distress, and praying for relef. Laid
on the table.
The Earl of SHAFTESBURY presented a Petition from
the Port-reeve and inhabitants of Honiton, against the Insol-
vent Debtors' Act. Laid on the table.

Mr. lams°' from the Custom-house, presented the Annual
Returns of the Trade and Navigation of the United Kingdom.
Laid on the table.
THE NAVY.
Earl DARNLEY was glad to find that his Majesty's Minis-
ten had at last acted on the principle which he had suggested
two years ago, respecting the reductions practicable in the
Department of the Navy, connected with the dock-yards and
the building of ships. They had reduced what might be called
the inactive expences, and augmented the active expences
of the Navy, by an additional vote of 3,000 Marines to the
service. If a larger addition had been called for, it should
have had his support. For though he did not mean to an-
ticipate the discussion which the Noble Earl opposite bad
promised should take place shortly, he could not but observe,
that if nor negociations at Verona had been backed by a
considerable naval armament, we should not have found
ourselves in the situation of having made remonstrances in
vain. Ile could not help wishing, under the present circum-
stances, that he should see more active preparations made to
fit out an imposing squadron. lie was not one of those who
entertained sanguine hopes that peace could be preserved on
the Continent, but want of preparation was much more likely
to provoke war, than a manifest readiness to meet it. Indeed
if war took place abroad, he could hardly conceive that this
country would long remain in a state of tranquillity, unless she
showed that she was fully prepared to enter into the contest.
The Earl of LIVERPOOL differed in one respect from the
Noble Earl. He doubted the policy of saving what the Noble
Earl called the inactive expence of the Navy, and of carrying
the active expences to a greater extent. The true policy for
this country was to take care that a large fleet should be pre-
pared and preparing for times of war; it would be found that
at no period had greater efforts been made to complete the pre-
paration of a considerable fleet; and he could say, that that ob-
ject was almost entirely accomplished to as full a degree as any
person whatever might desire. As to keeping a great number
of ships in commission, he doubted the wisdom of the measure,
as it had always been found, at the breaking out of a war, that
the sailors taken from the merchant-service were more efficient
than those who had been kept on board men of war during the
inaction of peace. An augmentation had been made to our
naval force, not with a view to intimate that the policy of the
Government was not one of peace, but because when war'was
likely to break out in any part of Europe, It became this coun-
try.to be ready for every emergency.
Lord ELLENBOROUGII contended, that if it were possi-
ble, under circumstances like the present, to make reductions
in our establishments, they would have been still more practi-
cable in 1818.

After a few words from Earl DARNLEY the conversation
dropped.
The Earl of ABERDEEN was understood to move for
returns of the number of Appeals to the Douse of Lords, from
the 3d of May, 1813, to the present period.—Ordered.
The Marquis of LA NSDOWN presented a petition from
the Inhabitants of Plymouth, against the Plymouth Bridge
Bill.—Laid on the table.
Earl POWIS presented two Petitions from Shrewsbury, the
one for a better regulation of the mode of recoveridg Small
Debts, and the other against the Insolvent Debtors' Act.—Laid
on the table.

NA T lONA L DEBT.
The Earl of LIVERPOOL having moved the third reading
of the National Debt Reduction
The Marquis of LANSDO\VN said, that in order to record
his opinion that the alleged surplus of Income was not what
the Ilill represented it to be, he should move an amendment
that the word Three should be inserted, instead of Five

-.l:4'ariliARNI.EY wished, that if the surplus really amount-
ed to Five Millions, only Three Ali Mons should be applied
to the purposes of the Sinking Fund, and the other Two should
be applied to the relief of the people and the repeal of taxes.
The Earl of LIVERPOOL contended, that the arrange-
ment between the Government and the Bank being concluded,
whatever might be thought of its wisdom, no one could doubt
that there was for six years a disposable surplus of five mil.
lions. There was nothing mysterious in the arrangement ; it
was the plainest and simplest transaction which could possibly
be conceived. Neither was the mode of reducing the weight
of the Dead Money unfair, either to the persons whose inte-
rests were concerned, or to posterity. It would be unfair to
posterity if more were laid upon it than upon the public; but
that wati not the case. Much present relief was certainly ob.
tained, but it was obtained in the best possible mode. For
had the Dead Money Annuities been suffered progressively to
expire, they would have dribbled away in an imperceptible
manner, and it would have been impossible for his Majesty's
Ministers to square the taxation 'to the fallings in. To reduce
the taxes one, two, or three hundred thousand pounds a year,
would not only have made their diminution insensible to the
public,' but would have prevented a great reduction being
effected in their amount_

Lord 14N0 supported the amendment.
Lord BEXLEY maintained that the present Bill was a re-
turn to the original principle of Mr. Pitt's Sinking Fund, and
that no unfair burthen was thrown on posterity.
The Marquis of LANSDOWN had never said a word
that could lead to an opinion that the arrangement made was
not just towards the individuals whose interests were concern-
ed ; neither had he ever heard a word to that effect. His only
objection was, that during a period of 45 years a burthen was
cast opon posterity which did not.fairly attach to it. With re-
spect to the pretended Surplus of five millions, could that be
called a Surplus which was obtained by loan, anti for which in-
terest was to Le aid, and to he paid by that posterity for the
relief of which those five millions were to be applied to the
Sinking Fund ?
After a few worth from Earl DARNLEY, the amendment was
put and negatived, and the Bill read a third time, and ordered
to be returned to the Commons.
KING'S PROPERTY.
The Earl of LIVERPOOL moved that the King's Pro.
per.y Regulation Bill be read a third time.
Lord .tiIIibENBOROUGH wished to know whether the
Noble and Learned Earl on the Woolsack was now prepared
to answer the questions which he had put to him on a former
night ?
-The LORD CHANCELLOR observed that the questions
put to hint embraced several objects. They were connected
with a notice of what was passing in the other House; and one
part of the inquiry was whether It would be necesaary to prci-
ceecl by Bill. Now with respect to the necessity of his Ma-
jesty's proceeding by Bill to give his personal property or
personal chattels to any individual, the object to be considered
was the situation of the person upon whom the gift was con-
ferret!. His Majesty might dispose of his personal chattles
without a Rill, if that party to whom they were granted were
capable of taking then, without one. If money were wanted
on the part of the Trustees of the British Museum to take the
benefit of his Majesty's donation, then a Bill would be wanted.
It was his decided opinion that generally his Majesty had the
power of giving his personal chattels away in his life time,
and had it not, been for the Act of the 39th and 40th of his late
Majesty, it would have been a doubtful question whether he
might not distlose of them by will as well as by act during
life. Ilis Lordship then quoted several authorities to show

that the Kings of England had formerly possessed the right of
disposing not of the personal property alone, but of the lands
of the Crown. A change had been made in the reign of Queen
Anne, when a certain portion of lands had been set apart
for the support of the Crown, but before that time it had been
allowed to alienate its own
.property. The powers with which
the Crown had been thus invested were still unchanged with
respect to the disposal of its personal chattels, anti the exer.
else of them was still lawful, he used that word as a Lawyer,
not a Statesman, to do whatever jt was not restrained from
doing by Act of Parliament. The doctrine formerly enter-
tained was, that the Crown might dispose of every thing it had
jure coroner. The opinion of Lord Holt was not doubtful on
the subject: " What," said he, " shall a person who has
large estates before he comes to the Crown, be deprived of the
right of disposing pf them because he has come to the Crown ?"
But in the time of Queen Anne, when so many great grants
were made, the right 'was carried to such extents that Lord
Bolt's reasoning I?ecame out of the question, and restraints
were passed. But there was nothing in the Statute which af.
fected the power of the Crown with respect to its personal
chattels. The Nth and 40th of his late Majes'ty stated what
descriptions of property the King might dispose of. Since
that Act had passed, he could not bequeath such property
though he iniAt give it away in his life time.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH admitted the explanation of the
Noble and Learned Earl to be satisfactory only so far as it
proved that he firmly believed the opinion which he advanced.
Ile (Lord Ellenborough) contended that the Joe Coroner was
not the Common law, but an exception to it, and that formerly
the property of the Crown was governed by quite different
laws. The • Sovereign was not then absolute proprietor,
but merely guardian of the property. The Noble Lord then
entered into a history of several ancient Kings, to show that
they had not the power of disposing of Crown property. He
contended that Lord Coke had stated distinctly, tlyit the King
could not dispose of the jewels of the Crown, which were con.
sidered as an heir-loom. With respect to the Bill on their
Lordship's table, he could not but consider it as a declaration
that his Majesty intended to separate his private property
from that of the Crown. And when another 11111 in the other
House informed him that his Majesty was giving away hi;Li-
brary without an Act of Parliament, it struck him that it might
be done in order that the King might have equal power to dis-
pose in the same manner, of all other personal property of
the Crown. His late Majesty having many children, might MI.
turally have wished for such a power, in order to share his pro.
perty among them; but in the present instance that could not
be the case. It was remarkable that his Majesty had for eight
years applied the revenues of the Crown to the improvement'W
his personal property. Other Sovereigns had lived in Royal
palaces, and all that they had spent upon them had been for
the public ; Majesty had chiefly resided and spent the
Royal income on his personal estates, of which he NW wished
to have the independent disposal. Had not the subject been
considered in a different point of view, when in 11116, 20,00 W.
hid been given out of the I)roits of Admiralty to purchase
furniture for the Pavilion at Brighton ; but a new light hail
broken on his Majesty's Ministers. ?is for him, it appeared
to him that the Crown ought to be considered a sufficient equi-
valent for the loss of all other property. He objected to the
present Bill, that it gave the feelings of private property, and
of a subject to one who ought to he without. He felt that he
should not have done his duty if he had not stated his doubts on
the subject.

The -LORD CHANCELLOR trusted that when he had said
that in point of law the King had a right to dispose of the pro-
perty of the Crown, the Noble Lord would not suppose that he
meant to extend it to the jewels of the Crown, which were im-
properly called an heir-loom. As it was mentioned-in the Act
that they could not be alienated, it was an additional reason for
considering that property not of that description which mightbe
aliehated. He would also observe, that his late Majesty had
asked nothing personal by the 39th and 40th of his reign, for
the power given by that Act, was not for-him alone but for all
his successors, and was one which he had never used himself.
The Earl of LIVERPOOL said that tharnanner in which
the Noble Baron had expressed himself made it necessary,
though observations did not in fact apply to the Bill before the
House, but to a transaction in another place, that he should
enter into some explanation. It, was due to the Government
and to the Sovereign on the throne that he should repel the
idea started by the Noble Baron, that there was some trick
between the liberal gift made by his Majesty to his people,
and the Bill now on their Lordship's table. Ile should ask his
Noble and Learned Friend on the Woolsack, whether the two
transactions were not totally unconnected with each other ?
Whether his Noble Friend did not know that his Majesty had,
been anxious to have the power conferred by this Bill three
years ago, whilst the gift of the Library had only been thought
of within the last few months ? Deeply did he regret that the
Noble Baron should have founded such a charge on a trans-
action which filled every mind in the country with sentiments
of gratitude, and did equal honour to hiM who had collected
that mass of human learning during 60 years, and to his Ma-
jesty who gave it, not to the British Museum, not to any par-
ticular institution, but put it at the entire disposal of Perlis-
ment, to be used and applied as it would think most expedient.
He thought it too much that Such an act of liberality should
produce such insinuations, and that it should be combined with
a measure with which it had no connection whatever as a mere
trick. It was the wish of the August Personage, that Parlia-
ment should dispose of his library in the way which it would
think most advantageous to the country. When the Bill un
the subject should come before their Lordships, then, would be
the time for the Noble Baron to discuss its merits, and for him,
(Lord Liverpool) to supply fresh explanations; 'he would, how-
ever, say that it had no reference whatever to the King's per-
sonal property. Ile should not enter into the question,
whether the 39th and 40th of his late Majesty, had been a wise
measure ; but he should ask whether his present Majesty,when
Prince of Wales, hating acquired property as a subject, which
he was then, and of which, as such, he had a right to dispose,
the House would deprive him of that right because he had as-
cended the Throne ? He put it on the ground of strict justice,
he wished for no favour, no liberality—liberality, in this in-
stance, was all on the side of the Throne—whether his Majesty
having acquired proper!), as a subject, they would deprive him
of that same power which he might exercise as a subject, be.
cause he was on the throne ? Should he be the only man to his
dominions who should not have the right of doing an act of in-
dividual kindness to members of his family, or to any others
whom he might think proper ? lie could not believe that there
would he a difference of opinion In a case of which justice form-
ed a clear and undoubted -basis.
The LORD CHANCELLOR having been called upon by
his Noble Friend to say whether there was any -Connection
between present Bill and the transaction. respecting the
library, would declare upon his honour that he had not the
least notion that any such connection existed between those
measures. On the contrary, having been consulted on the
principle of the Bill, he happened to know when it had first
been in contemplation t and it was not till years after the
question had been raised with respect to the King's property,
that he had heard any thing about the library. if he had
stated, as a lawyer, that with a sheet of paper and a pen full
,of ink, his Majesty might have originally relieved himself
from the necessity of this Bill, he should have stated nothing
but what every lawyer would know might have been done,
but what would have been less honourable than the conduct
of his Majesty, who had preferred obtaining the power which
he wanted from Parliament.

Lord REDESDA LE contended, that until the act of Queen
Anne, the power of the Crown to grant land had been unlimited.
It was true, that when those grants were not approved of, the
Ministers, by whose advice they had been made had been im-
peached, but even then the grants had not been revoked: Why
had the act of Queen Anne been passed, if the Crown had not
previously possessed the right of granting lands ? But the fact
was, that half the lands in the kingdom were holden by grants
from the Crown.
The Bill was then read a third time, and passed.
MARRIAGE ACT.
Mr. IlnoonEw and others brought up from the Commons
the Marriage Act Amendment Dill with amendments, to which
the prayed the concurrence of their Lordships.
The Amendments were then taken into consideration, and
agreed to, and the Bill was ordered to be returned to the Com-
mons.—Adjourned.

MOUSE OF COMMONS.
COMMISSION.

At eleven o'clock inli;i—mornini, the SriVANER attended
in the -House of Commons, and was shortly after summoned
to the Boone of Peers, to hear the Royal Assent given to the
Mutiny 11111 and other Bills—(For which see the Lords.)
The SoraxEn having adjourned the Bailee till halt-past
three, when he resumed his seat, many PriVoite Bills, this being

the last day of introducing than, were brought in and read
first time.

MISCELLANtOIiS.
Sir J. BOUGHEY brought in a Rill for the more apeedi
recoveryfof Small Debts in the'town of WOlVerhampton,—Rea
a first and ordered to be read a second time.
111 r. DRUMMOND ittoented a Petition from certain
Owners and Occupiers of Land in the County of Strath.
more, complaining of Agricultural Distress.—Ordered to lie on
the table.

Sir W. LEMON presented a Petition from the Inhabitants
of Falmouth, complaining of the practice of Hawkers and Ped-
lars.—Ordered to be printed.
Similar Petitions were presented from the Inhabitants or
Truro, and from those of Leicester,--Ordered to be printed.
Mr. EVELYN presented a Petition from- the Borough of St.
Ives, praying for the repeal of the Duties Oh Coids.—Ordered
to be printed.
A Bill was brought in to secure the better performance of
the Duties of Treasurers of Counties in Ireland.
Read a first time, and ordered to be read a Second time.
Mr. D. GILBERT' 'a Petition rrOM the Inhabit-
ants of Penzance, :pray ing the repeal of the Dutit on Coals
carried coastwise. The Hon. Gentleman spoke in support of
"the prayer of the petition.
P. GRENFELL-. supported the petition, and hoped,
when the Chancellor of the Exchequer came to consider what
taxes it would-be best fur the country to repeal, that he wculd
include this among those whiCh were to be taken oft:
Ordered to he printed.
Sir T. LETHBRIDGE gave notice, that on Thursday the
Ist of May he would move certain Resolutions on the subject of
Agricultural Distress.
Mr. BENNET presented a petition froth Richard Cathie,
now a prisoner in the gaol of Dorset, praying the House to
enact a law for the abolition of prison flogging, and otherwise
to alter the discipline of places of confinement, so as to make
them consistent with the humane.spirit of the age. Thelidn.
Gentleman in presenting the petition, took occasion to speak
against the 'severities, in some instances, exercised, and an-
nounced it to be his intention to introduce a Bill after the ho-
lidays, to prevent the infliction of corporal punishment at all.
The petition was ordered to be printed.
ARMY EXTRAORDINARIES.
Mr. 'WILMOT ithived the Order of the Day for bringing up
the Report of the Committee on the Army Extraordinimes.
Mr. IIUSIE said he had a petition to present.
The SPEAKER said, the lion. Member's name was not
entered in his paper.
Mr. liUML considered that he was in order in presenting
Himself as he had done since his name appeared in the printed
notice. •

The SPEAKER said perhaps the Hon, Member was right,
and he was wrong, but he wished the House to understand the
ground on which he had interfered. It was never his wish to
deprive any member of his right, but he endeavoured to act
according to the directions of the House. Under these he
found, that orders were to be taken first on islontlay, and
whatever notices might have been given, unless these coincided
themselves with orders of the day, they could not be entertain.
ed till the orders had been disposed or. When there was no
business before the house, if any Member rose- he csdled his
name, but when another Hon. Member had moved an Order
of the Day, without departing from his duty, he could not but
act as he had done.

After a few words from 111 r: WitatOT, Mr. Citr.Ev EY, and
Mr. Hush;, the Report was brought up.
On the first Resolution being read,
Mr. HUME referred to a motion which he had formerly
made respecting the salaries of Colonial Agents. These,
he had been told, were paid by the several Colonies, but
he now contended, that the assertion that they were not paid
by the people of England was totally unfounded. He then
enumeated the salaries paid to the Agents for the ,Cape of
Good Hope, Malta the Mauritius, and Ceylon, amounting
in the whole to 2,90'0/., which, he,goatentleti„. threw,,,,tat.
-ditional- ex-porter-on- this country ; and, consequently, they
were, in point of fact, paid by the people of England. He was
of opinion that the duties of the l'reasurer of the Navy were
inconsistent with those of the Agent at Ceylon ; and he con.
sidered that the services of the four agents he had mentioned
might be dispensed with altogether. 'rhe business at present
executed by them might be transacted by other officers at pre-
sent in the pay of the country. In page eleven of the esti-
mates he found that a sum of money was charged for prize
money paid to Lord Keith. Ile thought all prize money
had been paid long ago, and wished to know if the present was
the last payment. It would be recollected that touch diesus-
sion had taken place on this, subject, and that much then).
probation had been expressed at the delay which had ecturred
in some instances, and which, continuing for many years, had
frequently deferred the payment of prizte.money, till most of
those originally entitled to receive it were gone. There was ano-
ther item which he thought strange. In page 12 of the Estimates,
the sum of 9,2441. was put down as paid to Baron Larigsdorfe,
on account of the subset}, of 1793. Ile wished to know how
this sum came to be brought fortsard now? There -wail also
a sum charged which named very extraordinary, it was that of
10051. paid to Sir,a. Hope; as Governor of Edinburgh Castle,
in lieu of coals and candles, frorn.the 25th of September, 1810:
He wished to know on what, aceoetit this grant was made, and
whether it was a 'regular payment, or a new allowance, and
why ,it had- been left seven. years it; arrear ? There . were
some other things of minor'importance, but he should pro..
pose no diminution on account of them at present; but
with respect to the Colonial Agents, he was HO satisfied of
their being unnecessary, diet he should move to reduce the
vote before the Muse to the amount of 2,900/. lie 'accord.
ingly moved, . " That the sum of 620,000/. in the resolution,
should be iliered to 617,100/."
Mr. ‘VILMOT contended that it was not correct to infer,
because the military experices of the Colonies fell on the
Mother Country, that the agent* were not paid by the
colonists. If the Honourable Gentlemen htui *hewn that
the economy which he recommended were . practicable, by
pointing out to whom the business now performed by the
Agents, might be conveniently, transferred ; there might' be
some fair grounds for what he had advanced ; but • none
such appeared at present. The duties of those situations
must not be neglected ; and by whom, if taken froM the
agents, could they be performed ? lie would state before
that House, ••that it was inipossible fio..any one in his dePart.
ment to undertake them. If the lionourahle Gentleman
brought a motion forward" an this subject, he would prove the
fact—he would chew that the business 9f that department lied-
already been doubled and trebled, and he would defy the Hon.
Gentleman to contradict him. While on his legs he would
offer a few words in reply to a charge made the other evening
against the Governor of Upper Canada. .0n hearing it lie had
risen in his place, and declared himself satisfied that the fact
referred' to was untrue. But now having had time to make
inquiry he would challenge the Honourable Gentleman to show
that a more unfounded Statement had never been brought for-
ward in or out of that House. The Governor had 'been ,de.
scr.b.-:d to have sent a-Mr. , Gourley ta'xnuch injaretl'Oentle.
man) out of the Province, under circumstances of great hard-
ship and oppression. This was said to have occurred in con-
sequence of Mr. Gourley heving published that the Gover-
nor, after having consented to receive a certain salary, in
lieu of fees formerly allowed, not only received the salary
stipulated but the fees also: Now the fact was, there was not
a word of any such accusation in the three volumes which had
been printed, on matters connected with the case. After this,
what became of the charge which the Han. Gentleman had
brought ffirward, when it appeared that the accusation fur
which Mr. Gourley was sent out of the .Province, as stated
by the Honourable Gentleman who was shortly to bring his
case forward, did not appear ever to have been made ?
The Honourable Member ought to be more cautiotta in
making such charges. It was true they could be contra-
dicted, but in the meals time they were translated into other
languages, anti widely circulated, to the great injury of indi-
vidual character. On another subject the statement advanced
by the Hon. Gentleman was utterly unfounded—he alluded to
the lonian Islands, He defied the Hon. Gentleman to bring
forwardparornventitahneomnmrtthilsosun
authenticity of whichhe could not deny. The lion, Gentle.
bnieecL now If
made,iled idon so,
docuinents, the
it would' enable
man had stated, the lonian Wands were not prosperous. He
(Mr. Wilniot) could not go into the details while speaking on
a question to which they were irrelevant, but he could con&
dently tell the lion. Gentleman, that what belted asserted with
res:lec t
Can to
lt:llada were utterly unfounded, 7.
as well as his statements respecting Upper
of his thin. Friend. He objected to the Colonial Agents he-
cause three of them were Members of Parliament. The agent
r.CI:VnI t'n said, he should vote for the Amendirient
for Ceylon was WAltiskisson, }sq., the agent for the Cape,
T. P. Courtenay, Esq., and the agent for Malta, S. Bathurst,
Esq. Ile considered Members of Parliament hoicking such