The Sun.
London, England, 1824-03-20 00:00:00

SILK TRADE,

Mr. HALDIMAND rose to present a petition from some of
• the most respectable, and he might add, the most intelligent
silk manufacturers in England. It related to the arrangements
• which it was understood were to be made for carrying into effect
the propositions of the Chancellor of the Exchequer in respect
of. this trade ; and it prayed that no alteration might be made
in those arrangements.—(Hear !)—The petitioners especially
prayed that there might be no delay in their execution ; and
they added, that if this question of delay had not been agitated
afresh, the whole of their hands would have been by this time
in active employment. They also expressed their perfect satis-
faction with the intention which had been avowed of allowing
them .a drawback upon manufactured articles. With regard to
the suggestion about spreading the operation of the new ar-
rangements over a certain number of years, he (Mr. Heidi-
mend) really thought it could have no other effect but to para..
lyre the trade, and repress the energy, which, if the Right Hon. •
Gentleman's propositions were at once adopted, it would un-
doubtedly manifest. Ile (Mr. Haldimand) had seen that morn-
ing some silk merchants, as well as the manufacturers, and had
expected to be intrusted with a petition front them. Ile was,
however, enabled to say, that the silk merchants were favoura-
ble to the new arrangements.—(Hear !)
Mr. BARING would not enter into any discussion upon the
general questions to which the petition referred, bemuses more
eligible opportunity would be offered in the Committee into
which they should that evening go. From the speech of his
Hon. Friend, however, the House might have been induced to
suppose that he was holding it up as the petition of a certain
number of persons in favour of the measure proposed by the
Chancellor of the Exchequer. But no such thing; for his lion.
Friend having favoured him with a sight of this petition, he
(Mr. Baring) was enabled to state that there was no recom-
mendation of the measure.—(Hear !)—What. he meant by
" the" measure was, the free trade of silk manufactured goods,
of the goods of France coming into competition with the goods
of this country. Now, in support of this proposition, the peti-
tion contained not a single word. The fact was, he believed, •
that there were some Gentlemen in the trade who had large
stocks in hand, and were therefore very willing to put emir
hanks deep into the public purse. But he would repeat, that
neither bad this, nor any other petition yet presented, proceeded
frontany general body of persons concerned in the silk trade,
who approved of the general principles upon which the House
was in this case legislating.
Mr. HUME thought the House would know how to estimate
the argument of his lion. Friend (Mr. Baring) when it re-
membered the petition, signed by twelve persons, which his
Hon. Friend had presented-on the preceding night : 12 persorn,
he (Mr. flume) believed, were all that could be found in the
city. of London to .subscribe it.—(" Hear, hear !" from Mr.
Baring.)—Those individuals (at the head of whose subscriptions
he observed the respectable name of Mr. Hale) wit ted to keep
up the Spitalfields soonoyoly. Now. the petition whiz!' the Her.

Gentleman (Mr. Haldimand) had presented to-night, had
been signed by 33 of the principal men in London, in the short
space of two hours and a half; and so far from their not being
favourable to the principles upon which the Chancellor of the
Exchequer was proceeding► in this business, they humbly prayed
that the measures proposed by that Right Hon. Gentleman
might be acted on with as little delay as possible.—(Hear,
hear !) He (Mr. Hume) had received a letter from one of the
very first houses in London (Messrs. Wilson, Moore, and Ro-
binson), in which they expressly said, that with the time which
was now allowed for the arrangements, the silk.trade in London
had nothing to fear from competition.—(Here the Hon. Gent.
read an extract from a letter to that effect.) -
Mr. BUXTON made a singleobservation, that was inaudible
in the gallery, •
Mr. G. PRIMPS was convinced, that under the new ar-
rano-cm:ins, the silk trade could well bear any competition ;
and he expressed his belief, that the true alarmists were the
East India monopolists, who, on a recent occasion, had pre-
vented the confidential clerk of- a most respectable house in
London from proceeding to Bengal, to undertake the manage-
ment of a large silk business.
Mr. EDWARD ELLICE stated, that at Coventry, Maccles-
field, Derby, and other manufacturing towns in the country, the
silk interest was well satisfied with the intentions of the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer. He could not agree, however, with
his Hon. Friend that the silk trade was able to bear competi-
tion as well as he seemed to think ; for he (Mr. Ellice) had
reason to know that for many years past not only had looms
been imported from France, but Frenchmen had come over to
work at them. They exceeded us in the manufacture and the
dying..

-On—the question that the petition be read,
Mr. BARING thought it unfair in his Hon. Friend (Mr.
Hume) to read, in .support of the propositions of. the Chan.
cellor of the Exchequer, a letter from the only housein London,
in the silk trade, which had stood by the Government in these
propositions, which had been the adviser of Government on this
occasion, and which, if it were fair to bring the private concerns
of any house into the case, had, as he was informed, speculated
largely upon the consequences likely to follow from the regula-
tions being carried into effect.
After a taw words from Mr. lIALLIIMAND, not audible in
the gallery,
Sir T. LETHBRIDGE expressed a wish that the Chancel-
lor of the Exchequer should state to the House what was the
exact sum which the country.• Was likely to lose by the amount
of the drawbacks. Some had fixed it at 100,0001., and others
stated that it would amount to 300,0001. or 400,0001. He was
anxious that the real suns to be lost by the country should be
known. 1-1 e bad applications from the cloth manufacturers,manufacturers,ers,
who were anxious that the duty on their stock on hand should
also be taken off. It was unfair not to put both parties on a
similar footing with respect to a remission of iuties.
Mr. BRIGHT was glad this subject • had been brought be-
fore the House. The woollen trade were likely to suffer by
some regulations in prospect with respect to them, and he
thought it was injustice to give an advantage to one trade by a
remision of duties, which was denied to another which had
equal claims to

'The CHANCELLOR of the IGXCHEQUER said, that
the petition before the House was on the subject of the silk
trade, and he did not think such an occasion was quite the
roper time for discussing the question of the woollen trade.
henever that question should come regularly before the
House, he would undertake to demonstrate to the Hon. Mem-
ber himself, that the measures proposed on that subject were
just those which had been desired by the woollen manufac-
turers themselves. As to the question of the amount which
the country would he likely to lose by the drawbacks on silk,
he thought that a greater exaggeration could not be imagined
than to suppose that the country would lose a million, or one
million three hundred thousand pounds, by those drawbacks.
It was impossible to calculate such matters up to the exact
sum. There might be a few thousands more or less than what
had been stated on a former occasion, but it was quite absurd
to suppose that it would amount to any sum near a million.—
The greater sum was imagined, on a supposition that there
was .a great quantity of raw silk and silk goods on hand,
whereas it was contrary to all the principles on which the ma-
nufacturers conducted their trade to believe that as a fact.—
They never manufactured for the purpose of having a large
stock by them. They were prevented by the constant fluctua-
tions of fashion, and other causes. Then it should be con-
sidered, that it was only half the duty on the raw article which
was to be remitted, and that it was not to be allowed on cut
goods. 'raking all these circumstances into consideration, he
might state the cost to the country, by the remission, at 200,000/.
or 250,0001,, or perhaps 300,0001. at most; but it was impos-
sible that it would amount to more, and with the activity in the
trade which the remission would cause, that sum would be
more than repaid to the country.
After a few words from Mr. BRIGIIT,
Air;thAoludierd ibiaeanauWow(e) as well saidctt
as uncut
tshilaitz. the draw-
back
Mr. AIUNDY said, that the silk manufacturers of Derby
((loin
acre satisfied with the proposed regulations.
Mr. BA RING said they were, because they were throwsters,
and were made an exception to the general principles of those
regulations by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whq, in op.
position, to all his own principles of free trade, was not bold
enough to apply them to that branch of the trade.

A tier a rex; w•orc',s from Mr. Evass and another Hon. Mem-
ber, the petition was read, and ordered to be printed.
Mr. NV': SMITH presented a petition from the Journeymen
Shoemakers of Portsea, against the Combination Laws.—lt
was referred to the Committee on Artisans. _ _

Mr. JOHN :57111`H presented a petition from the Isle of
Ely, against Negro Slavery.—Laid on the table.
USU RY LAWS.

The Committee on the Usury Laws' Repeal Bill was post-
poned to this day week.
Mr. Alderman THOMPSON presented a petition from the
Silk Mercers of London and Westminster, praying that the
drawback on silk might be allowed on cut, as well as uncut
pieces of silk.

Mr. T. WILSON briefly supported the prayer of the peti-
tion, which he observed was very just.—The petition was read.
On the motion that it do lie on the table,
Mr. Alderman THOMPSON said that he would take an op-
portunity, in the committee, of moving that the drawback be
allowed on pieces of silk not less than 15 yards in length.
IRISH LINEN BOUNTIES. _ _

Mr C. H. HUTCHINSON presented a petition from the
merchants of the city of Cork, praying that the Bounties on
Irish Linens might he withdrawn. The Hon. Member then
proceeded to peinto4t the evils which would arise, particularly
in the south of Ireland, where coarse linens were manufactured,
from the repeal of those bounties, and expressed a hope that
the Chancellor of the Exchequer might seriously reconsider the
subject.
The petition was laid on the table, as was a similarpetition„
presented by the same Honourable Member, from the mer-
chants of Cork, against certain West India duties. They were
ordered to be printed.
Mr. H. G. BEN NET presented a petition from a Mr. Grant,
of Margate, praying for a remission of the sentences of those
convicts who were sent on board the hulks from the Peniten-
tiary, in consequence of the sickness which bad prevailed there.
—Laid on table.

Mr. I.II"rLETON presented a Petition from the Fleet, in
Staffordshire, against negro slavery.—Ordered to lie on the
table.

THE SILK TRADE.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, that as
the Counsel who was to have addressed the House that evening
was prevented from doing so by indisposition, he would pro.
pose that the House should resolve itself into a Committee on
the Silk Bill, in order that the blanks might be filled so as to
render the Bill intelligible. The Counsel might be heard on
the recommittal of the Bill on Monday, on which occasion the
discussion might also take place.
On the motion-of the Hight Hon. Gentleman the House re-
solved itself into a Committee on the Bill.
Mr. HUME suggested that a drawback should be allowed
upon cut silks when they were 30 or 40 yards in length.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER declared that
it was not his intention to make any alteration in the Bill, ex-
cept such as he had already stated.
After a short conversation, in which Mr. BARING, Mr. J.
SMITH, Mr. HALDIMAND, Mr. ELLICE, and Mr. HER-
RIES, participated, the blanks were filled up, the House re-
sumed, the report was brought up, and ordered to be taken into
consideration on Monday.
Mr. BRIGHT gave notice, as we understood, (for the noise
occasioned by strangers leaving the gallery prevented us from
hearing distinctly), that he would on a future occasion call the
attention of the House to the subject of the relations of Great
Britain with the Barbary States.
COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY. IRISH MISCEL-
LANi..OUS ESTIMATES.

Mr. GOULBURN moved that the sum of 2,0001. be
granted for the support of the Royal Cork Institution.
Mr. HUME opposed the grant.
Mr. C. HUTCHINSON supported the grant. The Insti.
tution, he said, had been productive of great benefit to that
part of Ireland in which it was placed.
Mr. S. RICE said, that when the grant was first proposed
in 1800, Go:•ernment had announced that it should not be con-
tinued long. _ _ _ _

Sir J. NEWPORT thought that the benefits of the Insti-
tution should not be confined to the City pf Cork alone.
Mr. W. WILLIA.MS opposed the vote.
Mr. PEEL felt the force of the objection to the principle of
the grants, on the ground of their damping local exertion ; but
.here was a difference between originating such guilts and con-
tinuing them.
Mr. WILLIA3IS was surprised to hear that Cork, which

he thought was the first trading town in Ireland, should be so
generally impoverished.
Mr. C. H. fl LUCE' INSON said, Cork contained a most
wealthy and respectable mercantile connexion ; but, neverthe-
less_, thousands of the poorer classes were severely distressed.
After a few words from 3lr. 3loNcic and Mr. I'ELHAM,
the resolution was agreed to.

Mr. GOULBUIIII moved that a sum' not exceeding 7,0001.
be granted to the Royal Dublin-Society.
Mr. HUME inquired how the balance of 1:3,0001., the
'alleged expenditure; was furnished ?
Mr. GOULBURN replied, by private subscriptions. •
Mr. HUME designated, this society as a great humbug.—
Gentlemen, he knew, read the newspapers there, and ladies
walked upon-the lawn ; but as to•the promotion of science, and
the fine arts practically, he had great doubts of its utility.—
There was an expenditure of money for opening mines, for
mineralogical purposes, and. statistical survey; where were
these benefits conferred•?

31r. S. RICE highly praised the progress of the society, and
said that it furnished practical information, which aided the
foundation of a mining "comptlny with a capital of half a mil-
lion. It had also a good school for the tine arts, and Mr.
Johnston, of the Board of Works, had munificently contri-
buted from 10,0001. to 12,0001. for the erection of a gallery for
the fine arts, in the institution.
Mr. GOI,I,I4BURN corroborated the statement respecting the
practical scientific benefits of the society. •
Mr. ELLIS also defended it.•

- -----
Mr. HUME repeated his objections,. and said that more
money had been spent upon this useless Dublin society, which
was split into political parties, than was expended by Buona-
parte upon any scientific institution in his most extravagant,
days. He was inclined to move that the grant be reduced
3,0001.
Mr. PEEL recommended the Hon. Member -to become a
subscriber, and personally examine the society , if after, that
he saw cause to retain his opinions, he could next year propose
his reduction.
Mr. HUME said, that if the Right Hon. Gentleman would
grant him a Local Committee to examine practically into the
proceedings of the society, he should have no objection to go
over and pursue the inquiry.__(A laugh.)
Air. Alderman WOOD hoped that the Irish Government
would make his Hon. Friend (Mr. Hume), an Honorary Mem-
ber of the society, as he was of many of the London corporate
bodies.

Mr. Alderman THOMPSON hoped to hear more evidence
of the practical value of the.society, to justify the vote.
Mr. MONCK saw no reason why Dublin should not have a
Museum, as well as every other capital.
Sir JOHN NEWPORT said, that at the time of the Union,
these grants were promised to Ireland, and ought not now to be
withheld, when that country was impoverished by the Union,
and her gentry transplanted to spend their money upon English
objects.

:Mr. W. WILLIAMS had a high opinion of the Irish gentry,
but would prefcr to see them stimulated (if that were necessary)
to support in preference their own national objects.
Mr. (OULIIURN rose. for the purpose of rescuing the in-
habitants of Dublin from the charge which had been made
against them. They subscribed very liberally to all the public
institutions for the relief of human misery that were established
amongst them.
Mr. W. WILLIAMS had not meant to make any charge
against the inhabitants of Dublin.

After a few words from Mr. Hiram, the grant was agreed to.
The next rant proposed was 10.1591. as. 3d., British cur-
.rOncy, to defray the expence of the commissioners for making
' wide and convenient streets in the City of Dublin.
Mr. HUME wished to know why the inhabitants of Los-
don or Aberdeen were to pay for widening the streets of the
City of London. Such grants were never made by Parliament
to widen the streets of the City of London : he therefore trusted
that the House would reject this grant altogether.
Mr. J. SMITH was surprised at the course which his Hon.
Friend the Member for Aberdeen had pursued that evening
with regard to the grants to Ireland. fte did not know whe-
ther the streets of Dublin wanted widening ; but he thought
that the people of Ireland had as much right to call for a part
of the public money for the improvement of their capital, as
the people of Scotland had to call for it for the Caledonian
Canal, and other public works. If he were not afraid of jobs
in the grants which were made to Ireland,he should be inclined
to vote larger sums than were now given to the people of that
unfortunate country.
Mr. PEEL contended, that the Committee ought to agree
to this vote for certain local reasons, which he detailed to
Parliament had granted money to widen the avenues to both
dtrat?the grants to which the Right Hon.
do means justifiedthe houses of Parliament, and to repair Westminster-abbey. Why
should it not be us liberal to the citizens of Dublin as it had
bi„Grereealnnittril:miliilint:l‘heicaE:dnf ssaalidlilaeun;deettlibeygrant to Westminster Abbey
pa:idthae
hpeuavbyl iefesevetore
tnboewbeexancluadtel
fro veryentering
bes towiet
unlesses
Chapter.—(Hear !)—No grants had ever been made to the
citizens of London forthe improvement or their city.
pec
A Mr, LOndoll 11,4•1
ge to wit.."—(A laugh.)
Mr. HUME allowed that 150,0001. had been granted for the
purpose, but contended that it made no difference to his argu-
ment, as he had been one of 10 Members who opposed it. Besides,
it was only a payment to the city out of the funds which it had
set aside in the reign of Qtteen Anne for the building of new
churches, and which for the last 70 years had been diverted
into the public Exchequer. The proposed grant, in his opinion,
was perfectly iinjustisaule.
Sir JOHN NEWPORT rose to suggest a mode of dimi-
nishing this grant, by diminishing the interest upon the debt
which the Commissioners had contracted. Part of it, he ob-
served, paid 6 per cent. intereet. 'The improvements which
these Commissioners had made tended not only to in the
beauty, but to promote the health of the City of Dublin.
After a few words from Air. Goim.nunet and Mr. Alder-
man Woon, the grant was voted without a division.
The following grants were then agreed to :
£2,500 for the Farming Society of Ireland.
£3OO for the Royal Irish Academy.
£5OO for the Commissioners of Charitable Donations and
Bequests.
£19,938 for the Linen Board of Ireland.
£16.800 for Board of Works in Ireland.
£16,000 for printing,, stationery, and other disbursements,
for the Chief and. Under ecreta,_
y's Office in Ireland, &c.
Mr. HUME wished to know whether the reform promised
last year with respect to the prices of stationery was carried
into effect ?
Mr. GOULBURN was 1101 aware that any promise had
been given.
Mr. HU3IE said, that it had been understood that the prices
of stationery in Ireland were to be brought down to the level
of those in Eng,land.
Mr. GOULI3URN said, that the prices could not be brought
to that level, because the greater
Part of the paper consumed in
Ireland was English paper. The course now taken was this :
a list of prices was ear from England, and
upon those prices 10 per cent.additional was allowed in Ireland
to the patentee, besides 13i per cent, in consideration of his sup-
plying the stationary rota:., which saved the expence to Govern-
ment of a separate establishment.
Sir J. NEWPORT thought it more than questionable
whether the Crown had power to grant patents for the supply of
articles for the public service. The effect of this system, which
was a remnant of the monopoly abuse of the reign of Elizabeth,
was, that we were paying 16i per cent. fur stationary in Ireland
more than we paid for it in England. What advant.Ne it was
to Ireland as a country that the paper consumed there should
conic from England, he did not well understand ;—(hear!)--
and he thought that if the clerks made shift to write upon Irish
paper, it would be, to say the least of it, quite as well.
M. GOULBURN said, the paper was furnished at the low-
est rate at which the public cOuld possibly be served. The
Right Hon. Baronet asked, why persons in the different offices
could not write on Irish, instead of using English paper.—
Now, he believed the Right Hon. BaronetThimself, when he
was in office, never write on Irish paper. tWe understood Sir
J. Newport to dissent from this.] He was convinced, that if
the Right Hon. Baronet had such a number of letters to
write as fell to his (Mr. Goulburri's) lot, he would hare been
anxious to use English paper, on account of its superior smooth-
ness. lie was sure the Committee would agree with him that
there was true economy in procuring a moderately good article
at an advanced price, rather than a bad one at a very low rate.
Mr. HUME said, when he, last year, proposed that the
printing of certain public documents should be executed in Eng-
land, by which a saving of 2,500/. might have been effected,
the Right Hon. Secretary exclaimed, " Oh ! .how can you
think of injuring Ireland. by taking from her this branch of
the public printing ?" Now he wished to learn, why the
Right Honourable Secretary did not adopt the same principle
with respect to the purchase of paper ? He was informed
that Alderman Maguey, and other gentlemen, who had paper
manufactories in the South of Ireland, could supply all the
stationery that was wanted. As to the inferiority of the paper,
lie would only say, that if they gave a fair price, they would
certainly procure as good an article as they could get else-
where. Much had been said of the right of an individual to sup-
ply the Government office of Ireland with paper ; but did not
gentlemen recollect that Sir Samuel Shepherd gave it as his
opinion that there was no patent.—(Hear !)—And why should
they countenance this monopoly in the person of such a man
as Bradley King ? —(Hear, hear !)—He also would cry " Hear,
hear !" and he would ask whether any man could place his
hand on his heart and say, that the transactions which had
been brought before Parliament, and in which Mr. Bradley
King had taken a very prominent part, were fair and just?—
(Hear, hear!)—lf any person declared them to be correct and

' proper, it would surprise him very much indeed.—(Bear,
hear !)—Many an individual had been discharged from his
situation, who had not done half so much as Bradley King was
proved to have clone by documents which were familiar both to
that and the other House of Parliament.
Mr. GOULBUItN.—The Honourable Gentleman had
asked, why he (Mr. Goulburn) would not take the print-
ing from Ireland, at the same time that he felt no hesi-
tation in procuring paper from England. The answer was
simply this—that the Irish paper was much worse than
the English ; but that the Irish. printing answered the ob-
ject as well as the English printing would do. He would not
stop to inquire whether Mr. King had a patent or not; but if
he furnished paper at a fair.price,and if, for a long time, a pa-
tent had existed, (even adinitiing, for argument's sake, that it
was no longer good in law), these points, he conceived, were
sufficiently strong to induce Government still to procure its sta-
tionery through the same channel.
Mr. DAwsos and Mr. T. ELms supported the vote.
Mr. HUME observed, that it appeared, from papers which
had been laid before Parliament, that the
.public had been de-
frauded to a considerable extent in the stationery department in
Dublin. What was the excuse which was made on that oc-
casion ? It was fit that it should be stated, as it was truly
extraordinary. Why then they were told, that though the
money went into the pocket of the master, it was totally with-
out his knowledge that the fraud was committed by his ser-
vant.—(Hear, hear !)—There ought, in his opinion, to be
2,000/. struck from this vote, which was paid in the way of
commission. Certainly he hoped it would not be passed in the
ensuing year without that reduction.
Mr. MONCK said, if proper paper could not at present be
made in Ireland, the best course would be to invite over a
'number of English manufacturers, who would very soon fa-
bricate a proper article.
The motion was then agreed to.

Mr. GOULBURN moved for a sum of 6,500/. to defray the
expence of publishing proclamations in the Dublin Gazette,
and other newspapers in Ireland, for the year 1824.
Mr. HUME opposed the grant, which, he contended, ought
to be reduced to 3,2501. He could see no reason why a mode
of promulgating proclamations should be adopted in Ireland
different from that which was followed here. It had been over
and over again stated from that (the OppOsition) side of the
House, that the system pursued in Ireland, with respect to
the publishing proclamations, was selected for the purpose of
bribing a great part of the public press in that country.
Those who were thus bought over were ready to argue
that black • was white, or white was black. It sometimes
happened, when there was not one of those convenient in-
struments in a county in which an outrage, calling for a
proclamation, was committed, that that proclamation scarcely
appeared on the scene of disturbance, though it was
profusely published every where else. Thus the charge to the
public was increased, whilst the effect of the proclamation was
in a great measure destroyed. He had before shewn the absur-
dity, partiality, and injustice of this system. It was proper
that i. shouPt be altered, and therefore he should move that the
suns of 3,250/. be substituted for 6,500/. The former suns was
sufficient for keeping up the Dublin Gazette.
Mr. C. H. HUTCHINSON could not conceive why the
Right Hon. Gentleman should call for precisely the same sum
this year as he had done in the last ? What reason had he to
suppose that the proclamations would be equally numerous?
Mr. GOULBURN defended the grant, the amount of
which, he observed, was calculated with reference to the pro-
bable expenditure. Of course, if there were any surplus, it
would be accounted for. He wished it to be understood that
the notices of commutation under the Tithe Bill, which, in con-
sequence of a clause inserted in that bill, at the suggestion of
the Hon. Member for Limerick, must be inserted in the Ga-
zette, had last year • created an expellee of 2,000/. ; so that,
taking this into consideration, the grant was by no means a
large one. If the mode adopted in this country for the dissemi-
nation of proclamations were acted on in Ireland, the expence
would be double that which he now called upon the House to
sanction.
Mr. S. RICE said the allusion which the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman had made to the expenditure of 2,0001., m consequence
of the clause suggested by him (Mr. Rice), had only plunged
the Right Hon. Gentleman into a greater scrape. The Right
Hon. Gentleman had called for a grant of 0,000/. before that
clause was brought in. It .vas therefore apparent that he had
demanded 2,000/. more than the circumstances of the case at
the moment justified.—(hear !)
After some further conversation between Mr. V. FITZ-
GERALD, Sir J. NEWPORT Mr. BENNET, and Mr. Gout-
BURN, the Committee divided, when there appeared--
For the motion • • - 51
For the amendment, 27
Majority, . - —24
Mr. GOULBURN then moved for the sum of 5,0001. to
defray the expense of printing and binding the Public Acts,
for the use of the Magistrates and Public Offices in Ireland.
Sir JOHN NEWPORT opposed the grant. The sum now
called for was 1,3001. more than that demanded last year.
Mr. GOULBURN said, the vote of last year was 1,3001.
short of the actual expenditure.
Mr. MONCK objected to printing the Acts in this manner.
Upon the same principle, they ought to be printed in Scot=
land and in Wales. Why not print all the statutes in one
place ?
Mr. GOULBURN said, if the Acts were printed here, the
cost would be greater than that incurred by printing them in
Ireland.

Mr. HUME moved as an amendment " That the vote be
postponed until information was laid before the Committee to
enable them to judge of its propriety."
Mr. GOULBURN could see no reason for such a postpone-
ment.

The amendment was ultimately withdrawn, and the resolu-
tion carried.

The following votes were then carried :
£24,000 for Criminal Prosecutions and other Law Proceed-
ings in Ireland.
£5,200 for deficiencies of last year, upon the subject of the
grant last mentioned.
£8,843 for the support of Non-conformist Ministers of Ireland.
£4,254 for Seceding Ministers from the Synod of Ulster.
£756 for Protestant Dissenting Ministers of Ireland.
£1,072 for salaries of the Irish Lottery Offices.
£4,000 for the completion of the Harbour of Howth.
£15,000 for Irish Civil Contingencies.
£4,500 for expences of Inland Navigation.
£27,000 for expences of Police and Watch Establishments
of Dublin.

47,140 for salaries to pay Commissioners ofJudicial-Inquiry
in Ireland.
Sir NEWPORT eulogized the fearless and impartial con-
duct of the Commissioners.
41,651 to pay the salaries of Commissioners of Inquiry into
the Receipts of the Land Revenue in Ireland.
£5,100 to pay the salaries and expellees of the Record Com-
mission of Ireland.

-------
£1,115 for Superannuated Allowances.
£lO,OOO for Improvements in the Road between London
and Dublin. •

£5,000 for expences of Trigonometrical Survey of Ireland.
The House being resumed, the CHAIRMAN reported pro-
gress, and obtained leave to sit again.—Report on Monday next.
The Slave-trade Piracy Bill went through the Committee.—
Report on Monday next.
. Mr. HUME wished to know when it was intended to take
the discussion on the measure. •
Mr. LUSHINGTON said it would suit the convenience of
many gentlemen to take it when the Report was brought up on
Monday. next.
The other Orders of the Day were then disposed of, and the
House adjourned at ONE O'CLOCK.