The Sun.
London, England, 1804-03-13 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS•

MONDAY, MARCH 12.
Mt scotch Bank Bill was brought in and read

first time.
!he:Fe:4le Bar Improvement Bill was read .a
second time, and ordered to be committed.
Alderman B,lydell's Lottery Bill was read a third
time and passed.
Mr.- HURS. T presented a Petition from John Wit.
sort, who. was committed to.Newga..e for prevarica.
!ion before-the Aylesbury Committee, acknoi.vledg.
.ing his offence, implOring the clemency' of the
House, and requesting to be permitted to ask par.
don at the Bar of the House.
Sir GEORGE CDRNEWALL•said, he did nct
wish that the imprisonment of this man should last
longer than was 'necessary for the. purpose of ex.

ample,
Mr. Hur.sT then moved that he shonld be brought
up on_Wednesday to be disclwrged.—Ordered.-
A i'etition was. presented from the' Trustees of
the .British Museum, praying for PaillilMentary
lief.-7;--Ordcred to lie:on the Table, and , an account
%-vas ordered tti be laid before the House of the dif-
ferent sums voted by
_Parham' ent for the British Mu-

scum.
The House having resolved itself into a Com_
mitree of Ways and Means,
The CHANCELLOR of the -EXCHEQUER,
rose to, rove, that a sum of two milli ns he raised
by way of Loan or Exchequer Bills ; 'he thought it
proper to
...add, that this sum was nett necessary
to answer any immediate demand, but he hdped the
Committee would consent,. to grant it at present, in
order to allow him a greater latitude when he came
to contract for the Loan for the service of the pre-
sent year.
The Resolution was agreed to, and ordered to be
reported to-morrow.
-Mr. CORRY moved. the Order of the Day for
,going into a Committee on the Irish Duties Bill.-
.The Order having been read,
RRY Y. said, that the last time this sub-
ject was under
.discussion, an objection was taken
to the proceedings, on the groutt that the previous
consent of the Crown was not announced. This
objeaionwas grounded upon the idea that the here.
ditary revenue of the Crown was afreaed. It there
was any I.:ullation for thiS objection, he could only
say, that there.were several precedents for it in the
Parliament of Ireland, and particularly at the time
'when Ain Right. Hon. Gentleman opposite to him
(vlr. FosTatt) was Chancellor of the Exchequer.
Mr. Coital- then went into a minute statement 'of
the nature of the hereditary revenue of Ireland.
The Bill upon the Table, he said, went to regulate
the hereditary revenue'in two articles, viz. tobacco
and tea, and in both cases he cited several instances
in which Acts had passed: the Irish' Parliament in
which those articles had been affected without any
consent of the Crown having been .signified. He
contended there were also precedents to be found for
it in the British Parliament, but 'upon a subjea 'of
this kinds if any doubts were serioustt entertained,
he should be very Sorry to press the question on the
ground of precedent,; he had gone ibto this state-
ment. to, shew that the Law Officers of the Crown
in Ireland had drawn up this Bill in 'conformity to
uniform precedent.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
said, that his Right Hon. Friend" had in his opinion
cotinpletely.justified himself and the Law OFficers: of
the Crown in Ireland, as far as 4epetitted upon pre. •
cedents.- .Upon :examining this subjea, he said,
that-the interest of the CtoWnwaS certainty affected
though in a small degree ; under these cireintstances
he thought it right to resort to that quarter whose
assent, to,this proceeding was necessary, and he was
autfibriSed- by His Majesty to say, that as far as .
his interests were concerned His Majesty gave .his
consent to their.procteding with this Bill.
11r. ,ROSTER said, that His Majesty's assent
having been given, his objection was done away ;
but his great objetlion was, that thii, Bill was' to
make the duties perpetual instead:of annual.
Mr. ROSE did not object to go into the C4m-
niittee, but he thought the King's assent ought to
have.bcen communicated by a Message.
Tke C,HANCELOR. of the EXCHEQUER
said.there were innumerable cases in which the As.
ssent,was not given by a Message.
After a few words from MT. G. PONSONBY,
ORMiliy.'apcl. Mt. VANATTART, the House re-
solved itself. into.a Cordmittee on, the Irish Duties
Bill. Oa the first Clause being read,
Mr, ~',TOSTER rose to objea to thisClause,which
gran 4,1 these duties without any limitation of time,
and consequently. granted them for ever to this
Clause. he should ,therefore most strennously object.
It hart:been. the constant and uniform praCtice'ofthe
Parliament of Ireland to vote, the duties annually,
and he saw. no reason why that prattice was now, in
the midst of a War, to be departed from. It would
;let raise the Revenue, it was not called for by the

Merchants of Ireland ; on the contrary, it only
tended to harass them. It was the more unneces. I
sary to make these duties perpetual, because, from
the unfortunate state of the Irish Finances, the Irish
debt would soon bear that proportion to the debt of
Great Britain, that the Finances of the two Coun-
tries must, under the provisions of the Act of Union,
be consolidated; consequently in two, three, or four
years, all these duties, which were now granted for
ever, must be revised, altered, and many of them
repealed. What then was the use of this measure ? It
could only tend to harass the Merchants. •It was •
said that it would increase the security of the pub-
lic creditor ; but did the public creditors demand any
such security; were they not perfealy satisfied
with the duties being granted annually ? nay, when
the Parliament of Ireland once voted the duties for
only three inonths, did the public creditor complain
that his.security was injured ? The interests of the
Croivn were also affected, because some of the duties
which formed the hereditary revenue were repealed,
the hearth duty, for instance, in a great degree e so that
it would be impossible to grant tie. Crown an equi-
.valent for the hereditary revenue, because it would
be impossible to knOw to what the hereditary revee
antics would amount. It had been said by the Right
Hon. Gentleman, that the Merchants of Ireland' were
satisfied with this Schedule of duties, except in a very
few instances. Upon this subject he could only say,
that he had seen a representation from several Mer-
chants in Dublin, in which they objected to above
40 articles he would not now go through them all
but the Right Hon. Gentleman knew that with re-
gard to the drawback upon the exportatidhlPf foreign
herrings, they had presented strong retnortstbneea
they.had also made strong objections to the Duties
on Drugs, and on the importation of foreign
. Hops, and, above all, upon the export duty on the
Linen Trade. It never would have been- believed,
that a perpetual Duty of Four per Cent. woUld, have
been laid upon the export of Irish Linens. It was
a circumstance ,worthy of remark, that the first
perpetual Duty that was ever laid on in Ireland, was
a Duty upon the Export of her Staple Manufatture.
The Right Hon. Gentleman was the first person
that ever proposed even a temporary Duty upon the
Export of that article. With regard to the sche-
dule of the Duties, it had only been delivered last
Tuesday, and it was impossible to consult with any
• person from Ireland upon the subjel, or to consi-
der it with ?hat deliberation which so important a
aulaieCt deserved. Upon the whole he could not see
any reason why these duties were to be voted
.permanently e he could not account for it on
any principle of wisdom, prudence, or cteminon
. sense ; it would not increase the Revenue, it
would not give additional security to the public
creditor, it was not wished for by the merchants,
on the contrary, they were decidedly against it.
Why then would the Right Hon. Gentleman persist
in voting these Duties, even when he knew
they must be revised a short time, for the reason
he had before stated If the Right Hon. Gentleman
would now consent to propose them for one yea: lie
would, not oppose them, because he knew that no
othei duties were prepireal ; but if he persisted in
his intention of now voting them for ever, he
should move to insert in the Clause these words of
limitation, viz. " from the evil March, So.{., to
ae March, tso j." •
Mr. CORRY said, he really felt himself, in some
degree, at a loss tb answer the-arguments, if argu.
ments they could be called, Which the Right Hon.
Gentleman had urged against this measure, on the
ground of the duties being voted without limitation;
and the inference which he seemed to draiv, was,
that if they were now voted in that manner, that
Parliament would not have complete power to alter,
revise, or repeal all, or any part of-them, which
might he deemed necessary. If a young man, not
possessed of any parliamentary experience, new to
the forms and proceedings of that House, were to
in eke such an 0!- in4ion, the House would excuse
him. But he would be informed, that if he sup.
posed, that because a Bill' was passed without arty
limitation, that, therefore, it must of course be
perpetual, that ht was labourirg under a complete
•error. He world he told, that it was the uniform
pra4ice of the British.P.tr‘liament to vote all duties
and taxes permanently, aed that they never felt any
- shame on alt4hig or repealing any of them, if cite
eumstances should change and render it necessary ;
and it was now the praCtice to introduce into Bills a
Clause anew ing them to be altered or repealed In the
same Session ; and he recollected when, io compli-
ance with this wise and salutary pratflice, he 'intro_
duced a Clause of that kind, the Hon. Gentleman
accused him of having introduced it merely from a
conviction that, the meesure he waf; proposing was
erroneous,' and that it would be necessary to re.

peal
Mr. FOSTER said, he never meant to contend
that it was not in the power of Parliament co'alter
or repeal a Bill,
,though it had been voted without

limitation,
2,Ir.,CORRY said that there was then an end of
the:argument open that Stilueet, for the whole of
the Right Hon. Gentleman', ohjeetion 1)4 turned
upon the impropriety of doting the dtitliijfoftever.
Indeed one part of the Right Hon. Gentleman's
br:ech was a complete answer to the other, for at
one time he urged the impropriety of vOiing the
duties for ever, and in another he' contendid- that
they must in a very short time Undergo a.cOniPlete
revision. With regard to what the Right Hon.,
Gentlertimi had said, about the duty 'on the export
of-linen, he had so ftiquentlY answered those ob-
. kaions, that lae wis almost ashamed again-to 6c_
olpy the time of the House upon the Subjeft. But,
he believed he must fellovir the example of a great
-mat) in that House; who having frequently answered
• ,the. objetiohi that were made relative to the' Ame-
.rican Witi.,lafla finding the same ObjeCtions- eon-
- stintiv repektecl, at last declared "that whenever
any Genite6ln on the. other side made his American
speeeli; 1:& would make his Ameritian speech-also in
He would therefore shortly'state the prin-
ciple Upon which that measure Was 'founded: It
was this, that 'the' manufactures of the two Coun-
tries not to be sent to Foreign -Countries
Under di Brett burihens. .-He begged ,the Right:
Gcntleman.for one moment to' consider what
he 14"pulC.1 feel if an'y English Member-were to move.
{he ntitigini.neet Was to-be .exporttiVireeolduty,
IA hilt Irish linen was to be subjea lb duty ; he would

instantly exclaim against it on every pririciple of
justice and equality, and this was what he asked 'Ort
the part of; Ireland. There ,Was not one article
of Biitish rnantifieturel that was not subje& to,
this Export duty. Her woollen manufaaures, her
glass, her, hardware, her pottery, all were subjeet to.
this duty except only cotton, and there the Export
duty was commuted into a duty on the Import on
the raw inaterial.• There was not a single article
used in the British manufatture of linen that was
not taxed on importation, except flax : ashes paid a
duty on importation into England—they were im-
ported duty-free into Ireland ; barilla paid a duty
on importation into England—it was imported duty
free into Ireland ; brimstone -paid a duty on im.
portation into England, while it was imported
duty-free into Ireland, and so through every arti-
cle used in the manufaCture of linen : every one of
them paid a duty on their importation into England,
and every one of them were imported duty-free into
Ireland. These were the advantages which the
Irish Linen manufaCture possessed over the English
one, and in addition to this, the Right Hon. Gen.
tleman now proposed that when English and Irish
linens were exported in the same ship to the same
market, that the English linen should pay a duty of
4 per cent, and that the Irish linen should be ex.
' ported duty.free. He asked could this be contend.
I 'ed upon any principle of justice ? He was sorry
to be obliged to make this statement, but the Right
Hon. Gentleman forced him to do it. The Right
Hon. Gentleman said that the persons concerned in
the linen trade ohjeEted to this measure ; but it
was not natural that the persons engaged in the
trade should view the subje4t in so extensive a man.
ner as Parliament. He meant not to accuse or speak
with the slightest disrespect of the persons en-
gaged in the linen trade of Ireland ; he knew they
were intelligent, liberal, loyal men, and he was
convinced they would not cbjed to a burthen which
was necessary to maintain a contest with an enemy,
whose objet was the destruaon of the trade, in-
dependance, and happiness of both Countries. The
Right Hon. Gentleman had endeavoured to hold him
Out as the first person who proposed a Duty on the
Export of Linen. It was not he that had done it,
it was the necessity of the. Empire, it was the pres-
sure of citurnstances that rendered these measures
necessary in hods Countries, It was nut therefore
right, to hold up any individual, or.even Parliament
to censure, for doing that which could not be avoid-
ed, and which was necessary for the salvation of the
Empire. With regard to the objections which the
Right Hon. Gentleman had made respecting the Fo-
reign Herrings and Hops, he had before answered
them. Upon the whole, therefore, he contended,
that by voting these duties in the manner he had pro-
posed, the interests of the Crown would be more effec.
ually provided for, the Public Creditor woulii obtain
greater, security, and the Manufacturer would have
as ample means of obtaining redress as if the duties
were voted annually.
Mr. BURROUGHS objected to the. duties being
made permanent, unless copies of the- schedules were
• transmitted to Ireland, and sufficient time given for
their consideration.

Mr. CORRY replied, that due notice had been
given in Ireland.
Lord CASTLEREAGH defended the permanency of
the duties, on the ground of general convenience,
but expressed himself inclined to agree to the Chair-
man's reporting progress and asking leave to sit
Mr. FOSTER said, he had not heard of any
schedulers having been transmitted to Ireland.
Mr:Coa rTlied, that schedules had been sent
to the difEA-ent bodies of Merchants, and to all the
ColleCiors both of Customs and Excise in Ireland.
After some further conversation between Colonel
HUTCHINSON, Mr. CARR; Sir JOHN NEWPORT,
end Mr. G. PONSONBY,
Mr. FOX complained of the trouble given to
Members, by measures being brought forward
which it was afterwards thought proper to abandon.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
said, he did not understand there was any inten-
tion to abandon the measure. The delay asked was,
he understood only till to-morrow, in order to give
time to compare the schedules sent to. Ireland with
those of the present `Bill, after which it would he
a matter for consideration as to what was to be
dune with the Bill. 11
After a few observa.tions from, Mr. LATOUCHE,
it was at length agreed that the Chairman should
report progress, and tl:e Committee were ordered to
sit iaain to-morrow.