The Sun.
London, England, 1832-05-23 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS, MAY 22.

was ordered to be printed.
LOVrAd sßoßnEthebrSotu. gLheto nuaprda'srlernoprrtoovfemthe ne taßmielnl,dwinheincths of the Lords
Mr. HALIBURTON brought up the Report of the
in Lord
ou
rS
nTfAt
hNeLBEi
Birmingham
presenteda p
and
Lonet it ino Warrington
donu
Railway
way Bli.
Committee on the Edinburgh and Glasgow Railway Bill.
The Committee reported that the Orders of the House
relating to Railway Bills had not been complied with.
Mr. SPEAKER said he had wished that the report had
been differently worded, but it was not brought under his
notice until it was too late to remedy it. According to
the standing orders of the House, no petition could be re-
ceived or complaint made of a non-compliance with the
standing orders after the second reading of a private Bill, but
those orders did not refer to Road or Enclosure Bills. The
terms of this report were calculated to mislead.—(Hear,
hear.) There was a standing order especially relating
to Railroad Bills, and stating that a certain portion of
subscribers should be obtained who had pledged them-
selves, their heirs, or successors, to complete the under-
taking, before the Bill could be proceeded in. It was the
duty of the Committee to see that that list was lona fide,
and in this case the Committee had ascertained that a suf-
ficient number of subscribers had not been obtained. There
were two alternatives ; one, to lay the report on the table,
and the other was to refer it to a Select Committee, upon
the petition of any parties who might desire to proceed in it.
The report was then ordered to lie on the table.
On the motion of Mr. HUME, the Bill to alter and
amend the 23d George 11., and 19th George 111., for the
more speedy recovery of small debts in the Tower Hamlets,
was read a third time and passed.
Mr. TENNYSON presented a petition from George
Harris, of York•chanibers, St. James's, Westminster,
praying to be heard by Counsel against the Hull Docks
Bill.—Referred to the Committee.
RESTRICTION ON THE DRAMA.

Mr. LYTTON— BULWER presented petitions from
Mr. %V. H. Hale, a Magistrate, for an alteration in the
law of arrest, from the Trades Union of Perth, for a
repeal of the taxes on knowledge, and a very large peti-
tion from London and the suburbs, for a repeal of all re-
strictions on dramatic performances. The Hon. Member
spoke at some length in support of the latter petition, but
in so low a tone that it was impossible to catch what he
said.

Mr. HUNT could not refrain from expressing his ap-
probation of the presentation of that petition by the Hon.
Member, and was glad to hear it was that Hon. Member's
intention to bring in a Bill to repeal all restrictions on the
drama. According to the present system there was a
complete monopoly of talent; and when it was considered
giventt hh highaa tt
tiniCoclen
performers,s e
forp consequence urfeo It:L3 visitinge of that
the tarhneacdtl monopolyeaitv.tgeiede tiap,seua public
theatres, it
hmi t
wereonw rs a
se
oscahllheimga
night's
hi sums
gwet
hidmetr,liees
they were done away with. It was a well-known fact
employment as was received by many clergymen of the
Church of England for a whole year's duty.—(llear.)
Mr. HUME thought the plan suggested of having a
Committee to inquire into the privileges of the large
theatres was the best way of doing justice to all parties,
and the sooner that was brought forward the better. lie
hoped the lion. Member would not delay his motion till
the time lie bad stated.
Mr. BULWER observed that it would take some time
to arrange the preliminaries for the motion, but he would
bring it forward iu ten days.
Mr. E. PEEL presented a petition from Newcastle.
under-Lyme, which had been agreed to at a meeting
which took place between the period of the resignation of
his Majesty's Ministers and their re-appointment, praying
the House not to grant supplies till the Reform Bill became
law. The Hon. Member thought it would be much
better that the care of the Bill should be intrusted tothose
handswho hoa b
of those
t horsoeu hb to ta
df
swt arveanrud
0, u than b p
poa. e placedd it
.in the
Mr. HUME would take that opportunity of adverting
to what fell from himself and the Hon. Member for Stam-
ford on a late occasion, which seemed to have been very
much misunderstood. Wnat he had real:), stated was,
that lie thought it would be for the interest of the country
if those persons who held situations in public offices, and
who were opposed to Reform, were discharged.
The Hon. Member for Stamford had understood him to
recommend an immediate creation of Peers, and upon that
assumption he had made some observations which had
been very much misunderstood. He (Mr. Hume) therefore
felt anxious to eive the Hon. Gentleman an opportunity
of explaining what he really did state.
Mr. TENNYSON felt himself under great obliga-
tions to the lion. Member for giving him an opportunity
of setting himself right with the country and the House.

He had certainly understood the Hon. Member for Mid•
dlesex to recommend an immediate creation of
Peers. When he stated that he trusted means would be
adopted for carrying the Reform Bill, lie certainly meant
those means which the Crown had been understood to re-
ject. Now it had been stated in the public Press that be
had had the honour of an interview with his Ma-
jesty, and that at that time be had given advice
to his Sovereign directly contrary to the whole tenour of
his past life. Such a charge was altogether inconsistent
and unfounded.—(Cheers.) With respect to the senti-
ment that had fallen from him he had really nothing to
retract : he stated then, and he repeated it now,
that if the Reform Bill could be carried with-
out doing that which every man must feel was
a course to be avoided, as it would create a great
shock to the Constitution, it would be most desirable.---
He had stated then, and he stated it now, that had he
been a Minister of the King he should have given the
Rune advice to his Majesty a 9 his present Ministers bad
done, and if that had not been acceded to he should
have thought it his duty to tender his resignation. But
it did not follow from that that the Crown was to be ca-
lumniated, when it was desirous, if possible, of avoiding
such a course. He trusted, however, the means were now
found to carry the Bill through.—(Hear, hear, hear.)
With respect to giving his advice to his Ma-
jesty not to create Peers, it must be perfectly well
known to the House that he was one of those who had
blamed Ministers for not creating them long ere this.
He felt that he had been most improperly calumniated,
r he had never expressed any public, private,
or any other opinion on the subject than this, that
it was impossible for his Majesty to form a Go-
vernment without bringing forward a strong measure of
Reform. He had never given any advice inconsistent with
the opinions he had always held. It had been said that he
had been in treaty with the Duke of Wellington for the pur-
pose of getting into office, and that boroughs, in which be
and his friends had an interest, advocated Anti-Refornl
principles. All these assertions he treated as they deserved,
and could hardly bring himself to believe it neceasary
to mention the statements he had done, when the principles
which he had always advocated had been for so long I
time known to every body. He would, however, say, that
with no human being had be had any communication
either directly or indirectly, for the formation of a MI
nistry. He retracted nothing he had previously stated,
feeling convinced what he had said was perfectly consistent
with the opinions he had ever held.—(Cheers).
Mr. BEAU:IIOYr thought the House would derive
very little advantage from entering into an abstract dig-
cussion on the creation or non-creation of Peers. How'
ever touch the constitution might be shaken by the crest'
Lion of Peers for a particular purpose, it would receive 11,
much greater shock if Lord Grey did not create a suffi-'
cient number of Peers to carry the Reform Bill.
Mr. VERNON presented a petition from a place is
Derby, in favour of Reform.
Mr. ATHERLEY presented a petition from South'
atripton, praying the House to withhold the supplies untl
the Reform Bill should become law.

The HoN. AIEMBEIt also presented a similar petitiol
from Cheltenham.
Mr. SANFORD presented a like petition from So'
mersetshire.
Mr. BRISCOE concurred entirely with the prayer 0
the petition, and trusted Lord Grey would immediate)
create Peers, for the purpose of carrying the Bill.
Mr. TENNYSON said he would join most heartill
with the wish of the Hon. Member, if he thought it pos9i;
We to anticipate the failure of the measure, but he believe,
the means had now been found for carrying the Bill.
Mr. E. A. SANFORD then presented a petition foil
Chan], praying the House nut to grant any supplies til
the Reform Bill was passed.

Lord MORPETH said, lie rose to present a number 0
petitions from the county of York, all of which arose 00
of the circumstances in which the country was lately placed
but out of which he was happy to say we had so gl'
riously emerged. He would shortly state the objet
of the petitioners by saying, that they all concur'',
in praying that House to take all constitutional means i
its power to procure the passing of the Reform Bill safer
to its end, viz., the receiving of the Royal assent.
Mr. RAaISDEN, Mr. STRICKLAND, and Sir J. JONI'
STONE, severally supported the prayer of the petitions.
The NOBLE LORD then presented petitions from Deo4
bury, Huddersfield, and Halifax, signed by 13,000 pefl
sons ; Hepton•bridge, Pudsey, Murfield, Bradford, Leed'
Addingley, Wakefield, Whitby, Armly, Cleckheat&
Dingley, and Oatley, all in Yorkshire, and one fro."
King's Lynn, Norfolk, to the same effect.
Mr. HUNT had a petition from his constituents whi'l
had been in his hands for ten days, during which he h$
had no opportunity of presenting it. He hoped that 11,).
Noble Lord (Althorp) would allow him to get rid of IP
burden at that time.

Lord ALTHORP could not comply with the IT'
Member's request, because there were so many notici
upon the book. However, to-morrow the Hon. MernlS
would have an opportunity of presenting his petitii
when he would have no objection to extend the time ('
presenting petitions till seven o'clock.
Mr. HUNT said it was very seldom that he had bee
absent from his duty since he had had the honour 01
seat in that House, but one of his family was ill in tt
country, and he would not have it in his power to be
hia place to-morrow.
Lord ALTHORP, under those circumstances, could fl
have the slightest objection to the Hon. Member then pr
stinting his petition.
Mr. HUNT then presented the petition, which e
from Preston, signed by upwards of 3,000 persons is 11,
than three hours. On hear ing of the resignation of I‘l
nisters, his constituents had immediately held a meetitl
at which the petition was agreed to ; they, thinking
matter was one of life and death, had sent it off iinlS
diately, otherwise it would have been more oumerool
signed. It prayed for Reform, universal suffrage, ea°
ponied with the protection of the ballot, and annual P.
liaments, and prayed that House to stop all supplies t'
that was granted.
Mr. BARING said, tlatinconseq consequence
privilege
ceofalter
thethe title of his Bill for t
abolition of h
joyed by Members of the Legislature, he moved that t,,
order for it should be dit charged.—Leave was then gly
to bring in a Bill fur vacating the seat of insoles
Members.
in favour
ROBINSON
fnfan inquiry pre presented a
into
the petition
state
from
of
the
e trade NcVor
of etetil
country.
FREE TRADE.
Mr. G. ROBINSON, in pursuance of notice,
metre for a Select Committee to inquire into the pelle' .
adhering to the system of free trade. He began by aofic,
ing the indulgence of the House, and proceeded to dei,
the origin of the system of free trade, which, he contend
arose out of the change in the currency in 1819. Ile e
verted to the presentation, by Mr. Baring, of the pet',
from the merchants, &c. of London, in the following Ye.,
and after eulogising the late Mr. Huskisson,:compl°
that those who succeeded him in office had carried
principles farther than he ever meant them to exlsr,
What he desired most was, to press upon the House
fitness of encouraging our own manufactures, and of
ploying our own population, for which the enriching e
few commercial speculators could be but poor come,
:ion.
order
rßteoTp
s(h)iitoHwo
fo
tnht.
ahte t Membertenrdps:itnlcci then
nl
er aoidtnt e
ev
wa rhni oincuisic enixtmt
pna
rceotrscee
e,JI°;
was mistaken ; and he went on to show, that no fore
nb whileth e
they
ysehnatd Ministers,
opened
ite withtrade s;si
W
nation had followed the example of liberality we hal;
them. He observed upon the extraordinary steps 'l,'
setkbienra n
kind adopted
wine,
e, y
Indies to the United States, which had adopt
most most rigorous measures in opposition to our 800)
liberality. Their conduct with regard to portsg
and French wines showed that Ministers Wets
willing to give advantages to the most hostile S,
the most favoured nations. He again reverted t°l'
conduct of the United States, and to the tariff °;
creased duties established in 1824, while the King of 13;H
and the Emperor of Russia had also counteracted ,
object of Great Britain in every way. He noticed
establishment of the Navigation Laws in the re's
Charles 11., and the appointment of a Committee
Lord Wallace, in 1819, in order to ascertain WI,
they ought not to be relaxed. He contended, that the 06,
returns showed that we had been in error from the u
and that the endeavours of the shipping interest to °DI
an inquiry had always been defeated—not by stredlitt
facts, but by plausibility of stitement. If a ConOgi
were appointed, he could establish from documents'
without parole evidence, that whatever increa9
taken place in our shipping, was owing t°
tti
colonial trade, and that the shipping employed t
with foreign couotties, bad long been declining. TV
tries outward and inward afforded no fair test, as tbsi"
eluded many short voyages made by the same vessel.
.(,)
true test was, the increase or decrease in our coinso,?
marine ; and here he would show, that between 1130 i:
1831, there had been a decline of 680 in the nuol
ships built in this country, and of tonnage, to the eft'
of 103,000 tons. What had been the effect of this •
system? Why, that the commerce of this countd,
started a material deterioration. Between iele
1831, the decrease in the amount of tonnage was I if
and in the number of men employed 16,517. lie
that many persons thought our colonies were Ward

and he agreed with them that the colonies were not Wortl
having if their trade went away. Then, again, with the
countries of the north of Europe, what was the result??
lu 1826, our trade with Sweden, Norway, Denmark, acre'
Prussia was such, that we employed 113,000 tons of ship-
ping, while the trade of other foreign nations to the same
kingdoms only employed 98,000 tons. In 1831, though
it was true the amount of our trade had increased, its in-
crease had been exceeded by that of other nations tradius
to those kingdoms; for the number of tons of British
shipping employed in that trade amounted the 258,000.
while the tonnage of foreign vessels in that trade had in-
creased to 341,000. That was the change which hey+
taken place in consequence of these reciprocity treaties.
It was important to look to these things, not with the spi-
rit of party, nor with a view to any peculiar theory, but
with the object of deciding the question to which they
related, for the good of the country. In the present, or
early in the next Session, that House ought to examine that
question, not with regard to any particular political theory
but with the aid of by-gone experience—of the experience
of the last twelve years. They should try this policy hy
that test, and then they would see whether the course they
had adopted was wise, or prudent, or cautious, and whe-
ther they ought to persevere in that course, or to stop
short and alter their plan. He did not question the truth
of the general principles upon which they acted, but he
questioned the application of the principles; and even Mr.
Huskisson seemed to have done so too, for he had made
alterations in the enumerated articles of British shipping.
The Hon. Member for Middlesex said, let them have free
trade at all events ; but Mr. Huskisson had not been of
that opinion, for when the American tariff became the
subject of discussion in that House, Mr. Huskisson said
they must have some means afforded them of meeting that
tariff. The fact was, that with all manufacturing countries,
and all that desired to be so, we were losing our trade, and
only kept it with Spain, Portugal, and those countries
which bad not the means of becoming manufacturing
countries]. With such countries we had made an exten-
sion of commerce, for they were totally dependent upon
ns. With France and other countries of the same sort,
that could compete with us, our trade bad not increased ;
for, although our imports had increased three or four fold
since 1819, our exports had diminished in the same
degree. He would tell the Noble Lord opposite, that
while be did not compel an exchange of commercial arti-
cles with those countries, this country would lee trading
with them at a disadvantage. France had obtained the
direct mode of getting payment for her goods by compel-
ling us to pay for them in gold, but we had adopted the
circuitous mode of carrying on trade, and we suffered the
disadvantage of it. Our trade with South America had
been a forced trade for the purpose of obtaining a vent for
our goods which could not find an European market,
though they ought to do so, if the liberal policy which
this country was recommended to pursue had universally
prevailed. Our manufacturing interests for the last ten
or twelve years had been, with respect to foreign trade, in
a state of retrogression. In order to meet that, we ought
to have our internal commerce and our colonial commerce
preserved to us. The Noble Lord seemed to him to act
upon a policy of anticipation of some benefits, which, un-
fortunately however, never arrived. The French Govern-
ment did not act upon that policy ; it was not regulated by,
our example, but by their own views. The French Mini-
ster said that if France would pursue our system, it would
put an end to their commerce. The United States were
of the same opinion, and they were right, unless they
wished to make themselves dependent upon us ifor their
manufactures. This country owed all the advantages it
enjoyed as a commercial nation to the energy of its people,
and not to the wisdom of its Legislature. Indeed he
thought he might say that the commerce of England had
flourished in spite of the Legislature—(Hear, hear, hear,
from the Ministerial Benches)--in spite of unwise changes.
He would argue against the changes of the last twelve
years, made without warning by a Committee of that
House, upon the mere recommendation of the Minister.
He recollected the answer which Lord Castlereagh made to
him some years ago, when he waited upon the Noble Lord
at the head of a deputation, to request him to obtain from
Spain conditions favourable to the commerce of this
country, which bad expended so much blood and treasure
to effect the restoration of the Spanish Dynasty. The
Noble Lord said he could not do what was required, for
he considered it unworthy of a great nation like this, and
unbecoming our magnanimity, to make stipulations of that
sort. That might be liberal, but it was foolish. The
Noble Lord opposite in the same way refused to ask
favours from another Government, but he granted
them favours willingly enough, and in that way he
lowered the duties on French wines without requiring
corresponding favour for our manufactured goods ;
and by acting in that manner he, in fact, held out a
premium to other Governments to refuse to join us in
the reciprocity system. The peculiar state of this country,
from the amount of its debt and the expenses of its Go-
vernment, was peculiarly opposed to such a practice. The
Hon. Member for Middlesex said, let us have articles from
all parts of the world, provided they are cheap ; but if the
cheapness of the article was all that was required with re-
spect to commercial regulations, they must go a little
further, and give them cheap Government and the ex-
tinction of the debt. If that system, too, was to be fol-
lowed up with respect to manufactured articles, the same
rule must be applied to other things, and we must have
an alteration of the Corn Laws. France did not act upon
our plan. There were no less than fifty articles of our
manufacture prohibited, either absolutely, or by a very
high duty, from entering Paris, but the raw material was
admitted ; and its introduction, indeed, was encouraged in
order that France might become a manufacturing country.
and France was making such strides towards that state,
that unless we made some arrangements they would spee-
dily exclude us altogether. Our trade with Spain was
more advantageous than with other countries, but even
there French ships were admitted at the same rate of duty
that Spanish ships themselves paid, while English ships
paid a rate of duties considerably higher. That state of
things
was contrary to actual treaty, and he called on the
Government to look to it. Portugal again afforded one
of the most advantageous and valuable branches of our
foreign trade, and he hoped it would not be interrupted'
by the system of which he was now complaining. With
Russia, too, we carried on an advantageous trade, but
even with Russia our imports had doubled since 1820,
while our exports had not at all increased. We had the
advantage of all the carrying trade with Russia, but she
levied extraordinary duties with respect to British ships,
and a greater number of articles were absolutely prohi-
bited. That was not a liberal policy towards us, and
it was becoming still less liberal;—(Hear, hear,
hear)—for he saw, by the recent ukase, that they
bad increased the amount of their duties. Then
be came to the trade with Prussia ; that was one of the
countries to which we had been taught to look for an in-
crease in our trade, provided we would but consent to give
her some advantages with respect to the timber trade.
The increase had taken place, but it was really insignifi-
cant ; while our exports had actually diminished during
the same period. Since 1820 our imports had increased
from 587,0001. to 1,300,0001.; while our exports had
decreased from 974,000/. to 736,000/. With Sweden,
too, our trade had fallen off considerably ; our exports to
that country now amounted in value to only 157,000/.
not as much as to the smallest of our West Indian colonies.
Of what use, then, was it to encourage our trade to that
country, unless we did so upon an arrangement that must
be beneficial to us ? Our exports to Denmark only
amounted to 227,0001., while our imports had risen from
170,000/. to 494,0001. in the same time; and besides
this, the trading of British merchants to Denmark war
subjected to many onerous regulations. He would now
refer to the trade with the United States. On looking at
the returns, Le found that there was an immense in-
crease of the imports—the amount, in 1820, being
2,300,000/., and, in 1830, 6,200,000/,, without, how-
ever, there being any:proportionate increase in the exports.
But the chief blunder that we had committed, was that of
openingi the West India trade to the United States—not
y spontaneously, but without the slightest reciprocity
on their
part. He knew of his own knowledge that the
American merchants had for years been endeavouring to
get across to the British Colonies in the West Indies, because
it was felt that the United States would have peculiar facili-
ties for supplying them with timber and provisions. Another
effect of this conceasion was, that the American marine was
receiving a great accession of strength and activity.
The United States had no claims
this
colonies had
couritry,,
while on the other hand our North American
the strongest possible claims ; and, still further, he would
take upon himself to say that those North American coln
nice, small as they were in the comparison, were capable.
of affording as good a market for West India produce as
the whole of the United States. He knew that there
were some Hon. Gentlemen who thought that the two
could be united, but this was a mistak. for unless the
West Indies took their timber from the 'North American
colonies, the North American colonies would not have it
in their power to take the West India produce. The fact
was, that the United States were looking to the establish-
rnent of their own manufactures;
observe, and those manufactures,
it was necessary
cotton, for
most rapidly increasing.
Take the article of to
or instance;—ls] 1800, there
were only 500 bales of cotton fn
tt manufactured in the United
States; in 1805, the nunitibe.
1510, the number was 10,000 ; afndbailteis 18 wasl 1815, It,h n
000 ; iu
e
bet was 90,000. And, again, with respect to iron, there
were now 300,000 tons of iron annually manufactured in
the United States, the produce of which amounted to

thirteen millions of dollars—eight millions of which were
paid in the way of wages to no fewer than 800,000
persons, for whom the iron-works found employ-
ment. He believed that the Americans would mo-

(lily their tariff ; but still he felt sure, that tin.
American rate of duties would Always be sufficiently
'nigh to exclude British manufactures from entering tin
narkets of the United States with any prospect of success.
lie contended that the colonies of this country had not

een fairly treated by this or the former Governments o:
this country. There were a set of politicians in that
House (smong whom the llon. Member for Middlesex
stood preeminent) who were for looking at our colonies
merely through the medium of those annual votes which
were brought before Parliament for their support—and
who, seeing that those votes took money out of the
pockets of the people of this country, were too often
tempted to exclaim that it was time to get rid of the co-
lonies, if they were not able to support themselves.
This, however, was, in his opinion, a very erroneous view
of the subject. Hon. Gentlemen might, if they pleased,
continue to maintain the inutility of the colonies : all he

could say was, that be did not envy the contracted views
of those persons who entertained such opinions, and still
more must he deprecate there being i❑ the Councils of the
King individuals who suffered themselves to be deluded
by such views. In spite of all such attempts, however, he
trusted that a good understanding would continue to exist
between the colonies and England. He now came to the

last part of his subject, and that was the state of our home
trade and manufactures. He real'y believed that the

change which took place in our foreign policy was
made in the sincere expectation that it would promote and
increase the home trade and the manufactures of this

country. He had formed this opinion from finding that
at the time the most confident predictions were made to

that effect; and he therefore thought that he was war-
ranted in asking the House to consider what was now
the real state of the trade of the country, as corn-

pared with 1520, when the alterations took place. It
waa not necessary for him to prove that the present de-
pressed state of trade and commerce in England had been
occasioned altogether, or even in a material degree, by
those changes. It was enough for him to be able to show
that the predictions that had been so confidently made,
and so hastily assented to in that House, had not come to
pass; and that the state of our trade was now worse than
at any former period of our history. His object in making
the motion was to get the House to grant him a Commit-
tee to inquire into the state of trade, and the effects of the
policy adopted in 1820. He meant to call on the House
to form no opinion upon the subject, but only to appoint
a Committee. He would not anticipate the objections
which might be made, such as that the session was too
far advanced, and the House had other matters on hand ;
he would only say, that this matter was too important to
be with propriety neglected. The Hon. Member con-
cluded by moving—" That a Select Committee be ap-
pointed to inquire into the present state of our trade, com-
merce, and navigation ; and specially to investigate and
report upon the practical operation of the changes in our
navigation laws and commercial policy since 1820 ; with
a view to promote domestic industry, and to improve
those national resources by which alone the prosperity and
stability of the British Empire can be maintained."
Mr. PIGGOTT seconded the motion. To support his
views the Hon. Member entered into some statement as to
the declared value of commodities exported since 1810,
with the intention of showing, as we understood, that
there had been, since 1820, a great diminution iu the de-
clared valve of our exports.—(The lion. Member, how-
ever read over his figures so fast, that we could not cor-
rectly follow him.) The object of the regulations of the
Government was to encourage a trade with France. This
was bad ; for the two countries were not adapted to trade
with each other. They resembled each other in civiliza-
tion, their wants were nearly the same; and between them
there never could be much trade. Yet to encourage this
trade, to sacrifice the trade between this country and Por-
tugal, and our colonies, whence we got raw materials, the
Government was throwing away certainty for the
hopes of a trade with France, which would never be
realized. Our trade with that country was now next to
nothing. Our imports from that country did not amount
to a 122 d part of our whole imports; and our exports to
that country were only the 81st part of the whole of our
exports. The commodities we imported from France
wese all luxuries ; such as silks, perfumeries, and
other things of the same kind, all of which were
luxuries. According to the political economists them-
selves, these were articles which ought to be highly taxed.
Now what were the commodities which we sent to France ?
The returns of 1526 mentioned 111 articles of the total
value of 1,171,0001. Of these 11 1 articles, only seven
were of importance, and they formed two-thirds of the
whole. Of these, cotton yarn alone was exported to the
amount of 290,0001., and the rest of these articles were
indigo, raw silk, machinery, saltpetre, coals, &c. All
these articles could be of no prejudice to the French manu-
facturers ; on the contrary, they were of use to them,
and enabled them to compete with the productions of
England in the Foreign Market. Looking at our staple
manufactures, and selecting one, he found that our
cottons exported between 1818 and 1828 amounted to
152,752,000/. ; and what was the proportion of them
exported to France? 106,142/., or one two hundred and
twelfth part of what was exported to America, one one
hundred and sixth part of our exports to Italy, and one
seventy-sixth part of the exports to Portugal.
Mr. HUME thought himself called on by the reference
made to him by the Hon. Member (Mr. Robinson). It
was curious enough that the Hon. Member had described
all the returns as erroneous, and as unworthy of any reli-
ance, and at the same time the Hon. Member had not ad-
vanced one fact to support his assertion but what he had
borrowed from these returns. He had brought forward
no evidence whatever to support his views as to the im-
policy of our present regulations. He agreed with the
Hon. Member that it would be most beneficial to extend
our commerce ; but he thought that not only our domes-
tic, but our foreign commerce should be extended. He
would encourage anl promote all and every branch
equally, and as much as possible. As to our colonial po-
licy, he thought that the course pursued had been most
erroneous. We had been pitting one colony against
another, and ruining one for the sake of another. With
regard to foreign commerce, i.e thought it should be left to
those concerned in it, and he should be glad to see it
flourish. The Hon. Member ascribed all the evils we
suffered to free trade. Why, we had no free trade. All
our limbs were bound and fettered, and not one motion
was free.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. Member admitted
that prohibition, restriction, and protecting duties, were
evils of themselves, and yet the Hon. Gentleman's whole
speech was intended to advocate prohibition, rest. iction,
and protecting duties. Where did the free trade of which
the Hon. Gentleman spoke exist ? When the Hon.
Gentleman said that he (Mr. Hume) was advocating
opinions opposed to the commercial community, he
begged leave to remind the lion. Gentleman of the
great meeting at the Egyptian Hall, and the petition
presented by the Hun. Member for Thetford, which he
should never forget. He was sorry that the Hon. Member
for Bratnber, who then supported that Petition, was not
present, as lie could tell the Hon. Member, that the Go-
vernment, with which he found fault, had only followed
the recommendations of the merchants of London. After
that great Meeting and elaborate Petition, what did the
Government do ? Did it act immediately ? No ; it ap-
pointed a Committee, which sate for three years, and ex-
amined all sorts of practical men. The Government also
appointed a Committee of the House of Peers, which ex-
amined practical men from all parts of the empire. These
Committees recommended an alteration in the wine and
the timber duties ; and there was nothing he admired more
in the Noble Lord opposite (Lord Althorp) than the hold
and manly manner in which he brought forward those
subjects. The Hon. Member described those measures as
failures, and spoke of them as defeats; but how was the
Noble Lord defraud ? By a union of those who were
pledged to these measures ; and the Hon. Member was
himself one of those who united to thwart the Noble
Lord. That opposition was got up for factious and party
purposes. He was surprised to hear the Hon. Member
who wished for restrictions. Why, there was not one
species of raw material, one species of trade, which had not
been exposed to restrictions, as if the Legislature had studied
to limit the industry of the country. The Hon. Member
had selected silk as a specimen of the injury done to our
manufactures by free trade. Why, this free trade was yet
incumbered by a duty of from 30 to 70 per cent. The
lion. Member wanted to keep prices high because we had
high taxes ; but because the taxes were high, he was of
opinion that the people should get everything they used
or consumed at as low a rate as possible. According to
this view, lie had always been of opinion that we ought
to get our corn as cheap as possible. Ile had always ad-
vocated the removal of the corn laws on that ground.
Cheap food was essential to us, precisely because we had
'OEI enormous taxes to pay. If the corn laws were
abolished, a general equality of price would be the conse-
quence ; and the price would fall here, and rise on the
Continent. The Hon. Member had mistaken the mean-
ing of the Reciprocity Act, and confounded trade with
navigation. What was the origin of that Act? Why,
Prussia declared that it we did not, within a cot tarn time,
lmit her vessels into our Fits on the same terms as our
wn, she would lay heavy duties on our shipping. Where
Prussia had one vessel, England, however, had three;
and Mr. Huskisson therefore recommended that the ships
of foreigners should be placed on the same footing as

English ships, provided English ship were placed on tlio
same footing as the ships of those foreign nations. That
was the object of the Reciprocity Act, and as England had
more ships than any other nation, the advantage was all
on her side. If, for example, our ships were admitted
into foreign ports at I s. a ton, then the ships belonging to
those ports were to be admitted into our ports a Is. a ton.
.•

By that Act, then, we gained advantage in proportion to
our extent of tonnage. He approved of that Act, and of
the statesmanlike views by which it was dictated. Let
it be remembered, that no foreigners were admitted to
the advantages of this Act who did not comply with its
conditions, and admit our ships into their ports on reci-
procal terms. The Hon. Member objected to our admit-
ting articles from France. In his opinion, we did not
hot admit enough. If the mutual exchange between the
two countries could be extended, it would be for their
. . _

...
mutual advantage. Both nations would be benefited by
that. The Hon. Member said, France would not let our

goods into that country ; but if France would not let our
cottons in at 6d. a yard, and made her people pay 9d. for
them, encouraging smuggling, was that any reason why
the Government of England should not allow the English
people to consume French wine, and the other produce of
France, at as cheap a rate as they could be procured ? He
maintained that the Government was bound to suffer the

importation of such articles, even where no apparent reci-
procity takes place. Whether there was any reciprocity
or not, it was the duty of the Government to get goods as
cheap as possible, and therefore we ought to admit them
without any prohibitory duty. In speaking of prohibitory
duty, however, he did not include that portion of duty by
which the revenue was to be raised, but only those duties

which were called protecting, bat which were, in point of
fact, prohibitory. Every such law was injurious to the
interests of the community, and ought to be put an end to.
The Hon. Member then referred to the state of opinion in
America on this subject, as expressed in the mercantile con-
ventions held at Philadelphia and Baltimore to consider the
propriety of altering the tariff; and it was decided upon, even
by those of the most ultra opinions, even by those who
were desirous of keeping up the tariff to the highest point,
that it must be lowered—(Hear)—and it would be

lowered in the course of the next session. It was found

also by a Committee of the Congress, that by the course
which America had been adopting, she was sacrificing the
. .

best resources of a young country, and had been acting in
opposition to the best principles of commercial intercourse.
The American shipping had fallen off, whilst ours, in con-
sequence of our acting on a more liberal plan, had in-
creased from nine to fifteen per cent.—(Hear, bear.) H•
then referred to the report of a committee on the wine-
trade in France, to prove that similar opinions prevailed
there. The doctrine of prohibition was to sell to foreign
nations, but never to buy; just as if commerce did not
depend on the benefits resulting from mutual exchange of
the produce of different countries. It was a mistake to
look to gold only ; if he were to cram the Hon. Member
with gold, he would not be half so happy or so well off as
if he were to cram him with corn or other articles.—
(Hear, and a laugh.) The Hon. Gentleman had made use
of a strange argutnent ; he had said that it increased crime
and pauperism—that clime and pauperism bad increased
in a direct ratio as prices bad decreased. It certainly ought

to be the reverse, for as the means of enjoyment were
brought more within the reach of the poorer classes, the
more was the inducement to crime diminished. Tee Hon.

Member was wrong in the statements which be had made :
referring to the opinions which had fallen from him when
the petition from the Merchants of London was presented
in 1820, he defended the tone of argument which he then
pursued, and declared that he should object to the inquiry
sought for, lest it should hold out to the country any
ground for believing that they were about to return to the
old and evil system. There was nothing to call upon
them for such an inquiry : they had no petitions from
merchants or others on their table, and he thought it the
duty of the House to discourage every attempt to return to
a system which had been so ruinous as that from which
they had now happily escaped.—(Cheers.)
Mr. WHITMORE said, the Hon. Gentleman who had
made this motion, as well as the Hon. Gentleman who had
seconded it, had laid it down as an incontrovertible fact,
that trade had diminished during the last twelve years. If

ever an argument was brought forward on any question
calculated to deceive the House and the country, it was
surely this.—( Hear, hear.) It was remarkable that,
during the last forty or fifty years, trade had regularly in-
creased in a certain ratio ; and so far from having fallen
off since 1820, that ratio was yet more extended. The
annual official value of the exports of the produce of this
country, from 1790 to 1799, was 17,000,0001. and a
fraction. From 1800 to 1809, 26,000,0001., being an
increase of 9,000,000/. annually. From 1810 to
1820, 36,000,000/., being an increase of 10,000,000/.
in the preceding ten years. Front 1821 to 1830,
48,000,000!., being an increase of 12,000,000/. annu-
ally; whilst the exports from 1830 to 1831, exceeded
60,000,0001.—(Hear, hear.) Still they might sly that
the official value was no guide, and that the declared
value had fallen off, which was, he believed, the case ;
but it was not the value but the quantity which they
wanted to ascertain, and, in this particular, the official
value was a current guide. There could not be a greater
fallacy than to imagine that the trade of the country had
fallen, when, in point of fact, it had considerably increased
in amount; and from 1821 to 1831, there had been an
immense increase in the amount of exports.—(Hear,
hear.) The consequence of granting the Committee
would be to paralyse the taade of the whole nation.—
(Hear.) He looked forward to an alteration of the corn
laws, when corn should be made a national trade, which
would benefit even the agriculturists themselves.—(Hear.)
Mr. Alderman WAITHNIAN did not object to free
trade er political economy in themselves ; hut he objected
to a gross abuse of those terms. He did not blame the
Government so much as he did the principles and opinions
held in that House, and of which they bad now had suf-
ficient trial to prove their inaccuracy. The Hon. Member
opposite (Mr. Hume) had spoken of the commercial pros-
perity of the country ; but he asked, did not distress exist
on every hand ? Were not the middle ranks broken down ?
And yet all these measures had been tried; they had not
succeeded, and distress existed in spite of them. He did
not attribute that distress to want of property, but to the
want of a just distribution of property. Trade had been
depressed 100 per cent. since these measures had been in-
troduced, and out of 147 silk manufacturers in Spital-
fields, no less than 47 were completely ruined. This sys•
tern of favouring foreign manufactures had produced this
result. He called on them to agree to the motion of the
Hon. Member for Worcester.
Mr. P. THOMSON said the motion itself was far too
extensive to be complied with; for it involved all the
questions that could possibly be raised upon all the branches
of English trade, both foreign and domestic. The Hon.
Member had assumed, that within the last ten years the
trade and shipping interests of this country has been in a
state of rapid decline. He (Mr. P. Thomson) could con-
fidently contradict the statement, for it was distinctly dis-
proved by the officirl returns on the table of that House.
Ficon those returns it appeared that the trade and naviga-
tion of this country had increased in a most astonishing
degree within the very period to which the Hon. Member
referred. After all the debates that had taken place on this
subject, he thought that it would have been more fair for
the opponents of the system to have come down, and, in-
stead of making general attacks on the system, to put their
finger on some particular part of it. Had that been done,
the disproof of the charge would have been comparatively
easy ; but it was impossible to answer general statements,
that were most easily made when they had the least degree
of distinctness and particularity to fetter them. The Hon.
Gentleman said he should not complain of the system, but
of its application. That acknowledgement was itself a
triumph for tie system, if triumph it could be supposed to
want. The Hon. Gentleman had insinuated that the Go-
vernment bad carried this system further than the recom-
mendations of the Committees of the House of Lords had
warranted. He denied that that was the fact, as
would be seen on examining the reports of those Com-
mittees, (specially wishrespect to the introduction of
foreign goods in British bottoms. Time reciprocity
system had not been adopted voluntarily, but
under circumstances in which, if we had not
adopted it, we should have been completely ruined. If
we hail not adopted that system, foreign nations plight
have excluded us front their ports, as we had previously
excluded them from ours. He was sorry that Mr. Hus-
kisson had not carried the system he advocated further
than be had actually done. When commercial arrange-
ments were in discussion between France and England, the
former required to be allowed the liberty of fetching from
England to her own ports the produce of our transatlantic
colonies. The shipowneri raised a great outcry against
that, and said, that though it might be beneficial to the
merchants, it would be ruinous to them. In vain did Mr.
Huskisson attempt to convince them that France could not
compete with us in shipping, and that we should have all
the benefit of the carrying trade. The shipowners perse-
vered, and in an evil hour Mr. Huskisson gave way ; and
the result was, that some of the goods he alluded to now
went to Ostend, while others were taken directly to the
ports of France, so that the carrying trade in respect of
these articles hail been entirely taken out of our hands,
Much of the argument of the Hon. Gentleman opposite
depended upon the state of commerce and of navigation in
past times, and especially during time of war, but since
then the at t of navigation had much improved, and the
facilities of commercial intercourse had much increased, and
therefore nothing could be more fallacious than were the

reasonings of the Hon. Mover. In fact four voyages were now
e,ade to the Baltic for one that was made formerly. From the
time this country began to act upon the reciprosity system,
our shipping had prodigiously increased ; and with respect
o the shipping employed in commercial intercourse with
those countries with which we had treaties of reciprocity,
the increase averaged not less than 35 per cent. Some
Hon. Members appeared to entertain great apprehensions
that our naval ascendancy might be effected by the changes
that had taken place in the condition of shipping interests.
He should have thought that no intelligent man could sup•
pose that the greatness of England, as a navel power, de-
pended upon foreign commerce. Our colonial and coasting
trade would he quite sufficient to sustain our navy, though
he by no means admitted that the reciprocity system had
any injurious tendency upon our navy. Some complaint
had been made of the apparent favour shown by this
country towards France in the establishment of our com-
mercial relations ; but he would contend, that nothing
more than justice had been done to the French, in placing
them upon the same footing as Portugal and Spain ; and
he hoped the time was not distant when France would
take juster and more enlightened views of our own inte-
rest, and co-operate with England in still further enlarging
the great principle of reciprocity. But the Hon. Gentle.
man opposite had asked, of what value were all projects of
free trade, when they did not bring prosperity to the peo-
ple, and when the public distress was greater than ever?
He utterly denied that the distress of the people at all ap-
proached to what it had been represented. No doubt, in
such a community as this, there must occasionally be times
of commercial difficulty, and some want of employment;
hut he thought there could easily be found the most satis-
factory evidence of the increasing prosperity of the
country in the state of our poor rates. In 1819, 20, and 21,
the average poor rate of the whole country was
7,500,0001. ; whereas in 1831 it was only 6,890,0001.,
though the population of the country had increased two
millicns in the interval. He admitted that the iron trade
was not so flourishing as formerly; but that was more
owing to domestic than to foreign competition. The re-
strictive system of the Americans, so far from being of
any benefit to the United States, operated to the disadvan-
tage of their prosperity, for within fifteen years the ton-
nage of their shipping had decreased nearly 100,000 tons.
The Right Hon. Gentleman then read a long statement, to
prove that our trade had been on the increase since 1819,
which he attributed to the free trade system that had been
practised since that time. He thought that it would be
much more manly for those who objected to the policy of
the Government to come to the House at once and state
what their objections were, instead of coming with a fish-
ing motion for a Committee. What he wished was, that
they would state at once their grievances, and what they
proposed by way remedy ; then the question would be ar-
gued fairly, which was impossible so long as vague gene-
ralities alone were dealt in about free trade—a thing
which, in fact, did not exist in this country, and which
was only raised as a sort of phantom for the purpose of
misleading and deluding the people.
Mr. BARING, with respect to the motion now before
the House, certainly must say that in his opinion, though
the Hon. Member for Worcester had not made a most able
statement, a sufficient case had been made out by that
Hon. Gentleman for the appointment of a Committee.
He admitted that there was great distress in the country,
but he thought it was greatly exaggerated.
Mr. WARBURTON opposed the doctrines of the Hon.
Member for Thetford, and defended free trade.
An HON. MEMBER could say of his own knowledge
there was great distress in the country, of the extent of
which the Hon. Member was not aware. He could not
agree with the Hon. Member for Worcester, however, that
the distress arose from free trade.
Mr. ATTWOOD contended that all the interests of the
•ountry were in a state of distress.
Colonel TORRENS coincided with the Hon. Member
for Thetford, and was sorry he was obliged to differ with
the Hon. Member for Worcester.
Mr. ROBINSON replied.
Mr. EASTIIOPE postponed his motion.
BANK CHARTER.
Lord ALTHORP said that the motion on the subject
of which he had given notice, was one of the greatest im-
portance, as it affected the prosperity of the country in the
greatest degree, and nothing would have induced him to
have brouget it forward at so late an hour, but that, as it
was for a Committee of Inquiry, he did not think it was
right to delay it. He was anxious it should not have
been delayed, but other circumstances had prevented him
from bringing it forward as early as he could have
wished. There was another ground on which tie con-
:eived it would appear that it was not improper for
him now to bring it forward, which was, that he did
not intend to enter into any discussion, or state
his own views on the subject ; indeed, it would be
almost using contradictory terms for him to say he would
move for a Committee of Secrecy, and yet at the same time
explain the views to the House which would guide him in
Committee. It would be inconvenient, nay, improper,
even if he bad had an opportunity of addressing the House
at an earlier period of the night, for him to have gone into
a statement of his views on the banking system. He
would state the reasons on which lie proceeded in Com-
mittee. This was the first instance when the Bank
Charter was proposed to be referred to a Committee of this
House. But a feeling bad existed for a number of years
past that the period of the renewal of the Bank Charter
was the proper time for an inquiry into the general system
of banking. Great anxirty had been expressed that this
opportunity should be taken ; for the principles on which
the Bank had conducted itself should be subjected to the
review of the Legislature. And he did not think he should
have acted consistently with his duty if he had entered
into any negotiations with the Bank relative to the renewal
of the Charter without first appealing to the House, and
bringing the whole case before the Committee. It was de-
sirable this Committee should be one of secrecy, for though
secrecy was not particularly observed on these occasiors, yet
the advantage was; "et the question could not be brought
into discussion in the House, or what took place in the
Committee be there adverted to. This was a great ad-
vantage ; for when so much money was concerned, that
discussion should arise before the matter was completely
concluded in the Committee would be attended with great
injury. He hoped the House would not object to appoint
a Committee of Secrecy. The questions it would have to
discuss would be, whether the charter was to be renewed,
and exclusive privileges of any description given to the
Bank of England? And if these questions were decided
in the affirmative, the Committee would then have to re-
commend on what conditions, and under what restrictions,
these privileges should be conceded. He thought it would
be desirable also that the general condition of the Banks
of issue in the country should be taken into consideration.
The issuing of money was the prerogative of the State,
and therefore the Legislature had a right to say on what
conditions individuals should be allowed to issue money.
There was another point of view under which the Bank
of England must be looked at, viz , as the Banker of the
State. The bargains made with it in this capacity, and
as the manager of the public debt, should be inquired
into. The Bank of England was both a bank of issue
and the banker of the State, and it was incumbent that
those two characters should be kept distinct in the inqui-
ries of the Committee. He should go into the Committee
having his own opinion, but he hoped he had candour
enough to give them up if wrong.—( Hear.) The currency
was connected with the question of the Bank charter; to
enter into that in the Committee would involve the Com-
mittee in contradictions, and he thought it ought not to be
touched. He thought, certainly, the Committee ought not
to go into any consideration of the standard of value.
He had his own opinion, too, concerning the issue of one-
pound notes, but though he did not wish that subject to be
debated, it was impossible to exclude it from the Com-
mittee. He had great difficulty in selecting the Committee,
hut he believed he had placed on it a representative of every
interest and every opinion. He had made the Committee
numerous, it would consist of thirty persons besides him-
self, which was as great a number as could be placid on
a Committee of Secrecy.—(Hear, hear.) At the same
time he felt that he had omitted several Gentlemen who
would well deserve to be placed on it. The Noble Lord
concluded by moving for the appointment of a Committee
of Secrecy, to inquire into the propriety of renewing the
charter of the Bank of England, and the present state of
the Banks of issue.
Mr. BARING thought as the Noble Lord had placed so
many persons on the Committee of different opinions,
there would probably be as many different recommenda-
tions. The currency and the one-pound notes had no
connexion with the Bank Charter, and Parliament might
entertain those subjects at any time. He thought that
these questions should be excluded from the Committee.
He wished to know whether the Committee was to discuss
soul determine the conditions on which the Bank charter
sghioinuldfornottheentpeurhilnicto.
should be renewed ; and whether it was to make the
.bar-
ht
the responsibility of the Government. He wished the
thilisebathrgoauignr
but
thaitt
sthhoeuldCobme mlefattethe
Noble Lord to explain whether these points were to be
considered in the Committee or not.
Lord ALTHORP replied, that as to the oue•pound
note, it was not possible to exclude it front the inquiries
s.f the Committee, as the Committee would be appointed
to consider Bank issues. He meant the Committee not
to make the bargain with the Bank, though it might re-
commend the conditions of it. That must be left to the
Government. The subject of small notes could not, how-
ever, be excluded from the consideration of the Commit-

tee, without tying its hands up in a nio3t inconvenient
manner.

Mr. HUME thought that the firs question would be,
whether the Charter should be renewed ; or whether any
privileges whatever should be granted to the Bask of Eng-
land ? The Hon. Member (Mr. Baring) verned to take
it for granted that the Charter would be renewed.
Mr. PIERSE expressed a hope that a sufficient num-
ber of practical men would be placed on the Committee ;
for if they were to be all philosophers, he feared that
there would he no practical measure.
Lord ALTHORP, in reply to an Hon. Member, stated
the motion would not extend to Scotland, and was con-
fined to England and Wales.
Sir H. PARNELL hoped that the whole question of
banking would be left open to the Committee. Mto practical
men, those of the Bank of England, their effort subsequent
to the restriction of 1797, was to depreciate the paper of
that establishment 30 per cent. All the distress spoken
of this evening was said to be the result of practical men
restoring the standard.
Sir R. VYVYAN would venture to suggest that the
Noble Lord should not appoint such a Committee till
after the Reformed Parliament was assembled. He pro-
tested against the Committee, because it could never make
its report.
Mr. COURTENAY did not agree with his Honourable
Friend, because be thought this a better House than any
which could be formed, and he supposed that his Hon.
Friend thought so too.—(Hear.)
Lord ALTHORP bad stated last session, that it was
his intention to move for the Committee, and therefore the
Hon. Baronet ought not to attack him. In fact, the
Bank charter expire' next year, and therefore it was ne-
cessary that the inquiry should now take place. He did
nut apprehend that the inquiry would take up any long
time, as the Committee would rather inquire into the opi-
nions than evidence. Witnesses must be examined, but he
hoped that the examination would not go to a great length.
Sir R. VYVYAN suggested that some temporary expe-
dient should be adopted.
Mr. WHITMORE said a few words, which were not
audible.

Lord ALTHORP thought it not possible to exclude the
subject referred to by the Hon. Member (we believe the
one-pound notes.)
Mr. BARING thought it would be better to exclude it,
as it was totally distinct from the Bank charter.
Lord ALTHORP wished it might not be gone into—
that was the wish of his Majesty's Government, but he
could not tie up the hands of the Committee.
Sir M. W. RIDLEY thought it would be better, as the
one-pound notes formed no part of the circulation, to re-
strict the Committee not to enter into the subject. To
most it would create a great agitation in the country. He
wished it to be known that the Committee should not
touch the subject.

Mr. HUIIIE hoped that the Noble Lord would not re-
strict the Committee.

Mr. ATT WOOD thought that the subject could not be
excluded, for if bankers could not be suffered to issue one-
pound notes they were probably unfit to issue any notes
at all.

Mr. GISBORNE though' the subject of the one-pound
notes could not be excludedt rom the consideration of the
Committee. The wh Jle subject ought to be left open to
the Committee.

The Committee was then appointed, and consisted, as
far as we could make nut, of the following Members :
Althorp, Viscount Smith, John Morpeth, Viscount
Peel, Sir R. Robarts, A. W Heywood, B.
Russell, Lord J. Ridley, Sir M. W. Ebrington' Lord
Goulburn, H. Attwood, M. Lawley, F.
Graham, SirJ. R. G. Newport, Sir J. Wrottesley, Sir J. B.
Herries, J. C. Baring, A. Cavendish, Lord G.
Thomson, C. P. Irving, John Wood, M.
Courtenay, T. P. Warburton, H. Strutt, E.
Maberly, W. L. Phillips, G. R. Carter, J. B.
Parnell, Sir H. Morrison, J. Stanley, E. J.
Smith, R. Vernon ,Thompson' W.
Sir R. VYVYAN asked the Noble Lord if be would
exclude from the Committee Mr. Alderman Thompson,

the only Bank Director who bad a seat in that House?
Lord ALTHORP said he had excluded the Worthy
Alderman for the very reason that he was a Bank Di-
rector, and for that reason alone. It appeared to him that

the consideration of the Bank Charter was a question on
the determination of which a Bank Director ought not to
be called upon to assist.
Sir R. VYVYAN observed that there was a precedent
for the appointment of Mr. Alderman Thompson on this
Committee, in the appointment of several Directors of the
East India Company on the Committee appointed to take
into consideration the expediency of renewing the Com-
pany's charter.
Mr. K. DOUGLAS supported the appointment of Mr.
Alderman Thompson.
Mr. BARING contended that it would give great faci-
lities to the labours of the Committee to have a Bank Di-
rector upon it; for the purpose of affording any informa-
tion that might be required.
Sir H. PARNELL agreed with the Noble Lord that no
Bank Director should be on the Committee, which ought
to be free from all suspicion.
Mr. ROBINSON was at a loss to conceive why a man
so tit to be on the Committee as Mr. Alderman Thompson
should be excluded, simply because he was a Bank Director.
Lord ALTHORP was so aware of the Worthy Alder-
man's qurlifications, that had he not been a Bank Director,
he (Lord Aithorp) should certainly have proposed him as
a Member of the Committee. However, as it appeared to
be the general wish of the House, he would with pleasure
accede to it.
Mr. Alderman THOMPSON felt some delicacy on the
subject, but would accept the appointment as a public duty.
The motion for the appointment of Mr. Alderman
Thompson was then agreed to.
The several orders of the House were then disposed of,
and at Three o'Clock this moruieg the House adjourned.

DESTRUCTIVE CONFLAGRATION AT
Messrs. BARCLAY and PERKINS'S BREWERY.

Yesterday evening, about ten minutes after five o'clock,
a fire broke out in the great brewery of the above eminent
firm, near Southwark Bridge, which, for the frightful
spectacle which it presented, and the extensive destruction
of property which it caused, has not for a long time been
equalled in this metropolis. Of all the many conflicting
statements which we received on the spot of the origin of
this terrible catastrophe (and indeed so bewildered, so
absorbed in terror and stupefaction did all seem to be, who
witnessed the appalling vision, that it was not easy to
collect any information, save what the visible progress of
the devastation presented), the following seemed to be
supported by the best authority :—The miller, being
obliged to absent himself for a short time from his post,
committed his duty to another. A machine, called Ja-
cob's Ladder, which conveys, by means of revolving
buckets, the ground malt into the mash-tubs, became de-
ranged in its operation, or had altogether stopped. The
man, in whose charge it was left, took a lamp or lantern
to the bottom, to examine the cause of the disorder or sus-
pension. Either from accident or a sudden gust of air, a
spark dropped on the combustible malt-dust lying about.
An instantaneous and wide-spread blaze seized the arid
wood that composed the machinery, and before the men
on duty could recover from their consternation, the fire
was fed by the susceptible fuel that the heated apartment
abundantly furnished. Another version is, that the engine
was set on fire by the velocity of its own rotatory motion.
An alarm was spread with the greatest possible prompt-
ness ; but while fire engines and voluntary thousands were
rushing to save the concern, the flames bad gained too
strong a position. In less than one hour about forty en-
gines arrived, and all the avenues were crowded with a
dense mass of men, anxious to lend their aid. A great
body was admitted within the gates, others were
busy (flanked by a powerful body of police, forming an
outpost of defence) in assisting those who plied at the
engines stationed in the streets. London, Southwark, and
Blackfriars bridges were thronged with spectators gazing
at the magnificent but terrible picture.
At half-past six the fire having devoured the boiler
apartments, burst into the brewing-house and mounted in
a deluge of flame to the roof, which was topped by a cu-
pola 110 feet high. The engines were then brought to
bear with all their force upon this part, where the whole
power of the fire seemed to be concentrated. But the
volumes of flame that burst through the windows and
mounted high above the roof, mocked and baffled the ener-
gies of the firemen. The flames soon seized the cupola
and soon over-topped it. For about half au hour they
shot 100 feet over the cupola in one immense column.
The wind was quite still, which gave them a perpendicular
and compact form ; if the wind had been high, the lateral
and devious spread of the element, which seemed at this
time to rage with unconquerable fury, would un-
doubtedly have produced the most terrible results
soufrrouthnedingcupboulialdinwge:
se
cofortunately,asunled at once,
from
evenly-ascending direction of the fire, the but-
tttorheestslemes
and it sunk directly down, with a crash of thun-
der, beating all the under-floors in its course along with
it, and raising a shower of sparks that fell thickly on the
firemen and spectators. If the cupola had been under-
mined only at one side, and had fallen over, the havoc of
human life, in consequence of its elevation, and the con-
densed multitude in the yard close to the building, not
expecting so speedy a fall, would Lave given a moat ap-
palling aggravation to this terrible event. The whole
brewing house after this was one mass of fire from one
end to the other. The engines were then brought to the
hard, and continued for at least two hours to discharge

. tb Per -nt
'.•
': .- '7 At 1k •
1r
. * •••••'''. *
torrents of water tlrough the i A•.-sZLlvoleit I,*„. .
the walls ; but all effttts w, r. /se • 7;.;:r. I:'.l.ol64:..'..;;;llanittti: 4t
nir power could cheek the fu '5., rit e , ,,,,..0.i;,.• •
osense beams that supprted the 'oo ' --a,_ lit , ivied
of the building kept the flame alive—ftit a•
when a few of them fell, and by draWl4-after them the
mperincunibent mass, formed a heap of half-consumed
fuel ; no strength of water discharged from the engines
.(mid quench this compressed mass of burning mate-
rials. The fire having now borne every thing before it,
mei supplied from this reservoir in the brewhouse, gushed
into the stage, where the mashing-tuna and wooden
machinery were placed, and having con4urned these
reached the dwelling-house of Mr. F. Perkins, which
adjoins it.

Before this, precaution was used to convey all the fur-
niture away; but from the confusion necessarily iiiciden t
on such an occurrence, and the intemperate precipitation
of the strangers who tendered their services, some valuable
pieces of furniture were greatly damaged. They were
flung into the little plot of pleasure ground opposite the
house. The main efforts now of the firemen and persons
employed in the brewery were directed to save the hops
and malt loft. Several thousand hop-bags were flung out
of the loft, and rolled to a place of security. The contents
of the beer-vats, containing about 2,000 barrels of [her,
were poured out from the cellars to supply the engines.
At eleven o'clock, by the most incredible personal exer-
tion on the part not only of the firemen but of a vast body
of persons assembled in the yards (most of whom seemed to
us to be persons in a respectable sphere of life), the malt-
loft was declared to be out of danger. However, from
the immense pile of half-consumed materials that are
blazing within a few yards of it, if a breeze sliould spin
up from the south, there must be danger.