The Sun.
London, England, 1821-02-15 00:00:00

TEIE QUEEN.

Colonel Woon-:- presented a Petition, nume-
rously and respectably signed, from the Free-
holders and other Inhabitants of the County of
Brecon. AlthoUgh he did not agree in all the
prayers of the Petition, he felt it his duty to pre-
sent it. It began by declaring the fidelity to
the King, and the love for the Constitution, by
which_ the Petitioners were animated. To the
truth of this declaration he could bear sincere
testimony. A more loyally attached County
than Brecon could not he found in the kingdom
--(Hear. hear!). The -Petition proceeded to
censure the unconstitutional proceedings which
had been -pursued with respect to her Majesty,
declaring, tfiat they consider the omission of hei
_Majesty's name in the Liturgy as a condemna.
tion and punishment before trial—(hear, hear!),
They then proce.eded to express their disappro-
bation of the financial system, and their regret
and astonishment, that after five years of peace,
the
_agriculture and commerce of the country
should be' in a .state so ruinous—(Hear !)—The
Petitioners affirmed that they were Making great
efforts to restore the prosperity of the country.
,but_ that those efforts were rendered inelFectual
by the enormous expence of contested elections,
which prevented them. from having intelligent
persons as candidate. He- (Col. Wood) was
bound in gratitude to say, that in no county in
the island Were greater -efforts made to return
_Representatives with as little expellee as possi-
ble.. In conclusion, -the Petitioners- expressect
their conviction of the benefits that would result
from a change in the national councils,and there-
fore prayed the House to take such steps as might
induce his Majesty to dismiss his present Ministers
--(Hear,-hear!)—ltt this last prayer he certain-
ly did not agree with the Petitioners ; . for he
could not help thinking, that to his Majesty's
present Ministers the country was indebted for
the'blessings it enjoyed.—(A laugh).—The gen-
tlemen opposite might smile ; but he was per-
suaded, notwithstanding the distress that exist-
ed, that that distress •-mould have been much
greater, if they had been. the Ministers of the
Country. Of two evils, therefore, he must choose
the least—(A loud laugh).—Being convinced that
the country would derive no advantage, but the
contrary, fro'm a change of Ministers, he certain-
ly could .not concur in that part of the Petition.
—The Petitiot was then brought up", read, and
ordered to be printed.

CONDUCT OF SHERIEFS

Mr. Br:Arista:s'r Tose, in pursuance of his no-
tice, to call the attention of the Ifouse -to the
conduct. of Sheriffs in refusing to call Meetings
for the purpose of Petitioning, and to move that
the Cheshire Petition op that subject should be
referred. to the consideration cf a Committee. It,
would be in the recollection of that House, that
on Friday last, a Petition was presented by-a_
Noble Lord,.oomplaining of the conduct of the
Sheriff of Cheshire in two points--the one, that
he had refused to propose an Amendment moved
by a Noble Lard to the original motion, and the
other, that he had omitted to put the negative on
that original motion. It was not his intention to
advert to the conduct of any particular individual,
with a view to draw upon him a vote of censure.

What Le Complained of generally was, the un-
constitutional conduct of the Sheriffs of Cheshire.
Northumberland,;* Gloucestershire,• Kent, and
elsewhere; and' his object was to propose some
legislative measure which should prevent the re-
currence of such conduct. I.le would not take
the other course to which he had just alluddd; on
account of the absence of one Hon. Member spe-
cially interested in the question, and also. as he
was desirous to avoid.all observationslhat might.
have
,a,iy tendency to affect the character of Gen-
tlemen, in_ preserving a due .respect for whom,
the Whole country was so much interested. He
had already-stated that in the case of Ches-hire,
the conduct of. the Sheriff had . been complained
of on two grounds. . With respect to the first,
his refusal to propose the amendment of a Noble
Earl, it was obvious that,. by such means, a She--
riff might prevent all advantageous discussion on
a public question. The other point was of still
More importance. It would be, in many cases,
impracticable correctly to ascertain ;the sense of
a public meeting, unless the. negative 'as well as
the affirmative- -of • a- question were put. He
Would not trouble the House with the different
cases in Which Sheriffs had.acted improperly—s
they would be for the considerafrion of the Com-
mittee. With respect to the case of Northum-
berland, the requisition had been_ signed by a great
number of persons possessing property to a great
extent ; the object of the Requisitionists was per-
fectly legal. The SheriffobjeCted to call the meet-
ing, not on the ground of illegality, he assigned no
such ground, he acted merely on his own discretion.
The object of the meeting which he refused to call
was perfectly legal ; and, considering the rank
of the persons who signed the Requisition,.nnd
the general respectability of the county, not the
slightest danger or inconvenience was likely to
occur. The Honourable Member next alluded
to a late-Act of Parliament, the' Act agiiinst
Tumultuous Meetings, which took away the right
of the people -to hold public meetings, and gave,
to the Sheriffs an extensiVe and dangerous poWer.
It was not the intention of.the Legislature to give
so great a discretion to the Sheriffs; for he remem-
bered a declaration made byMinisters in thatllouse,
when the Act in question was- under consideration.,
The Ministers de'Oared,that the meaning of the
Act was to give the sanction of law to that which
existed before only by sufferance. He contend-
ed, that the important right of Petition was, by
the new power given by- the Act in -question,
greatly endangered. He trusted that the House
would take some measure' to limit•that power
within certain bounds, either by amending or re-
peal;ng the Act altogether. He would willingly
vote for its repeal, because-he was convinced that
the- inconvenience and danger complained of was-
occasioned by that law. He hoped that he brought
.forward this subject in a manner not likely to in-
crease the agitations of the country ; far diffe-
rent, indeed, Was his object. Ills object simply
was, to correct what appeared to him to be an
abuse of power, and to prevent the recurrence-of
acts so irritating as those of which he complained.
=The Honourable. Member. concluded by mov-
ing, C 4 That the Petition presented, on the 9th
'instant, to that House, from the Inhabitants of
Chester, complaining of the conduct of theJligh
Sheriff in refusing to call a County Meeting,
should be referred to a Select Committee, toßxa-
rnineinto the matters therein stated, and to re-
port to the House thereon."
Mr. DAVENPORT asked whether this motion
was not in substance the same as that of, which
notice had been' given by the Honourable Mem-
ber for Appleby ?
Mr. BEAUMONT said, that the object of the two
motions was very distinct. His (Mr. B.'s) ob-
ject went merely to prevent the recurrence of an
evil. The object of his llonourable Friend went
further—it went immediately to-the consideration
of the Sheriff's conduct, with a view to have him
censured or removed from office.

Mr. CREEVEY said, he thought that.the motion
of his Honourable Friend would have been for a
general inquiry into the conduct of Sheriffs as to
the exercise of their discretion in refusing to call
County Meetings. Such, he thought, would have
been -the object of the motion suggested by the
refusal of Sheriffs in various counties—in Glou-
cester, perkshire, Kent, 4ncl other
.places. - The
motion of whiCh he (Mr. Creevey) gave notice
last night; stood on different ground—that motion
was suggested by facts stated by different Mein...7
hers, from which it appeared that the Sheriff' de-
clined putting an Amendment, or proposing a ne-
gative to the Address. Ills object, in giving .the
notice of last night, was to bring-the conduct of
the Sheriff before the House, with a view, in case
it should appear that he had 'acted improperly,,
of having him censured by the House, It ap-
peared to him that the- motion of his ilonoUrable
Friend was exactly the same as that of which- he
had given notice.

Lord CASTLEREAGH said, the object of the mo-
tion, as appeared to him, was to inquire into the
conduct' of the Sheriff, with a view to ground
some further proceeding. He begged to observe
that it was by no.means a matter of course to put
an individual, charged with possible misconduct,
to the trouble arrtr expence of bringing up wit-
nesses from the,courto'. Ho apprehended that
it would be better-if the lion. Member for Nor-
thumberland and the Hon. Gentleman behind
him, would postpone the question until they had
the whole merits of the case before them. Then
the House would be able at one view to see the
nature of the- delinquency charged against the
Sheriff. It was a subject well deserving of at-,
tendon, and before they came to the discussion '
of it, they certainly should have the facts and
merits of the case 'before them. -lie threw out
the suggestion, and not by -any means for throw-
ing any embarrassment in the way of inquiry.
lie wished to have the matter put in the most
distinct and intelligent manner, and with that
view he suggested that the motion should be al-
lowed to.stand over until the is hole of the facts
should he collected.

Air. DENMAN said that a Petition had been
put into his hands, which he would have present-
ed early-in the evening if he were aware that the

, . _ _...._,....,
motion was to have been brouKlit on. A Requi-
sition had been some time since presented to the
SJe of Middlesex for . a County Meeting
which they declined calling. Mr. Sheriff.Waith-

man, in case his conduct should. tie 'objected to in
declining to call thatMeetiq, had certain papers
to produce to the House which would justify his
conduct. The question before the House was
certainly very importantondhe was glad to hear
the.declaration:made by the Noble'Lord ; but he
thought that declaration was a little incorleisteut
with the conduct. Ninisters,- partictilarly at
.the Harnpsl4re Akettitig. -
tend tilat'llreetii'ig and. openly. oppose the object
for which it was held, but a number of them
signed
,a counter-requisition.
BEAUMOST assented to the suggestion of
Lord Castlereagh,A4dthe motion was withdrawn
for the present. • •

SCOTTISH JURIES.
Mr. KENNRDY, in bringing forwardtistshotion;
said.that it was of the utmost importance to re-
move any blot that might casually appear on the
administration of justice ; fie did not Mean to
cast the slightest imputation on the conduct of the
Learned Judges in S-cotland, fo'r en,--
tertained the highest possible respect-,and he felt
he was only attempting to relieve them when he
endeavoured to remove defects in the administra-,
lion of justice. In the year, 1701, an Act was
passed in Scotland which might be properly call=
ed the Habeas Corpus Act of that country ; it
was an act to secure the liberty of-the subject,
by-virtue of which, any individual charged with
an offence, might compel the prosecutor.tO bring
him to trial within a limited time. Unfortuhate
ly many persons were denied the benefit of that
Statute, because the-expettce of 'seeking foe're-7
dress under it was too heavy for those individuals
to meet. Again, persons were only entitled to
the benefit of the Act of 1701,- who
.previously
qualified themselVes by goihg to gaol,
.persons•
out on bail could not obtain the benefit ofthe
provisiOns of that Act. Another defect to which
he felt it necessary to allude, was Ors arbitrary-
jUdgments pronounced in Scotland, ,no matter,
what the punishment, ft om the smallest' fine,
up to transportation for five years, and Jot., life ;
Judges pronounced arbitrary judgmentsee-peli-
tical 'offences also carne" under the cognizance
of those Courts.
.By a late Act,,,whiCh na-
turally excited alarm in this country, a man
convicted of the, second offence in the
-case
of libel,' was made subject to. the punishment
of banishment ; but -in Scotland it 'is the law
to transport a man for the first offehceese(Hor„
hear !)—ln the course of the last-year, .an in-
dividual in that country, convicted, of a seditious
libel, was transported_ for five years--. (flear,hear!)
—That individual was. now, under,going 'that
punishment—a punishment which he understood
was considered rather lehient—(Hear, hear,
hear D---Another point--to which he would allude
was, the power assumed and exercised
-.by; the
Lord Advocate, of filing ex-offleioinformations,
by which means he took away from the accused'
the benefit of c. Jury, in the firSt instance. Ano-
ther grieVance on the accused, party was, that he
was denied the benefit ef any informality: that
might appear. Where such inforinality'appears
the prosecutor " deserts. the diet,'! pro loco et
lempole, and the party_is sent back to prison, and.
brought, up for trial a.second 'time, for' the same
offence. Another crying evil was, the -mode of
selecting Jurors for criminal trials,. The praee
tice was, that forty-fiVe persons were presented
by the Sheriff, out of which fifteen pees Ons were
selected as a Jury to try the csse: Iti Sq;otland
there were. four Counties As ithie the' 'Circuit-I the
-Sheriff returns at Edinburgh .4.5 prsonS'for each
of those Counties, making 'OO persons. in the
whole. Those names are deliverechti;the Judge,
and out. of them he 'selects 45 perionSsathtis will
acid _pleasure. lle was far from suPiAssing that
the Judges acted improperly or partially, but he
submitted that those were preliminary arrange-
mehts which ought
.not:tteexist.' It-should be
recollected, that in all cast*--sincaSes of murder
or of robberyeeseighr Jusor.a,ohf; a fifteen were
sufficient to cOnyict the accnsed...4n a country,
where one matt might lose his life bylhe decision
of another,-sthe greatest caution ought to be obs
served in thesselection of Jurors.------(Hear, hear !)
—The Hon. Gent. next observed,. that though Sir
G.M'Kenz-ie stated that,the right of peremptory
challengeexisted in Scotland, such right did 'not ex-
ist, and was not sanctioned by authority. The
reatedyhe proposed was, that the Jury, insicad,of
being norninatedas theseare, should be selected by
ballot. He would alsogive touacif Orly theright to
a small amount, of peremptory challenge. lie
would give the prosecutor the right to challenge
three J urors, and the right to the accused of chal-
lenging three also. He did not wish to go, ,far-
ther, though he thought that the right of peremp-
tory challenge might with safety be extended
farther ; in a country where the life and
.fame of
an individual might depend On the voice of a
single man, no party feeling should be allowed to
exist. In England' the right of, peremptory, chal-
lenge, in cases of capital felony, was always exer-
cised, and was generally permitted in other cases
as long as Jurors could be found., He'under-
stood that the Learned Lord (the Lord Advocate)
intended to introduce some measure of ameliora-
tion with respect to the Law 'of Scotland ; he
would be glad to find that the question concern-
ing the selection of Juries was intended to be em-
braced in that measure, but he was- not aware
that such was the intention of the Learned Lord.
The lion. Gentleman concluded by moving for
leave to,bring in a Bill to regulate the Appoint-
ment of Jurors in criminal cases in Scotland.
Lord BINNING said, that he regretted,- with his
Hon, Friend, the absence of the Learned Lord
(the Lord Advdcate). It was riot to be supposed,
that he (Lord Binning) could be able to reply to
the statements 'that had been made ; indeed, it
was not necessary, for his Hon. -Friend•had gohe
into matters which were quite extraneous'to the
object of his Bill-e---,(Hear 'hear!) His Hon.
Friend had alludesho what, he called arbitrary
punishments; he would state the nature of those
arbitrary punishments. Where an individual
stood accused' of an' offence whiCh was death
by the law, the Lord Advocate had the right
of restricting the libel, which was', pro tanto,
restricting the power. of the Judges in favour
of, the accused. He:was not prepared to assume
or deny the propriety of the change, proposed
but in the abSence of. the. Lord Advocate,
and in the utter ignoranee of the
,t(otte, with the

exception of two or three Members) he hoped ids-
Honourable Friend would content himself with
having the Bill read a first time, and letting it
lie over. ..
Mr. M. A. TATi.ort,,,,laid, it was rather unpar-
liamentary that his. Hoer', Friend should be as-
sailed because he brought forty d the Motion in
tlik absence of'the Noblrolle;r whose duty it
nfai,,to be Arf :14 di qt gee why, esenif the
Lord Advocate Ica absent, their tongues were
to be tied ; the Nob e Lord should rather have
IS(
apologised for the Learned Lord than have
inculpated his Honourable Friend. His Honou-
rable
Fiend- had broup,hteto .view the arbitrary
~
power exorcised by ,the Court of Justiciary', to '•
instances of which he (Mr.. 1.,) had.happened,t6te
be witness in
,a case, the details of which •weea • •
printed,•and which was also to be. found in, the '.
debates of that House; he meant the case of Mr..
Muir and. Mr. Palmer (Hear, hear, hear!)-----11e,-..
(Mr. T,) had been in the House in the time of -
the debate,. as well as in Edi.nbarghr at the time .
of the trial, and certainly, in common v:it'n...
many others, he did not ,think the verdict vies
that which would have been given hv an Englis;r .
Jury.—(lleac l)---Ile had
.on
.this point the tes-
timony of a man of no mean authority,• who
_was
present the whole time, he meant the late. Sir
S. Romilly. Mr. Erskine, a lawyer of the veil
first eminence, declared, that on that occaiot
the'Court of Justiciary had misunderstood the
law, when they sentenced the prisoners to trans-
portation. The law. said, that persons conviettel
of sedition should be-" banished from their pleae
sant fields and native home's." But this never •
had been understood, or could be honestly inter-
prete.d, as giving a power to transport the _prig
sOner to a particular place, -as they -did those
prisoners to Botany Ba v. The cage, was brought
befee,e the Douse- of Commons by the present
Commissioner. of the Jury Court (Mr. Adam) ; .
the Judges escaped ce.nstire witli veil, great dila-.
cutiy„ And no one who heard, that.debate, could
suppose that the law gave the -power assumed a
banishing . beyond the seas for,eedition and libel.
But, , forsooth, they were ncrt to speakiof .Scots
law, unless the. Loid Advocate was present. In
the.liOuse of Lords, the Chancellor decided ()J.: ie
Scots.law, though no Scots lawyer, and in that
house, even if the Lord Advocate had been pre-- "
sent,-he should take on himself to decide accord-
ing to his own judgment;
Mr.- J. P. GRANT said,• the principles of the
Bill had been laid..bY his Honourable.Friena en. •
grounds which required no amplitication„ but h ..,
should rectify a mistake-of the :Coble Lord (Lord
Binning), who supposced that it was only when a
libel was restricted by the Lord Advocate that
an arbitrary pOwer was exercised by the Court of .• .
Justiciary. Within not a great many years, ill
those cases ie. which by the law of Scotland they ••
were enabled to inflict a punishment, of which the
utmost extent was banishment from Scotland,
the
Judges had assumed the power to transport tne.
prisoner- to a particular place, as under the Trans-
portation Acts in England, and in a recent ca:sev,
for one of theseoffences, in which banholunent was
the utmost legal pnWshment, the prisoner wasfe-
-omi-trended by an unanimous jUry to the leu,itf•
of, the Court. and that Court, in its lenity, trans'
ported him for five years. I

Lord Rtzvi.t.-cp._ explained. Tie had not said
that ther.t.,ourt of St.sticiary never exorcised the 4--
power of seniencing to transportanol,,,inlia:
where the oiunce was. capital one. What /le •
had stated was, that what was caned " an arbi-
trary punishment" was hi fact a leniency, because
the puniihrnent was only so restricted, in pse*oL,
capital offetice.7—Leave was then granted to bli4
in the Bill.

nrwritl rLot7rt:
CLI'IFc, after men tianin 9: that for sane'

time a practice had prevaile.4 of supplying oar
garrisons-abroad with American in preference ta.
English Flour, moved for an account of a.l-I•Lh°
Corn and Flour,' the produce -of America ana
Foreign countriecontractedsfor by his Majc,;'..y*3
Victualling Office within the last three years.
The CnANcEr.i.on of the ExcatEouE4-esl3"
ed, that during the war the "colonial garrisons
been-supplied as they best aught be,. but that
the Commencement of the peace, the TreaslitT
had issued an order that they should be supplica
with British corn and hour. Daring two year 9
that- this system, had prevailed, a great part of
the flour was returned unserviceable, and..the,
strongest representations were made that Americam-
Hour on ly might be sent out. American fiour had foi'
two years been supplied. But on the repres?u-
tations of agricultural gentlemen, and on its being' t
proved that British .flour might.boso prepared as
to be egnai to American flour, the Lords of 'the
Treasniy. lied changed their systeM.
Mr. Cumw EN said, that the only ditrerence be-
tween American and English flour was, that tke
former was kiln-dried, which of course might 1;°
done -with the -latter when it was sent to
climateS.

, Mr. IftNE protested against a departure frPi,o'
the principle that the Government ahould supplY'
itself at the 0-leapeo market.
After a few words. from the CHANCFLT c'f
die EXCHEQUER, the motion‘was, agreed to.

• lONIAN ISLANDS...
Colonel DAyrEs wiAed to know how long- tlt°
Inspectors of Militia were be kept up in tl'e
lonian Nes, where militia (as appeared. by
,etn rus) was embodied. Their salaries arnouute
:o about 40001.; they were nominally paid. out Q`
he royenne of the Island, but While those rev"
rues were, insufficient for the insular expences,
bey were in reality paid by' this Country.
Mr. Got]LeußN said the inTectors were 0111-
!ers on the Stall, 'and 'were appointed for no den"
lite time.

Sir J:Nllwroar wished to know whether anY
more Reports were to be made from the Cora'
missioners on. the Fees of English Courti of 3116:
tide, of which not, one had 'been presented for by—
_
years answer was given.
'Mr. Bitou-cHAm,'in reference to the inspec!ov 9
in lonian Isles, wished. to know whether etc Y
were continued when there was no militia ?
Mr. CO,ULBURN said, though there was no ":
litia embodied at the time of the 'returns; that
did not prove that the militia did !lot exist.
Colonel DAvrEs sajd, he could explain how thq
fact was.. In rcality- there was no militia. Uncler

X

I

the old government of the island there were vil-
lage offlc.ers who trained the militia, and who
called them out at certain times to exercise.—
Since the British Government had commenced,
they had been called out, and they had .unani-
rnously refused, becaufe there existed a sys,tem
of misrule . and misgovernment in those islands,
which,- the sooner it was put a stop
.to the better
for our connexion with those islands. Thai sub-
ject, however, would be brought substantially
before the. Hanse. fact, none existed But as to militia, in point of
cu rists. , and the inspectors were Sine-
.l Memenr". GdIaIIURN
Statements.respecting the lonian Isles, when they.
M C e eumined, would be found inaccurate.
Bill r. C. GRANT moved for :leave to bring in a
to regulate the Office of Clerk of Assize,
and...Nisi Prins_ and Judges' Register in Ireland.
Leave given. ,
tt
,„
Ous 4r. C. GRANT moved . that to-morrow the
e resolve itself into a Committee. on the Acts
respecting the Judes' R
IRegisters Salaries.
Ibn
the.
answer to a g
question from Mi. CREEVEY.,
r' C. GRANT said his object was,"in pursuance
ofrish recommendation of the Commissioners on
I Courts. of Justice, to take away the fees,
and to pay the officers by salaries to be.-made.up
tY a stamp duty on certain parts of the gro-
eedng

SCOTS MALT nun%
On the motion that the Ccimmittee of Supply
be postponed to Friday,
Lord-A, HAMILTON asked, whether the Chan-
teller of the Exchequer intended to make any
alteration in the duty on malt, which, in the
Northern Counties and in Scotland, amounted to
snore than the price of the article ?
The CHANL rt ELLo of the ExcHEQLLR said he
had obtained much information on this subject,
and should lay it before the House : but he did
not find reason for making any alteration in the.
duty, beyond that alleviation as to malt made
from beer. or big whichavas made last year.
MPREVENTIVE SEILVICE.—REVENUE.
r. Wanat was anxious to make one or two
earks. with respect to the mode. of service
with
mcii Government had for some time established
a view to the prevention of smuggling. He.
had understood the Right Heil. Gentleman to.
have said,' on a late occasion, that he was ouite
satisfied with are measures at present instituted
for that purpose ; and that on a comparison of
the illicit importation of French wines add spi-
;its last year, with that which had been carried
°tl in the preceding ode, he was-led to presume
that smuggling-10d very considerably diminished.
lie (Mr. Warre) was not prepared to state that
It had increased ; but he was very desirous of
calling the attention of the House. to the manner
in which it had been proposed to carry this plan
4uo effect. He could only premise, that it was
ch a mode as Mr. Pitt—when some of the du-
":s: in consequence of which smugglers found it
aevantageous to- exercise a contraband trade,were
the imposed—would never haye thought of, for
;Ile attainment of such an object. At the same
is let him not be misunderstood, as if he
1.1-1. undervaluing the difficulties whidt su.r-
,,!unded its attainment, or as if .the fair trader;
;Lid consequently
.the national revenue, was
both to be protected. He was aware that they
ti°l„th„,rset quire protection and- he knew, too, that
Ih'4"f-ion-of many Honourable Gentlemen to
their
o, of:any one of those duties was
talui rluluil of the absolute necessity of main-
he lig tile It.
wanted senue upon its present scale. What
.ient !ern I.?
ascertain was, did the Right Hon.
sYstern tia." Intend to keep up the same preventive
Peculia all,37ear I—(llear !)—lt was, indeed, a
from a novel system. The whole coast
lvas .n, alcnYshead to the mouth of the Thames
'6,4cued by armed coasters .and schooners.
real; were blockhouses and forts on the shore in
itiet ar succession, and every step you took you
tots: Tan---a sailor, generally—armed with pis-
Lice-1' a Cutlass. 'He did not believe that a ter-
Nu so manned had had the effect of preventing
deß.!gilug on that range of coast, to any great
Plaine ; and he was far from intending to corn-
-I,ass that
da4llo. the men so employed in a hard, a ha-
,l'' and a vexatious service had miscon-
frie.. e,' themselves. He had beeri told by a
itiurlu of his, a naval officer, that 1500 men were
tiro, engaged ; the body being composed en-
b-A°f Seamen and officers. Upon this subject
vat am. cue
word to offer; he would ask any na.-
who might happen to be in the House,
i.
hs' an it there were none then present, he Would
Lin.,, h
y Lord of the Admiralty who might hear
all
the
ether
this was not the very worst of
for a , !ervices to which the navy were liable-,7
hear ql'dslannaan, for instance,-to take ?—(Hear,
kely t whether it was not that which was most
fession eil!.inguish in him the pride of his pro-
et'p out
0f7.001d not every parent be desirous to.
tiotHd tf„±seIt his s T..}ie fact was, that it sill).-
societ,,3'°'lng men to every sort of tempta-
ti;eY cOuld ha trley had none; immediate, restraint'
seeouj went tl-pve l'one ; • for it was impossible when
ah:"°llnds,,, that the captain's
!eye
uis ,;vaYs upon then-.—Hear, hear .)
Yullter well "Ace alone might seem to make the
RoUse Worthy of the serious attention of that
of
hut assuming that all this were mat-
t"; Jig"t• consd
not too Right Hon.
eatiernan -quene, had
the
ad 141.1 self some apprehensions that
d as n;
xavY be doing injury elsewhere?. Si.tt.rat
ver,. ere—haiintr,, from our insular position,
Prod' (Atelisi,;6 .
of • -.rt it not be
It range coast—might `Vas of those very.mischiefs against which
Inischierstended to provide ? He knew that those
e '..vas,t;,,llad been reasonably apprehended, and.
be fonv arful that at some future day they would
oll'er.in: not to be imaginary. He could not help.
'Was b 6bserration with respect to ah act which
Secretr:ruht .in, during the last session, by the
tOQine s Y of the Treasury ;—an act- of .such ex-
eefoc(;veritY, that it did, hy its own nature, tend
,t 1 fact, wr°rtt, and to defeat its own.ends.
posses . rendeted a person who happened to be in
'sl°ll of a single pint of smuggled spirits,
this
le to the penalty of 1001. And to show that
c 11.,: vas absolutely the case, he would state a cir-
ors_tance that had recently occurred within his
0:4? ktrirow ledge. From this the House would see,
t the act, i fall not upon the stringier of a whole

cargo cogamoaities- .atteßpte4 to
be imported, bat" upon the lanOcent" owner
Of a small quantity ofa spirits, perhaps ac-
eidentally-picked up :—A fisherman was return-
ing fromafishing, and in the act .of.landing, in
order. to go into hts oven house from which he
had been absent for two days, when a lieutenant
of this blockading system seized upon his person
one_ pint of foreign spirits. The officer took him
before the nearest magistrate, who happened to
be a friend of:his.(Mr. Warre's) and demanded
the penalty of.lool. to be adjudged against the
fisherman, according to this act. This act, it was
to be. remarked; left with the magistrate ao dis-
cretionary or mitigating- power whatsoaver. The
way the magistrate acted was this : he knew the
man, and he knew that he was not a professed
smuggler.. He also believed him to be of a good
character,-and he knew that he could not possibly
pay the penalty of 100/.ave:l4f he were to decide
that he had become liable to it. He also knew that-
in default,of payment, he must hold the man in
prison, and that he would infallibly ruin his wife
and .family., He. therefore told the officer
in plain terms that he must apply el3e.where.
The officerinsiated on the penalty ; and the magis-
trate at length declared that he did not believe
the spirits to he smuggled, and would not, there-
fore,. be the. means.of ruining the man and his
family ; and that if the officer would still insist
upon going for the penalty, he must betake him.
self elsewhere.----(Hear, hear,)—Might not a
case of the.same character happen in other places ?
As for the. extent to which. the system prevailed
along the coast, he could assure the Right Hon.
Gent. that if he wished to take the fresh air there,
he. would be very apt to meet with the individuals
he spoke of.—(A laugh.)
Sir. Gonoz Cocauyas had very great plea-
sure, ie stating that from the reports made to the
Admiralty by qualified- parties,all the individuals
employed upon this service conducted themselves
extremely "well. There were soldiers among
them as well as sailors ; and both officers and
men messed' together with the greatest regularity
and harmony. With respect to one of the parts
of the Hon. Gent.'s speech, it might
.be suffi-
cient to .say, that every- person who was placed
there as midshipman, had previously passed his ex-
amination, so as to be qualified for the rank of
Lieutenant; consequently his education asu sea-
man wasacompleteclaas it-were, before he entered
upon the service. With regard to what the ser-
vice had to do,- he could only.say that they had
had some distinguished actions.—(A laugh)—He
could - assure- the. Ron. Gentleman opposite that
the smugglers did not come down in boats only,
but in large armies.—(A laugh.)—They came by
100 at a -timet—(a laugh)—So that this service
had regular actions with them, in which many
officers had been killed and wounded ; and lists
of the -killed. and wounded were traasmitted in
the usual form to the Admiralty. From every
information which the Admiralty had yet re-
ceived, both -from the Magistrates in those dis-
tricts, and from persons sent down by the Com-
missioners; .to inspect the service, he had-much
pleasure in declaring that it was impossible for
men to conduct so difficult a service in a better
manner.