The Sun.
London, England, 1817-05-20 00:00:00

WESTNIINsTER CQAL BILL

On the question that the IVestrninster Coal
Meters' Bill be read a thisd time,
Sir 'l‘l. W. RIDLEY expressed his disapprobation
of that clause which gave to the /leads of the
Depahment, the power of di'missiog working
Coil Meters' tvittiout application to the Niagi3.
Oates' as heretofore, it was vesting them with
extraordinary power, and he wished the clause' to
bß,uttiitied.
'Sir J. GRAHAM said, the power of dismission
was tb beiihicettin the hands uithe Lords of the
Treasury.
Sir M. W. RIDLEY obserVed„ that this was still
more objectionable.
The !-louse divided on the clause :—the num-
bers were, "
rlpiel.. '64 I Noes
A division nfterwvdids took place on the subse-
quent stage of the Bill—
Ayes 6Ol Nues 6O
On which the Speaker gave the casing vote lu
favour of the Hill.
Mr. M. SUTTON .moved, that the Committee on
the Clergy Residence Bill sliould posipoottl to
Wednestlity.
LORD SIDMOUTH'S CIRCULAR.
Sir S. Rost itt.Y lII° vett that be'pre-
,
tinted to the Prince Ltegent, requesting his'itoYal
Highoeas to be pleased order to be laid hefore
the Howe id Copy of Lord Sidmouth's Leiter
(Cit:tilar) to the Lard Lietitehants of Enelatol
acid Wales, dattl March 17, together With a'Cope

Mr. Ti NY observed, as the Noble Lord had
Mn II Intneed 166 illtentiOn of bling,ing it down, ti .at
tke could not undet stand why so inipot taut a coin-
munication. should .be so long deferred. its the
Ministers considered that they could show,the
necessity of continuing theJlabeas Corpus Sus.,
pension Act, they sorely most have the materials.,
ready, and therefore there was no occasion for
delay. It. was true the Noble Lord thought .other.,
wise. When pressed on the subject, he content.,
ed himself with declaring, that he should come
down to that House a fortnight hence, ptep'tred,
to frighten them—(A laugh)—and that, havug
first. determined on the renewal of she Act, ti
Noble Lord intended to move, fur a Committee tti
iuquire whether or not the Bill ought to be con-
tinued.--(Heat !)

Lord CASTi4iIEAOI4 rejoined, that having been
questioned as to the intentions of Government, he
had communicated what they were to the House.
Ile had de, Tared what it now became necessary
to repeat, that according to the Ministers' view at
the state of the country, they should feel them,
selves just iled in. applying to Parliament for a re-
newal or ,continuation of the Act ; that svithont
siteh proceeding the peace of tlje nation could not
be preserved. lint in risking such declaration .of
the ioteotions of Government, it, must not be
imagined thot Parliament wos pledged to any
thing .p--Parlilinent would have a case hill be-
fore it, and it would be to. be. decided on that
communication, whether the Suspension AL.;
ought to be- continued.

Mr. TIERNEY added, that all this might be rely
trite, and yet he thought it odd, the No;)le Lord
having the materials leatly,.--fo. he prestuned
much, as the Ministers had determined on the
course they motad fursne-r-that there should be
any delay in making the communication opt su
important subject. Soincthing very terrible
must bore conic to the Ittit ledge of Ministers to
induce them to make a second applic;ition to that
House; and yet they becra.to be kl pt in igno-
rance of what 80 materiallratiected the internal
tranquillity of,the country for a fortnight,
Sir M. RIDLEY. asked whether the Committee
was to be chosen by ballot
No,aoswer. •

Lord MILTON wished to ask a question eons
fleeted with this .subjeet, whether tiler"."
truth in a rumour Ow the adjournment for. filo
whitsun holidays was to be longer than :usual
Lord caSTIfEIIeAGII said, the question would be,
whether they should adjourn to Wednesday or,
Friday ? LAs Thursday was a holiday some tniglik
be itt faour of an adjournment to Friddy.—,—(l3etty,
hear!) • , ,
. _ . . . .

Lord M.a.ToN.replieo, that he had asked the,
question consequence of its being rinhoored
that the Ministers 11.0000 to propose an ad,
joorninent to the following Monday.
The conversation here ended. -
• MR. POWYS, "THE MAGISTRATE.

Sir J. MAC.FaNTOBH gave notice, that to»
morrow be should move for copies Of oil column.)
nications between thy Home Department and John -„,
Ellison Pool, touching the commitment to gaol of
three persons, named Parkinson, Fletcher, anti
Deacon, by Mr. Powys, Clerk, charged with
offences unthr the Hawkers' Act.

I,OTTBRY BILL.
On tie questiou that the Lottery J3lll be read

third time , -
Mr. LITTLETON opposed it, and moved as an
etneOthlieitt, that it he read a third time this day
six mouths. Having already spoken frequently
on this subject, he would not fatigue the House
with any repetition of his arguments:; and as ire
thought the sense of the House was with hint
against this measure,: be should press his timend.!
mew. He hoped Members would he, ashamed to
vote for the Bill ; tie thought ip bulimic and con-
science they won't! feel themselves bound to vote
for the amendatent.--.(1-1ear !)
Mr. W.ILBERFORCR was against the Bill. The
money obtained by the Lottery was raised by the
most extravagant and expensive means; and while
it was more expensive in the ,collection than any
other mode of raising revenue, it.was positively
ilti"riottu to the moral, of the people., The piNiq
became more and more enlightened on this sub.
jest ; anti he Ittooglit the day was not very jar
tiktaot, when the I-ion. Memlwr below him (Mr.
Littleton) woohl behold his wit,lies realized in tiog
alsandontnent of Lotteries as a source of llevvrote,
.Mr„ litiasT.spoke in tin indistinct tone against
dm Bill.
Mr. J. W.' WARD supported the
arguing on general princlples, he thought L,itte»
ries Were pernicious in their tendency on the ma,
r,ds of the people..--(Hear, hearl)—kle was for
Ili: Bill passing this year. It it were abando.ted,

Low could the tiekciency in the revennz. be tup
ilietii ?. He thought tienticmen opposite, a•t a time
like the present, ought to point out a more 'con-
venient method of raising 50,0001. before they
proposed Out the Chancellor of the Exchquer
should give up the Lotteries this year.
Lord Hnrttt.TON said be should oppose the Bill
nu those grounds which bad been ably and forcibly
stated by the Hon. Member who last spoke (Mr.
'Ward), when he Tesisted the continuance of Lot-
teries on a tormer occasion..--:(Hear, bear!) •
Mr. P. GRBtivetu begged to 'correct the Hon.
Member (Mr. Ward) as to the produce of Lotte-
ries; so far from the Lotteries realizing 500,000/.•
anomally,Ahey, had never produced half that sum.
(Hear, hear !)

Mr. TIERNEY stated, in answer to an lion.
Ikiember (Mr. Ward), who wished to know how
the deficiency could be supplied that would be oc-
casioned by giving up the Lottery, that the Chan-
cellor of the Excheqner had Tainted out the
means: it might be made up by an issue of Ex-
chequer Bills.
Mr. Man having explained, the House di-
vided.

The lumbers. were, on the question that the
13111 be vOirft third time " now'
Ayes 7B Noes - ' 48
On our return
.to the gallery we found
Mr. eiIIENFELL regretting that he was forced to
take op the subject pieceme►►l. He should pro-
pose to omit altogether th►►t clause which went to
give to the Bank of England a remuneration for
managing the Lottery, it► addition► to that they
already derive from the. money of it passing through.
their hands. They received for this management
500 W. a year, whiLli in the present situation of
the country would be a very proper saving that
Ought not to he overlooked, lie could assure the
Right lion. Gentleman, that out of that !loose
there was only•one concurrent feeling as to.the
way in-which this transaction was conducted. The
Bank -had received for this trifling service, since
the year 1806, no less than between 40,0001. and
50,0001. Ile adverted to the large profits gained
by the' Bank on the loans contracted for dining
the war., and -alter repeating that they ought to
take the management of the Lottery without
compensation, he moved that the whole of the
clause on tl►ia point in page 33 of the Bill be
omitted. .

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, if
the Hon. Gentleman could suggest any more eco-
nomical mode of management than that of the
Bank of England, he should be happy to adopt it ;
but this was not likely, unless the system was
takers entirely out of their hands, which would
produce no benefit to the public. The experiment,
be was sore, could nut be made in the pr .sent in-
stance, without altering the system, and therefore
he should Oppose the alteration.
Mr. LITTLETON proposed, instead of the title
of the Bill, to substitute one founded on an Act
passed in the reign of King William, for suppress-
ing all Lotteries, It should be called "An Act
to enable the Lords Commissioners of the Trea-
sury, to raise stunts of money, by setting up cer-
tain mischievous games, called Lotteries, injurious
to the good, the trade and welfare of leis Ma-
jest y'sdorninions." _

Sir J. NEWCORT observed, that our ancestors,
in the time of King William, were of opinion that
the ravenue ought not to stand in the way-of the
public welfare ; but the Chanceller of the Exche-
quer of the present day Thought ►he public good as
nothing, when pot in the way of the public re-
venue.

The:PHANcEtt.ok of the EXCHEQUER said, the
Act of King lVilliatn -adverted only'to Private
Lotteries.,
Mr. I.lp.auAnn MORRLAND contended that the
words of the Statute were Private Lotteries and
all others. It went further it. declared them to
be common and public nuisances. That wits the
law even at the present hour, although it was
evaded by these annual licences. Indeed, •a` the
law now Stood, .all persons in any way concerned
in planning and executing Lotteries were declared
to be common rogues---(A laugh thiongh the
Iloutte.)

Mr. 13110UG110.1 was of opinion that the title
Of the Bill ought to run thtti :—"An Act for the
encouragement of vice antl etpecially
among the:lower elesses.o

GRBNPZIA, would once more suggest, whe.
ther it this evil was to' he continued, in order to
Increase the reve►rue of the country, there could
be' an objection to its being managed by the
Excheriner

No fillSWet was returned ; anti the question be.
lug put, that the clause stand part of the Bill,
it WAS can-tell in the affirmative. The Bill was
then teed a third time and passed.