The Sun.
London, England, 1821-03-06 00:00:00

TRANSFER OF S LOCK;

Mr. CURWEN said, he never rose with more
painful feelings than he now did, accused as ID.
was of sheaving in the motion, which it was his
duty to make, little regard to private property
and public credit. He, however, did not -admit
the justice of the charge; but it was fair to
avow, that iu moving for an account of the Stock
transferred at the Bank of Engladd, in the last
ten years, his direct purpose was to point it out
as an object of taxation. The first Loan Act,
which passed in the reign of William and Mary,
contained a clause in which it was said, that the
annuity paid to the public creditor should be
exempt from all burthens. In this, he doubted
whether Parliament had not exceeded its power,
for there was an inherent necessity in the nature
of all Government, that property should pay for
the protection afforded it: But at that time the
capital in the country was so small, that it was
necessary that favourable offers should be made
.to induce individuals -to advance loans. Nor
was it then of great consequence whether the
small amount of time Debt was exempt or not.
But now that the Debt had grown up to be
equal to the whole funded property of the
kingdom, it was very important whether it
should be entirely exempt from taxation. He
contended that even if there had been no in
stance in which a tax had been imposed on it, it
could not claim an exemption, but the fact was,
it had been subjected to the Property Tax, and
was now subject to the Legacy Duty. There
Were grave authorities which supported him in
saying that it should take its share of the bur-
thefts of the country. In the case of Clerken-
well, in the reign of George 1., the Judges de-

Oared, that property in the funds might be made
available to the support of the Poor. And in a
Case from Norwich, Lord Ellenborough distin-
guished money in the funds from money lent on
bond ; and stated, .that it would be chargeable
with poor rates, but for this circumstance, that
it could not 'be shewit in any initance to be
-visible property, 'arising, within a particular
'parish. These declarations, which slimed that
the funds were, in principle, chargeable, spewed
,tbat. • they were fairly chargeable with Taxes.
But, if the Fundholders could plead an exemp,
tion, they should be :the first class to forego it,
as was so much their interest to encourage
the payment of Taxes, from which they de-
rived so much. [t was said, it would be fair to
tax the Fund-holder to a certain degree, but, it
was asked, where would it stop? It Would stop.
where it should, for he hoped the House would
never tax .any class beyond its fair proportion.—
It .•was not sound reasoning to resist a fair and
equal Tax, lest an unequal one should be im-
-iiosed. The distress of the country was now quite
as great as. it had been iu France at the beginning
of the Revolution,- and, they should remember,
that it, was the obstinacy of the privileged orders,
in pleading their exemption:, which brought on
th! calamities which ensued. As - he thought,
the're was a fair claim in justice and expediency
that the Funds-should besubject to Taxation, he
did not shrink from -the odium of avowing his
°l3-inion. He moved for an Account of all Trans-
fers
of Stock-at the Bank for the last ten years
(except that transferred to the Commissioners of
the Sinking Fund), distinguishhig each year, and.
each species of Stock.
The CHANCELLOR of thy EXCHEQUER said, he
should oppose the nfoLion, On the broad grounds
of the bads which the Honourable Member tad
laid forit. He was far from wishing to charge
the Honourable Member with aiming at the de-
struction-of public. credit and private property,
ii.nt he was compelled to say that the proposition
of the'.llon. Member was fully deserving of all
the reprobation that could be bestowed on it.
Honourable Member had confounded two
very distinct things—a tax on the funds as such,.
and a tax the fundsin common with all other
PrOperty. The fundholders had submitted to
the. Property Tax without a murmur, but to
subject them to special taxation would be a
violation of the faith which had been pledged
to them. It .was stipulated in every Loan
till that. there should be no tax on the Transfer'
°f Stock, so-that the llon. Member, by proposing
'F•ax upon• Transfers, had taken the bull by the
horns, because, if ever such a tax was imposed,
!II the arpment against other taxes from the
t-reach of public faith was taken away. The
%uestion had been Much confused by the asser-
tion that the debt had been contracted in a de-.
Predated currency. In the years in which the
lutrency was depreciated, sums were borrowed
:ic't" to a greater amount than one fourth of the
1,,t, and this was so mixed up with the rest (as
.0 one who purchased stock knew in what year
." Particular portion was created) that it was
14'Possible to trace it. But even if any could be
1.
°i-Incl in the hands of the original holders it
wolld be most unjust to tax them on account of
depreciation, nor could it be done without ex-
•l
- tf.• rt•
og.the principle to all private bargains which
"ere made at the. same time. Any tax that was im-
:Posed on the funds would less affect the rich fund-
molder than any other his capital was speedily
transferred, and would be transferred, on the
first intimation of the intention of Parliament, to
foreign funds, where he would get a higher
'interest -for his money,—(llear!)—from which
ire was now withheld only on account of the sup-
Posed superior security atid faith of this country.
4-t. New York or Paris he might lan2,l' at our
_taxes. The alarm would soon extend beyond
The small fundholders would he alarmed ;
the wor4 with all proprietors of stock would be,
suave qui petit, and transfer must soots stop for
Want of buyers. Then it would be that the cries
of distress and ruin would be heard _from the
orphans and widows, and from thousands who
(lepended on the funds alone for their support.
Who could calculate, too, what the effect on all
other property would be, when this vast mass was
reduced to nothing The good faith of this corm,
try had been its surest stay in times .of danwer,
told the measure which would rob En-trland of its
public credit, Would deprive it of' its best support,.

and: .lay.. it open to "eVei‘y enemy. Ou- these
goounds he should give a negative to the motion.
•Mr. JofiN MARTIN observed, that as the re-
striction on the Bank was not a permanent mea-
sure, so It was known when the public :con-
tracted loans that an alteration must take place
at some time or other In the value of the, currency.
After a few words in explanation from the
CtiANcELLorI of the ExtitEQuEit, the motion was
negatived.
Mr. Duonaaa moved for leave to bring in a
Bill for the more summary punishment of ju-
venile delinquents. lie stated, that he intended
to confine the operation of the Bill to delinquents
under 16 years of age. The Bill was to give
power to two Magistrates summarily to comMit
them to;hard labour, in cases of theft to a small
amount.—Leave given.
IRISH MASTERSHIP IN CHANrERY.—MR. ELLIS.
Dr. LUSIIINGTON said, as the motion which he
had
,to make directly. affected an Honourable and
Learned Gentleman opposite to him, he should
discharge the task which, was imposed on him
with as much brevity as possible. It was not
necessary for him to state that in Courts of
Equity, all the most various and complicated
questions of property were settled ; that where
accounts were to be taken, where the estates of
bankrupts, or of lunatics, or minors were, in ques-
tion, the Courts of Equity had an almost exclu-
sive jurisdiction. It was not to be concealed,
that though justice was ultimately done in these
Courts, ,very heavy burthens were Imposed on
the suitors by delay, and it was their duty: to see
that this great evil was not still further aug-
mented. The basis on which he should found
the motion
.which he was about to subunit to
the House was, that the honourable Member
for Dublin could not discharge the duties of
Master in Chancery in Ireland—that he must
neglect either his duties as 'Master, or as
Member of Parliament ; and that, therefore,
as the House had a paramount and compul-
sory claim on the services of all its Members, the
suitors in Chancery must be necessarily the suf-
ferers. In stating to the House what the duties
of the, lion. Member as Master in Chancery were,
he.had the very best evidence, that of a Commis-
sion appointed by the Crown and of the 'lion.
Member himself upon oath. The Hon. Member,
he should premise, had purchased the resignation
of his predecessor, Mr. Walker, in 1807, in pur-
suance of a long custom (with the evil of which
the Hon. Member was not chargeable), though
the pchtice had generated a whole Edit r7i of
abuses in the administration of jastice in Ireland.
No man could read the report of the 'Commis-
sioners of Inquiry, without perceiving that the
-administration of justice 'in • Ireland, for the last
30 years, had been a system of corruption, and
was disgraceful to those by whom it was' admi-
nistered (Hear, hear From the Report
of the Commissioners it appeared, that one
of the six Clerks had charged 1297 at-
tendances in a single cause, Without hay.
ing attended even once.—(lfear, )rear, hear!)—
This was only one of the many abuses which pre-
vailed up to the present day, to the great injury
of the suitors in the different Courts. The lion.
and Learned Member (Mr. Ellis) entered upon
his office of Master in Chancery in 1 g 06.-
examined upon oath before the Commissioners,
he stated that the duties of his office were various
and difficult. Here the Hon. Member referred
to the Report, in which it was. stated that the
Masters in Chancery had to attend to the cases Of
lunatics, taxing bills of costs, bankrupts' affairs,
and, in short, whatever it might please-the Lord
Chancellor to refer to them. Could any one doubt
that the absence of any Gentlemen who had such
various duties to attend to, must be productive of
the most serious injury to the suitors in the Irish
Court of Chancery ?—(Hear !)—The next ques-
tion put to the lion, and Learned Member by the
Commissioners was, as tolhe length of time lahich
;was necessary to perform those duties, _Upon
this point he had the most unanswerable evidence
—the evidence of the lion. and Learned Member
himself, which was corroborated by two other
Masters in Chancery. The Hon. and Learned
• Member stated, that the duties of his office re-
quired his personal attendance during ten.months
of the year—that he attended in his office from
eleven till four every day in Term, and out of
Term, more or less, as business reqaired—and
that he also attended in his office in the evening,
for the dispatch of various branches of business
connected with his situation. How, then, could
-any Gentleman so occupied attend to his Par-
liamentary duties without injury to the .pub-
lic ? It was impossible that a man, under such
circumstances, could discharge his duty, unles
he could make 38 hours out of 21. In ano-
ther part of the Report, the Honourable and
Learned Member stated, that the duties of, his
office could trot be discharged by, deputy.—
(Ifear!)—lie trusted, then, that notwithstanding
the desperate situation in which motions arising
from his (Mr. Lushington's) side 'of the House
were generally placed,•that the Members of the
Sister Kingdom, at least, would get rid of party
prejudices, and exert themselves in favour of
their country—that they would reflect upon the
situation in which recent circumstances had plac-
ed that unhappy country, and endeavour to pre-
serve to the suitors in the Courts at least a wreck
of their fortunes. lie presumed that the-lion.
and Learned Member (Mr. or his Friends
Would say, that the motion with which he was
about to conclude, would operate as an ex post
facto law, and go on to argue that no such
motion should be made until all the mischief
complained of was done. If he knew any
thing of the nature of an ex post facto law, his
motion woold be totally different from it. He
would allow the mischief 'to be done rather than
introduce an e.c post „facto' law to prevent it.
—The fact, however, was this. The Honourable,
Member's office was conferred daring pleasure.
Now, if he could chew that the holding of such
an office was inc:Aapatible with the ditties of a
Member of Parliament, he trusted that he would
establish his case. 'the' • lion. Member was
appointed to his office in 1806, and he (Dr.
Lushington) was happy to say that he was fully
qualified for-the duties imposed upon him ; but
this was an additional reason why he objected to
the • abscnaa of the Honourable and- Learned

Gentleman from his Ace: Two Or three. MA3-
ters in Chancery had been recently aPpointed;
none of whom could be supposed to pdSsess the
knowledge, and experience of the Hon.
Learned Member. The fees of office were stated
by the Hon. Member himself to amount to 37101.
a year. lie meant no imputation. uPon the
Hon. and Learned Member, when he state‘F that
those fees had been pririCipally created, Niiithiti
the last 25 years,.by the Masters themselves,:for
their own benefit. in addition to the fees, the
Hon. Member had a salary of 400!. a year, which
with half the fees of the examining clerk, made
the situation worth 44001. a year—a sum as large
as the salary of any Puisue Judge of this country.
The Thin: Member; in support of hiS argument,
quoted the cases of several Members who had
been arrested by cirder of the House, though
their excuse was hating gone to attend the ditties
of publiC offices in Ireland. SuppoSe that a call
of the House were td take place; would it be rt"
good answer on the pai't of the Hon. and Learned
Member to say, that he was engaged'in
into a complitated and difficult question con-
nected with his office? The Hon. Member; allud-
ing to the previous discuSsiOns on this question,
observed, that the Noble Lord soppoSite (Lord ,
Castlereagh) and a Right Hon: Friend of his
now abroad (Mr. Canidog) ,lead declared;
that in the event of the HonoUrable Member's
wishing to retain both his seat and his office, they
had not the slightest objection t.. nicving an Ad-
dress to the Crown, praying his removal fr 07.11 his
situation of Master in Chancery.-411ear, hear.)
This he had heard from the Noble Lord; and he
now called upon him to make good his assertion.
The .lionh Menther, after some further obseTva-
tions, concluded by moving, a series of Resolu-
tions, the purport of which was; that the situa-
tion of Master in Chancery (Ireland) required
the constant attendance of the person filling that
office ; and that Thomas Ellis, Esq. Master in
Chancery, who had been recently elected Mem-
ber of Parliament•for the City of Pullin!), was in-
capable of efficiently discharging both these duties.
The Hon. Member said, he meant to follow this-
motion up by another, praying an Address to the.
Crown for the dismissal of Thomas Ellis, Esq.
from his office of Master in Chancery in Ireland.
Mr. LENNARD, in seconding the motion, sz4id
it was impossible that the Hon. and Learned.
Member could be allowed to abandon the duties
of an oflite for which .he was paid. With re._
spect .to the purchase of the office he (Mr..L.)
really could not trust himself in expressing his
opinion upon it; but it was perfectly clear that
no man could serve two masters, or could serve
two offices,-where one was inconsistent with the
other. The lion. and Learned Member could:
not claim the Royal privilege of legal contiguity.
With respect to the condition, it must be per-
fectly clear that even if the condition were not
expressed, it must .be implied, and that the of-
fice shotild be held only while the officer dis-
charged its. duties. 'The place was only tellable
whilst the duties were properly discharged. It
was a duty inconsistent with the discharge of the
duties of a Member of that House. Mr. Ellis
was virtually incompetent to perform both duties.
Feeling the impossibility of a person in the si-
tuation of Mr. Ellis doing justice to the soli-ors:4l
Chancery, he should second the motion of his.
Hon. and beamed Friend.

Mr. ELLIS was about to address the Tlonse,when
The SPEAKER observed, that a difficulty pre-
sented itself to his mind upon this question.—
When any motion respecting the privilege of the
House, or inculpatory of any Member, was
brought forward, the form was to allow the
Member to address the House before the ques-
tion was read from the Chair, and then that such
Alember should retire. It would be for the
House to decide how far the present question
came within that regulation.
Mr. W. WYNN was of opinion, that, on the
present occasion, the lion. and Learned Member
(Mr. Ellis) ought to be heard before the ques-
tion was read from the Chair.

The SeEAKEn felt that if any doubt existed, it
would be better to allow the Hon. Gentlermn to
address the hion,,e, and retire, before the clues=
tion was put. By doing this no harm could ar-
rive, whereas by a different mode of proceeding,
they might create a' very inconvenient precedent.
_ _

_ .
Et.t.ts then roe.—He did not mean to
answer the arguments of the Hon. Gentleman who
went before i►im, but to state a few facts. He
could not help observing, that the usual decorum
was not observed on this occasion.—(No, no l)—
He maintained that exasperated statements had
been made respecting himself perSonally,:.which
the parties were not justified in making. He felt
that his case -was identified with -the constituent
body of the empire, and he would uot, by yield-
ing to the present attack, abandon their, rights.
The Hon. Member then proceeded to give an ac-
count of the var►ous duties lie had to perform in his
office, and which duties he always carefully attend-
ed to. When he was in the city of Dublin, he con-
stantly attended in his office, whether there
was business to be done or not ; but it (lid not
follow that he ►night not be occasionally absen'.
The duties of Masters in the Irish Chancery,
were different from those in England ; for it was
'there a matter of indifference which -of the Mas-
ters executed any order of the Court ; and if,
one Master happened to be absent, 'another was-
always found equally competent to do the duty.'
A great deal had been said of the delays in.
Chancery, but he could declare to the !louse, that:
the Lord Chancellor of Ireland never-rose any
one day from his Court until he discharged- every-
-paper before him ; and the day he himself sut
out from Dublin, he had not left an un-'
finished paper on his desk. The Masters,
by an arrangement among themselves, allowed
one Master to.be absent two or three months in.
the year. This indulge Ace was allowed him ;
and after his absence of three months, h-e•-took
the duty of the Master who -had :acted for him in
his, absence ; and, by that system of rotation, ti►e
business of the Court was never suspended. for
a single moment. The question now before the
House was one which did not so much affect his
office, as whether Dublin should be deprived of
its franchise. Me should now retire, and leave
it to the HouSe to decide on his case. If it should
be the pleasure of the !louse to remove him from.

.; .
. .
he shouldhaee the consolation.to reflect,
that his last speech there. was uttered in defence
of the violated rights of an inulividdal.
Mr. Pier. contended that the 11 tiiise- could
have no right to exclude a err her oil the, mere
presumption that he woold hit likely to neglect
his duty.; ,The Ifoose might as well.eachide fill
the Officers•of the Army and Naey who held
seats in it, and who were .olifiged td he absent
(hiring a great par:. of. their 61:Ica The actep-
twice of Commissions in the rt,uy and Navy 'by
nembers of that House did not cause them to
vacate. their seats ; even their_ constituents did
not call on them so give up their seats after they
got the Commissions. But_ the Case was much
,streuger lucre ; for the.electOrs chose the Hon.
and Learned Gentleman at the time they knew
liC filled his present office. The case of Meals
hers smut abroad as Ambassadors was similar
to that of Naval and Mtlitary Officers. The
case of Calliford which had been quoted, had
no reference to this case ; for the House
did no more than order - hint to attend
aria charge of certain misdemeanors ; he at first
neglected the order for his attendance,- and the
house Merely suspended 'hint from his privileges;
but he did at last attend,-then went back to Ire-
land 0 execute the duties of his dffice of Com-
missioner of the Revenue, and he was not re-
moved from his seat. There were persons hold-
mg judicial offices in Scotland who could not sit
in the liotise ; but they were excluded by a
special Act of Parliament. The operation of this
Address, if carried. would, be more unjust than
any ex post facto law that ever was passed, and
would, in fact, be an ex p"st facto Address. After
the Union in 1801, the House passed an Act to
declare the offices, the holders of which were to
be excluded from Parliament. The Act enume-
rated several offices, and never mentioned that of
Master ia Chancery. English Masters in Chancery
were allowed to, sit in the House ; and coup any
thing be more grossly unjust than that of exclud-
ing a Member because he held the office of a
Master in Chancery in Ireland ? It was an incon-
venience often felt that professional gentlemen in
Ireland could not attend in that House. The
gentlemen of the bar could not give up . their
practice' by coming over here ; and as the
people of the Metropolis of Ireland felt that
their interests required that an able lawyer from
that comitry should he a Member of Parliament,
to d;seass all great questions t"Oiillf! cted with
their legal and commercial rights, thisught fit. to
elect the lion. and Learned Gentleman who had.
just retired, and who must be subjected to a griev-
ous injury and injustice if he were removed.
Mr. AiitsitcrtOMiiiE contended that it. was im-
possible for Mr. Ellis-to discharge his duties as
a Judge if he attended his duties in that House.
It appeared that Mr. Ellis was required to be at
his office during the greater part of every day of
ten months of the year ; and he asked, was a due
attention to. his business as .a Master of Chancery
consistent with his duties as a Member of, Par-
liament. He thonght, that, of all professional
men, Judges should be the last that ought to be
allowed to have seats in that House.
Mr. Beowsraow thought that this was one of
the most cruel and gratuitous attempts-at
iucli-
vidual'njustice that ever Was made, and as such
he would give it his decided opposition.
Lord CasTarataaan said, he should divide the
subject into three heads—first, as 'to the general
expediency of some regulation respecting the of-
fice of Master in Chancery in tieland ; secondly,
as to the particular case of Mr. Ellis ; and, third-
ly, as to the situation in which the majority of
the House stood, who had voted last year for the
Chancery Bill. With regard to 'the last, he had
expressed his concurrence in 'the clause for ex-
chiding the individual from his 'seat, but not 'from
his office ; but be had never considered that be
was bound to, pass by the. House of Lords after
they had rejected it', and to do that by Address
which they had refused to 'do by Legislation,—
That, indeed, would be to place the House in
such an attitude, with respect to the Lords, as
no prudent man could desire. He was ready to
admit the great incongruity of any Irish judicial
officer holding a seat in that House ; and such
was his' impression when this case was before
under the consideration of that House ; but yet,
since that period, he had found that Mr. Ellis's
situation formed a special case; for at that pe-
riod be was not aware that this Gentleman had
hotight his office, paying no less a•surn than 9 or
10,0001.; that at the, time he made this purchase
he was not aware that his tenure of
.the office
would exclude him from a seat
,in .Parliament;.
nay, more, that when elected by the citizens of
Dublin, he had no reason
.to think himself ineli
Bible to that seat. Under these circumstances,
and -considering that there was less pregnant
public necessity for the excluSioia of the Hon, and
1.-arned Gentle Man than he ,had contemplated
npan the first view of the subject, he could not
accede to the Motion, although he was ready to
agree to any measure for excluding Irish judicial
officers from that House in future, excepting the
particular case of Mr. Ellis..
_Here there was a loud cry for
Mr. PLUNKETT, who rose accordingly. The
Right Hon. Gentlentan began by Observing that
the pre Sent savoured much of a personal motion;
and that therefore, from his respect for Mr.
Ellis, he, should feel some,difficdlty in speaking
epon it, if it asere-notsfor the concluding obser-
vation of the Laarned:Gentlematebirnself, viz.
that. the present question was,mueh impor-
tant to the rights of his Constituents than to any
feeling or interest of. his own.; But tp,, this oh-
servation he would say, that the ,Learited
,Gen-
tleman might be deprived ofshis seat
,witheut
arty loss either to himself •oatcathern :for. if he
were a good :Master im chanc,eryalle coeldisot
be a good Member of,. Parliament. His 'own
.character, locked, as .well„ :as their inte-
rests, would he best .consulted by vacat-
ing either. his seat or his place. As to the
argument, that Masters in Chancery were
-gible to sit in that llonse,..becanSa they were
omitted in the Act of 1803, which excltided cer-
tain Irish oaces, he rhaiotaitted that this argu-
:tient hid no validity ; for although the Irish
jadges Were not enumerated in that ACt, would
tiny one infer the monstrous idea that theysould
sit in that House ? The At. lion. Gentleman ex-

posed-the fallacy of the reasoning; that this •W4l
merely a question of privilege ;. and_after describ-
ing the duties which thetearned Gedt.litmd to per-,
form in Ids office ihireland,ccirribitiimi4 the descrip-
tion 4-itti a statement of his own dechiratiou before
•a Committee of that Hotise, that. he "Was•utsaer
. the necessity of tittemiding thcise Akita dtitie,s not
less than teu hours a da4' for thefar.greatet_part
of the year, he cancloded With repeating his
re.spectfiir the Learned Genttentan, whose
gibility.tosit itr that House, be (Mr. P.) statedl
publiClS, 'at the hurt it s in Dublin, bef6re his
election—adding that he thotight the House it-
self flk i y to declare him inc ligible, not becalpie
lie was in any respect intompetent to the ditties
Of a Legislatory.but
.because ,he could not per-,
form stich duties in conjunction with those of an
Irish Master in Chancery;—beeatise, km 'a *ord,
the Learned Gentletrian could riot do ititpos:;ibi-
lities.—(ilear, hear!)

Dr. Losmswrox, in his reply, 'stated, that h
took the words which he had imputed to the
Noble Secretary of State from' the concurri.nt
reportS of all the Journals he could find with
respect to what the Noble Lord said when
this question was before under the con-
sideration of that house, those reports too
being' cOafirmed - by the testimony of several
Members of that House. The NOble Lord--had,
however, thought proper to. deny those words
but from this denial and the Noble Lord's-cHnge
of .onieion„ he must say, that be should never
again allow himself to he wedded to any coni-
dence in the declared opinion of the Noble Lord,
considering the ingenuity with which he could
change his opinion, and-the manner in wi.::64
could assert that n;:w lights broke in upoP bins
to call for that change. Ile saws .110 w-ever,
that those new lights broke in also upon several
Gentlemen, for they were all babes a grace. MO-
withstanding the aberration of the Noble Lord
and his immediate adherents from their fnrmer
profess' d se.ptiMents upon this subject, lie trusted
that the House would, in justice and humanity-,
accede to his motion, and thus secure to time
suitors in the Irish Court of Chancery, that at-
tention which they had a right to expect. At
all events, he was- determined (hosv.over the
Noble Lord might desert his native land) to do
all the justice in his power towards the -very. in-
teresting and much injured people of that country.
The House divided, and the numbers were—

Fiir the Moliton
Against it

11'

--Gel

Dr. LUSHINCTON gave notice of a Motion for
Thursday next, for leave to bring i:i a Bill to ex-
clude persons holding high legal situations front
occupying Seats that)louse.

Nl-. LiNNARD moved for an Account of the
Produce of the Excise Duties on Articles enter-
ing and consumed in Birmingham, for 1819 and
1820, expressing the articles and quantities.—
Ordered .

'Mr; llot.mEs laid the Miscellaneous Estimati
on the table.—Ordered to be printed. •

CATHOCI-C-C{IrESII-0.

---
THE NAMES OF THE MEMBERS WHO DID.NOT 'VOTE Ott
PAIR Orr ON Blrrt- PLUNKETT'S MOTION' ON WEDNES-
DAY LAST, THE 28TH 1.7.1. T. . .
-ATQurt, C. A. Fa&stone, Viscount' Paget,' iron. 1:f .
Ancrain; Earl Forbes, Viscount ..Paget, Hon. Sir C.
Antrobus, G. C. Forester, Francis Pahner, Charles
Ashurst, V. 11. . Foster,..R.r. LIOn. J. Parnell, W.
Astley, J. I). GippS, a orge • -Parsons, J.
Aubrey, • Sir J. Bt. Gooch, Thomas S. Pelham, lion. C.A.
Balfour, John Gordon, lion. W. Peunant, G. 11. 1).
Baring, H. Graliiin, Jarritni ' Percy, 'Hon. 11:
Marne, : Michael GraVes, Lard ' 'Percy, lion. W. 11.
Barry, 11 t. lin. J. 31. Greenhill, Itussellt. l'lurn.r, W.
Barton, Nathaniel Ciros.set, J. R. Pollington, Visi..t.
Bastard, E. P. Grosvenor, Thos. Prittic, Hon. F. A.
Bastard, John • GUrney, R.' H. Proby, Hn. Grany.
Belfast, Earl of • Haldiman,. W. S, E. V. .'
Bernal, Ralph Hare, Hon. R. Ramsbottom, johu,
Bernard, J. jun. Ileathcote, SirGilb. , jun. • • ' '-.
Blake, Robert • - Ba-t. • • Ricardo; D. ... •
Boswell, Alex. Heron, Sir It. Robarts, 1.1. J. :.
lloughey„ Sir J.. Pt. Holmes, Sir L. T. Roberts, W. 'A. "
Boughton, IV. E. R. W. Bart: ' -' • •Itothford, tiust.:H.
Broughain, H. Hope, Hon. Sir A. Rooksavage,-Earl•af
Bruen, Henry Hope, Sir W. G. Rose, Mllap...G. H.
Burdrtt, Sir F. Bt. Horrocks, Samuel Russell, Mat. '2-
Burgh, Sir U. B. - Howard itlolyneux Sandori,.Viscxy.int
But zerworth, Jos. Howard, Li H.T. SLourfield, W.-:4:.
• •
Buxton, J. F. Hudson, Har. Sheldon, Italp4, .. ~
Caleraft, J. 11. Hulse, Sir C. Shelby, Sir J..1.344rt.
Campbell, Lord J. liyde, John Shitilier, Sir -6,...-iii.
D. H. James, William
,Sibthorp, C. W. .
Campbell-lin.G. P. Inner, John Smith, sl,l
Canning, Rt. fln.G. Jocelyn, Han. J. ' Smith, rrOa. Ea:
Carhampton,•Earl Kerr, David • Sothercn, 1.; -
Carrot, John • - King, Sir J. D. At Spurrics,..C.
Chaloner, It. Langston, J. H. '• - Stewart,frft.J.ll.F.-.
Cliamberlayne, W. I AseelleS, Vise •••ati t •8 te WI- r •.,• W.
Ghetwynde.; George Leake, NV. ' • Stratt, J.' H.
Cockburn, -Sir U. Lindsay, Lord . S:..it.t.m, Right :nun.
Cocks, Ilon. J. S. Littleton, 11 J. C.. M.
Coke, .1.. W. jun. Lockhaart,t.AHVon.'E..t.). Teh,ramtipe,o,
iEl::ilvv...
.:.
Townshend,. ,lion- ,
CoAlq.uhoun, Rain.
LoLornag,,no,
Lora
.Cooper, E. S. Macdonald; R. G. H. G. P. 1
Cotes, John .Macketki??; • 'V. - Townshend, : Lord
Cuffe, James ' Macqueen, T. P. J. NIB.' . .
Cunningham-I'Bi, Madacks, W. A. Trench, F. W.
Sir W, Bart. IViatjorilraziks, S'l.rJ. 'Padway, Jotio P.
Davies, T. IL : -.Bart. • Tyra.; C. K. •
Dawson, (4. R. ' Markham, J. lixbriage, En-1 c..i'
Domville, SirC. Illarryatt, J. Vaughan, Sir R. W.:
•Drummond, 4. . „ Maxwell, J. ' ..• Bart. '
Dunally, Lord Milbank, 'Mark ' Vereker; llon. J.P.
DuticOirb, C. Mont ornery, Sir J. Villicrs;Right Her:.
DuncoMb; W. - Bart.
Militias, Itt.lin.W. Mordaunt, Six C. Walpole, Lord
EdnionStane,. Sir C. Bart. War.n C.
Bart. NCule, Sir H.P. At Welleidey; R.: • .-
•Edwards,lizi.E. 11. -.Needham, lion: F. Wigravri,,Sir•ft.
Elford John 'Nolay.) 'Michael- Wilber/at-to' 'W.
Ellis; ii,,,iy - • - 'North,- a' . : Willi.„--„, etwon:
FerraisToWnshend, -O'Brien, ..St v. ;E: -Pt. .Wi11iw,,,,,, sir it
Lord C. 'O'Caflagban, J. Williams, lie,' ::--
Fife.„ Earl of tl•'Gratlys,• .!;.i. ' Witlouz."iby, F 1
FirazepAßt.lTOn.• t)'llarrt,• Charles Wiii.._;ritca,
.S. 'i".
• my. . • • ' • OsbO4he; 14 F. G. W001..11., •
Fitz-Harris, Vistt. -(lfS',llStail; Lots-1 Wrow sl7, 11.
Foley,ThOibas - 'OOO4, :lit-..1. ii: • 'ioilic; 4..tir J. S.

sir ilr.,,%.)Amis Liki3Opoileittr) arrived in tpw.a
Yestg.:rtl.ay, morning 11614-h ton , 4rl
upon. the I)Ulke and.FSOchei,s of..I;LAitI4C.F.
condolence from the pri-,,,ess Au_
• 041 • OUS'T.A , oc , from, 1.9 4-
more, and remained v‘ith:tstte . and-'l)uclicc
till pastit,ve, when herl-Roial, Ttighiyess returned.
to .Fro,Akilfire, Thc PU.ctivss of t ;1,61.4•1c::-rzit ;,C L 1
the Princess SoentA .were Wan the Dike anti
Duches, treat i;oitiOu
rjuccies. of 4sf:iv:e,4l froth Ciarcjilont
one, and renvined
.611 past three, when 'ter Ito,'
Ifighnesl returned to ,C1.4.•r .oms:lnt,.‘Whk,'she c.',"•-
tinues on a visit to Ilyince LEO poi.e.
PrincesgSgenti MATIT.o. Scot rival Lilacl,Cheav-,
niale Ger. affeetionate. intiniries of toliil,6leo'•
The Tesidence of.the bufce aii:l 411 •t:e
Palace, St, Ja•ioes's,,wtts throfiged'au.r.ing
the )6 hole of yesterday witfi inq 'cOuities of ,u-
-dolence. . .•