The Sun.
London, England, 1819-05-21 00:00:00

price of coal,r. In 1814 theNft were 625. a chaldron,
and, in 1818,-only 485., which afforded relief to
the amount of 14s. per ebaidron. He objected
to the motion, and thought the interests of the
country would be best promoted by suffering the
subject to rest.
Mr. LAMBTON expressed his surprise and sor-
'row at hearing the Right Hon. Gentleman not
only refuse to repeal a partial and oppressive tax,
hut announce that it. would be necessary to itn-
poge fresh Impost's upon the country. She was
already•burthtoned more heavily
,than She could
bear, and he should resist-, as far as his humble
abilities extended, any attempt to increase her
taxes.
,He supported the original motion. With
respect to reviving the Income Tax, as had been
recommended by an Hon. Member opposite, he
trusted that the present Parliament was not one
in which such an impost could be carried ;
_and
that not withstanding - the taunts thrown out on
the subject, its proposal would be attended with
certain defeat.
Colonel WOOD explained that he recommended
a Property and not an Income Tax.
Mr, DICKENSON opposed the motion. To lay
a tax on go,;l at the mouth of the pit, would be
to tax every article of necessity throughout the
country.
_

Mr. SINCL AIR rose in the mids, of cries of ques.

tine. He should not stiffer himself to be put
down by she Noble Lord who represented the
County of Donegal, and endeavoured to prevent
him from fulfilling his duty to his Constituents by
the clamour he had raised.—(Order Order !)
Lie then strongly opposed the motion.
Lord MOUNT CHAKLAS having been personally
alluded to, appealed to the Chair whether the

language used by the Hon. Member was Parlia-
mentary language, and must request an apology
from him to the House.
Mr. SINCLAIR. was understood to say, that ha
did not think an apology nccessary.
The SPEAKER stated, that if any Gentleman
thought t►imself unfairly interrupted, he ought to
appeal to the Chair, and not to private indivi-
duals. The Hon. Member must be conscious that
he had acted wrong in adopting the .latter.course.
Mr. SINCLAIR stated, that it-wa3 not his in-
tention to be personal towards any Hon. Meat:.
her. His eagerness to express the wishes of his
constituents, had betrayed him into a degree of
warmth, for which he was. ready to offer any
apology the House might thinkfFroper.—(Hear !)
Mr. Alderman WAITHMAN spoke strongly in
favour of the motion.

Sir J. SEBRIGHT entered his protest against the
tax, as partial and unfair, and thought that if it
could not be spared, it should he equalized.
.11Jr. MAXWELL opposed the motion.
After some observations from Sir M. W. Ridley.
Mr. Wilmot, Mr. Ellice, Mr. Bennet, Mr. Pro-
t heroe, Mr. Alderman. Wood, Mt. Byng, Mr. Hart

Davies,.
Mr. HoLD.te SUAINUR replied, and the House,
divided.

'
Ayes 49
Ntdes
Majority against the Motion.. -in
INSOLVENT DEBTORS' ACT.

Lord ALTHORP said, he rose in pursuance to
the wishes 61 the Committee, to move for leave to
hying in a Bill to amend the Insolvent Debtors'
Act. He apologized to the House for having
brought it forward before the Report of the
Committee was laid on the table; but it was the
wish of the Committee, that, before the Bill came
to be discussed, it should be in the hands of
Members, and its merits. sufficiently judged
of, before it passed into a law. He wished to
make the House and the country understand the
principles which this Bill contemplated. According
to the old law between debtor and creditor, the
individualvontracting- debts was kept in prison till
those debts were paid ; but the grievances pro-
duced by this inflexible rigour rendered it neees-
sary to pass temporary Insolvent Debtors' Acts,
which, however, were frequently abused. The
Noble Lord then adverted to the passing of the
Insolvent Debtors' Act, properly so called, and
went into an exposition of the abuses of it, with
regard to persons concealing their property, end
otherwise eluding the provisions of the law. To
counteract these abuses, he should propose that an
examination should take place out of Court, be-
fore it took place in Court, and that there should
be in the Insolvent Debtors' Court three Com-
missioners instead of one. He shoilld also pro-
pose, that the claims of such creditors as had
not proved their debts within a certain time should
not be taken into consideration, and that the deb-
tor be obliged to claim the benefit of the Act
within 14 days after his arrest, otherwise that he
should forfeit, it. The next measure he should
propose was, the abolition of fees in the Court in
every instance. The Noble Lord, after sonic
other observations, Moved for leave to bring in a
'Bill for the Relief of the Insolvent Debtors in
England.
Mr.WaITHMAN, though he doubted not that the
Bill proposed to be brought in had been framed
in conformity with the Report of the Committee,
and though he might approve of some of its pro-
visions, did not think he. could approve of the
measure altogether.
The CHANCELLOR Of the EXCH 'MUER, to ac-
complish an object so important as that alluded to
by-the Noble Lord, would not oppose a moderate
increase of expence. He approved of the prin-
ciple on which the present Insolvent Debtors'
Bill had been originally brought in, but he did not
recollect any measure that had more completely
failed. When it was- seen from the papers on the
table what an enormousatnountofptopettyhad been
swallowed by• its operation, he must confess he
could not understand how the trade of the country
could sustain such a loss without being utterly
ruined, If be could contribute to make the Bill
about to be brought in more perfect than it might
be at present, he should be_ happy to co-operate
with the Noble Lord.

After a few worth from Mr. Hurst, Mr. Har-
vey, Mr. W. Courtenay, Sirl.Newport, and Mr.
L. Forster, leave was given to bring in the Bill.
Lord ALTHORP afterwards brought in the new
Insolvent Dehtors' Bill, which was read a first,
and ordered to be read a second time to-morrow
se'nnight, and to be printed.