The Sun.
London, England, 1821-03-30 00:00:00

CORN AVERAGES.

General GAS(OYNE presented a Petition from Liverpool
against the Bill for altering the mode of striking the corn Ave-
rages. He was of opinion-that .if his Right lion. Friend the
President of the Board of Trade persisted in his memure, the
manufacturing interests would be materially injured by it. .
After a desultory conversation, during which General Gas-
coigne, Mr. Birch, Mr. Sykts, Mr. Caleraft, and Mr. Bright
argued against the proposed alteration in the mode of taking
the •Cp.rn Averagesvantl ,11r. Curwen aml .A.Vestern maintained
s expediaicy, 'tie Petition was. brought up and read. On the
notion that it be printed, .
Mr. BE N TT (of Wiltshire) contended, that the proposed
mode of. taxing the Averages was but a correction of the exist-
e. frauds.
''.llr.-.BARING rose and commented on the absence of his
sty's Ministers at that hour, and at a coaversation on such
a subject. He declared, that he had no doubt that the Bill in
progress through the House would have the effect of raising
the price of Corn. If any-one inquired respecting it in Mark-
lane, the answer was, that setting aside the introduction of the
price of Irish Corn into the calculation, the new mode of taking
the averages must unquestionably add to the price of Corn.
He certainly objected to the mode in .which the Bill had been
introduced by the Right Bon. the President of the Bpard of
Trade, who. had declared, that it would not effect any alteration
in the price. At all events, it was important for the House to
know whether they were paasing.a Bill for. the mere correction
of frauds; or for the purpose of altering the average, and fixing
it at a higher rate. his opinion was completely unshaken on the
subject of the Corn Laws. He had not intended to speak on
the subject of the Bill, relying on. the statement of the Right
.1-Ipm.citaitleman, that the object of the Bill was not to alter the
Averages. Now, however, from what he had heard, he had
reason to believe that the Right Hon. Gentleman had not kept
his word with the Houfse ; he • hoped, however, that when the
Bill came under their'consideration, if it should turn out to be.
what he believed it to be, the House would keep faith with the
people, and reject it.
• •Mr. LUSHINGTON accounted for the absence of his Right
Hooourable Friend by observlkig that the second reading-of the
Corn Averages Bill -was not to take place until to,morrow, and
therefore, that his Right Honourable Friend could not dave
been prepared to expect such- a conversation as that which had
taken place. He expressed his perfect confidence, that when
his Right Hon. Friend.should be present, he would satisfacto-
rily prove to the House that the object of the Bill was not an
increese of price, but simply the correction of fraud. In making
that obseivatiOn, of course. he did not advert to any effect that
the introductiOn of Irish Corn intnthe calculation of the aye-
rp.ges might produce. In- proof of what he had been .saying,
he adverted to a paper
.which he h4d, that. morning seen, in
which the price of corn, by the existing, and by the proposed
mode of taking the aiwrages, was.calcolated ; and from that it
distinctly appeared, that by the latter the average would be even
higher Liam -by the tOrmer. lie repeated his conviction that the
Lill in prozr,ss in the House was founded in justice.
Lord A.-HAMILTON said,.that whether or not it was the
designoi 'the Eight lloa, the rresident of the Board of Trade-
to raise the Abe
of.corn by the Bill was of little importance, if
such would be actually the cas:!.. Adverting to the 'document
of i'vitich the HonourableSecretary of the Treasury bail spoken,
lie observed that it ought to be beforethe done, and he trust-
ed, that unleSs it were produced the second reading of the Bill
would not be pressed. . -
Mr. WILSON observed, that if the object of the Bill was, to
raise the price of corn, he would certainly oppose it. He had
supported it on the ground that its purpose was only to correct
frauds.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said a few
words, but they Were wholly inaudible.
illr. GLADSTONE slid, that to his own knowledge va-
rious frauds occurred in the mode of taking the averages in Li-
verpool. Variations were' stated, when, in fact, no variation
.whatever had taken place in the averages—The Petition was
orderAl to be printed. . . .• - • •
MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.
A Message came down from the Lords, stating that the
Lords had agreed to the Commercial Intercourse Bill, and to a
Lill for Indemnifying Witnesses examined upon ie Gram-
pound Disfranchisement ,Bill.
TIMBER DUTIES. • •

Mr. PIIII.LIPS pi-esentd a Petition from Merchants en-
gaged in the .Voreign7.l'inkber Trade in London, Southwark,
and Westininster, .preying for an alteration in the Titnbez Du-
ties.—Ordered tb be printed. . •
• • . CRIMINAL LAWS. •

Mr. BARING presenwd .a Petition from the Town and
NeighbourhOod•of Taunton, praying for a revision of the Cri-
minal 'Laws,. with a view :of rendering- them less sanguinary
and more eflieacious.—Ordered min printed.
After a few words from Mr. WARM,
Mr. G. BENNET said, that he had in his possession a num.
ber of very important facts, =•which would; tend to shew more
clearly the operation'of_the Penal Laws. Those facts he would
take an opportunity of .stating, either in the Committee, or on
the bringing up cif the itepOrt....The Petition was•ordered to
be printed. • •
Ztlr. BABING presented a Petition from the Naltstere,
Brewers, and. Victuallers,of Taunton, complaining of the vexa-
tious Operation of tertain Excise Laws. _ _ _

r.LUSHINGTON saik that a copy of Cu Pctition was

sent to the Treasury, and the subject of it was under considera.. tion—The Petition was 'ordered to- be printed. • -
PUBLIC ACCOUNTS'. • •. .
Mr. RICARDO complained of the Very incorrect mant!ir
in
which the Public Accounts were printed, by nears of which
;larch valuable infonnntion wes kept back from the public. ,
Mr. LUSHINGTON said,' that he had no objection In have
the accounts to which the Hon... Member alluded,-printed in any
manner that would be pointed out. • •• • i-ir. WILSON CROKER gave notice,_ttiat on Tuesday he
would call the attention-of the House. to a 0-.'stion of privilego
relative to the manner, in. which oaths are takenby Members of
• that House before Committees of the House of Lords.
.• ASSESSED TAXES.
Sir M. W. RIDLEY wished. to know, whether it was the
~, intention of the Right Honourable Gentleman (the ChanceLloi
of the ExChequer) to bring in a Bill for the purpose of con-
tinuing the Act to enable persons to compound for Assessed
Taxes. •
The CFTANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, thesub
ject was at present under consideration. •
On the motion of Mr. HUME, -it was agreed that then,
should -be laid before the House copies of Correspondence wit)
the Board of Stamps concerning -the Building, or l'urchasig
-of a new Stamp Office in Edinburgh, with a ctipy of any Con-
tract made for Building of Purchasing the same ; and curies
of Correspondence respecting the Building of a new Post Office
in Edinburgh, with a copy of any Contract made concerning
the same. -
Sir H. 'PARNELL gave notice of a Bill to regulat., the Ex-
pence, of returning-Dflieers on El-cc:6°llBl°r Members of Par-
liament for Ireland. -
Mr. G. BENNET moved for copies or extracts of any Cor-
respondence between Lord Bathurst and the different Colonies
respecting the payment by the Colonies of any part of the ex-
penses of their military delenee.--Agreed to.
NAPOLEON BUONAPAItTE.
Mr. Hum c rose
.to submit a motion to the
House, relative to the expellees in which thiq
country had been involved by the detention of
Buonaparte in the Island of St. Helena. e
did not mean to enter upon the question whether,
he was to be .kept there or not, but if he was to-
be kept there, he wished to ascertain whether
the ..House would consent to his being so kept
at our own exclusive expense. lie thought that
.he might be sufficiently guarded for one-tenth
of the expence now applied to that purpose, and
in that, lie contended, the other powers ought to
join. Perhaps the,llouse .was not aware of the
amount of the present expence. He had in his
pOsSession-an estimate for the year 1315, and al-
though he could not vouch for its being exactly
correct; yet he thought it would be found•to be
very nearly so ; and he was no:, aware that any had been made in the establishment
since that period.. The Honourable Member
then stated the following items
,of expence, as
being according to the estimate which he held in
his hand : •
The Experices of the Staff amounted to s
The Expence.,. of th-
Military Establishment -
The. Incidental Expences for the Maintenance, &c. of
Napoleon - - - - -
The Expences of Provision Vessels, about
The Expences of the Navy - • .-

X 24,000
191,074.

-57,000

5,000
160,000

The total Expence - 1:43!)674
lfe understood that Government had lately en-
gazed. with the East India Company, that the
Company shotild
pay'all expellees, and that they
Should he paid by Govertiment a sum equal. to
the amount of the average expense which,atteod-
ed•the detention-of Napoleon for,the*- fast three
or four years. The Him. Gent. again said, that
the other Powers of Europe ought in fairness to
bear a part of the expenses . of detaining Napo-
leon ; 'seven years had expired since . the tetroi-
nation of the war; it was too severe .tOsee Eng-
land, ithmersed. in financial difficulties, obliged
single:handed to pay the entire expenses attend-
ing the confinement of the late • Emperor. Ile
concluded by moving for Copies of all Corre-
spondence between the Government and the. East
India Company, respecting the Expences attend-
ing the detention of Napoleon Bonaparte ;. also
an Account of the Expences of the Staff, the
Troops, the Ships of War and Transports,. sta-
tioned at St. Ilelena.

The :CHANCELLOR. of the EXCHEQUER did not
mean to object to the motion, and when the (louse
had the papers before them they -would see if the
detention.of Ruonaparte could beattained by nny
more economical plan. From the nature of the
returns, there would be some diaculty as to time
in their being made.- But the 'utmost dispatch
should be used to effect -their. production. lie
was aware that the expences to Which the Ifott.
Member referred were very, considerable, bathe
did not think them so great as the Estimate which
he had stated.

Mr. Hum observed, that the necessity for de-
lay could only apply to the last year, whereas
his motion extended to_the: last five rears. He
could not think that Government would be with-
out regular accounts of what had been expended
in the different years preceding the last.
•Sir It. WILSON said, that he was anxious t
take the first opportunity which presented itself,.
of protesting in the most solemn manner regain;'
the detention of Napoleon.—(2l. laut;li from the
Ministerial side.)—Centleinen, said he, may
laugh, but I express the sentiment of every just,
humane,' and generous man' in E-.,rope. In the
detention of that Illustrious Man, I can see
nothing but dishonour—the violation oC national
faith—and the stain of national' character. He
threw himself upon the protection of Eagland—
his appeal to English generosity was met by
placing him on a rock, where ,he had been sub-
jected to. cruel insult. Separated from his fain -
ly,.even from his infant child, he had been de-
prived of every domestic enjoyment. It is, said
he, a fact well authenticated, that Napoleon
might have escaped, b.ut he preferred throWing
himself upon the generosity of Great Britain.
He has had bitter cause to regret that fatal con-
fidence ; years of suffering and humiliation have
passed over him ; but, if ever that country whose
destinies he wedded, over which he reigned with
so much glory, Whose fortunes and whose inte-
rests were so closely identified with his fatnc.,
—should that country ever regain her freedom,
she will not, cannot, submit to see the hero,
who was once the Sovereign of her choice,- lau.

• - .
...4saksh upon Mt • inhospitable brow of a barren
Mr. CROIKER denied that this country,•with
respect to the detention of Napoleon, was guilty
of the slightest breach of. faith. It was a well
known fact, that the night before Napoleon
sorrendered himself he held a Council of War,
or rather a Council of Safety, in which the ques-
tion was discussed, whether _Napoleon had.
any possible chance of escape? - It Was detided
that he had not. Napoleon; who judged with
caution and with clearness, saw ne means of
safety but in surrendering himself to a British
Officer; hesurrendered himself with reluctance.—
The. British Officers received his person under no
other engagement than that they would detain him,,
and that they would wait for the directlori of the
. King's Government. Should the House, on any
other occasion, think fit to go more fully into the'
-subject, he (Mr. Croker) would pledge himself
to show that Napoleon was fairly hunted into the
toils, and that in the whole transaction, • the ho—
nour of this country, and of its Officers, was
above. all reproach.—(llear !),
. The question was then put and agreed to_
:sir. HOME said,. that in bringing for Ward the
next subject for the consideration of the Rouse,
he wished it to be understood, that on the former
motion he had put the policy of the detention of
Napoleon entirely out of the queStion. He cer-
tainly thought the conduct which had.been sliewn
towards that individual Was more blameable than
the policy which directed his original detention.
He thought there was a degree of severity exer-.
-cised. upon him which the house would never
bring itself to sanction. Supposing that the
original detention of Napoleon were founded upon
good policy, it-might be a 'question worthy of
consideration whether the necessity for that po-
licy still.existed. The Hon. Member concluded
by, moving for a Return of the Number of Ships
of War employed upon the, subject connected
with his former Motion. ,
Mr. GOULBURN said,- that when the subject
should be brought before the. house in a formal
shape, he was convinced that a satisfactory an.
serer would be given to - every complaint which
might then be advanced.
Sir PL.WILsox again said, that the treatment to-
wards Napoleon-was vexatious, harsh, and even
cruel. After paying the highest mark of respect to
the generosity of the English nation,-afterahrow-
ing himself upon their protection, as Mithridates
threw himself upon the Romans, he was confined
a close prisoner, deprived of his wife and child,
and cut off from all correspondence with his
nearest relations.
Mr. GOULOURN begged to remind the Gallant
General,• that Napoleon himself declared that
he came not as Mithridates, but as Themistocles
(A laugh.) •
Air. C. HUTCHINSON said, he should be ashamed
of himself if he ~''soffered any occasion to pass
.without recording his opinion of an :act which he
considered a disgrace to the country, and a viola-
- tiers of all humaniiy. He at present would not
enter into the policy of the-original detention ,of
Napoleon, but he was satisfied there was now no
danger in existence, upon which it could be jus-
tified. Yet we continued to by the gaolers of
the Allied Powers, whose principles were avowed
by:their actions. There was a time indeed when
the Noble Lord opposite might justly have called
upon the English. Parliament to support him
against the attempt of lawless ambition ; but now
. there was not the slightest excuse to justify the
severity of the proceeding in question. Now,
indeed, the scene had altogether changed, and
notwithstanding the conduct of Ministers, they
dared not to avow an approval of the aggression
of Austria against Naples. '.,11e would boldly
affirm, that the Courts of Austria, Russia, and
Prussia, had avowed the tyrannical principles
noon which they intended to govern mankind.--
That principle was not only more degrading, but
was much more insulting than any principle
which had ever been adopted by Napoleon. The
pledge by •Which the Continental Sovereigns had
obtained the suppoet of Europe against the ambi-
tion of• Napoleon,. was that which held out a pre-
servation of European liberty ; and he (Mr. H.)
directly charged them with haying violated that
pledge. Thr lion. Member' proceeded, to a re-
view of. recent continental events,iand observed,
that without the support of those subjects who
Were now denied -constitutionill freedom, the. So-
aveigns of Austria and Prussia. Would not have
• succeeded in putting down Napoleon. The Hon.
Member apologized for having delayed the atten-
tion of the House from.the question immediately
before it, • and concluded by declaring,: that as
there was now no appearance of justice' in con-
tinuing the detention of Nalibleow,-U, saw'rto
..reason for continuing that detention, an ex-
pence 'of half a million-anneally, while.the people
were already ground nearly to dust by exces-
sive-. fa.xation,—The motion:- wa-s then put and
egreed to.. '