The Sun.
London, England, 1821-03-10 00:00:00

PARLIAMENT,

hOU,SE OF .I.,ORDS, MARCH 9. ~.
. Petition preented, on the part of Viscount
11,Iolesworth, claipii.ng for his Lordship the right
of voting at the elections of .Irisli Peers, was, re:-
ferret.' to a Cominytee of Privileges to consider
and report thereon.
Mr. BROGDEN,• and other.mernbers from the
House of Commons, brought up ..the Lunatic
Stock Transfer Bill, the Nova cotia Trade
Bill, and the New South Wales buties.l3ilf•
Mr. MANSFIELD brought up the Leiceger"Gas
Bill and Mr. HART DA-vis, the Bristol Gas
Bill. All these Bills were read a first time:.

..4.-person from the Treasury presented. an . Ac-
count of all the Warrants issued from the office
of Vice-Treasurgr in Ireland.. •

. .
The Uarl of SnAi-Tsanity presented.a Petition
from the Mayor; Aldermen, and Burgesses of the
Town of Beverley, in the County . of York,
aaainst any further concessions to the Roman
eatholics. The Petition was read, anti ordered
to lie on the table.
. ,

•
The Marquis of LANSDOWN presentecra Peti-
tion from the Ship Owners of the port of Sunder-
land, praying that no alteration might take place
in the existing duties on the importation of Tim-
ber from North America. The Noble Marquis
observed, that although he was opposed to the
prayer'of the Petition, he felt it his duty to pre-
sent it to the House.

The Marquis of LANSDOWN then moved for an
Account of all Goods exported from Great Bri-
tain to France during the last year, distinguish-
ing the flags under which the goods were exported.
The Offenders' 'Transportation Bill was read a
third time, after which the House adjourned till

Monday.
F• HOUSE OF COMMONS.
This being the. last day appointed for the
bringing in of private bills, a great number of them
were read a first time.

, .
Mr. BYNG brought in a Bill for establishing a
company, for the better- lighting of the suburbs.
and the vicinity Of the tiaetropolis with gas. Read
a , •
first time.
-NAPLF.4.,
Sir Itonhtur WILSON gave notice; that the tribi•
tion which he- had intended to-haire. submitted
last night, for the production of a letter from Sir
William A'Court to the Neapolitan Minister,. he
would, if it should be found necessary; submit on
Tuesday the 20th of March. •
BREACH OF PRIVILEGE. •
Mr. S. WORTLEY said, he rose to bring under
the notice of the House one
,of •the most gross
breaches of priVileges that had called for its at-
tention. It vvas known that for many years past
the debates ano votes of that House had been' pUb-
lished ;- he was one of those who believed that,
when fairly' given, they produced the utmost
bfinefit to the community. Since the House,
therefore, had connived at their publication, it
became it to take the utmost care to•see that that
permission was not abused—to prevent any false
motives .being imputed, to its Members, as
influ-
encing their votes, and especially to prevent
their being represented to vote for or against,
questions that were never submitted to its con-
sideration, nor,to give a false colouring to its pro-
ceedings. The particular circumstance to which
he' had now to call the attention of the House,
was the statement of a Minority of that House,
which appeared in The Morning Chronicle,
of the 26th of February, under the follow-
ing title :—" A List of the Minority of thirty-
seven•that. voted against the Petition of Thomas
Davidson being rejected before it was read, and
against the admonition of Lord Castlereagh that
the people should not continue to trouble Or take
up the time of the House with their Petitions."
—(Cheers by the Opposition.)—By this state=
ment, which was not correct, it must be intend•-
ed to impute to the Majority that they had
adopted and supported the contrary opinion.
Now no such question was ever put to the House
as that stated in the Paper ; it was therefore a
gross libel, and, he must add, consisting of the
greatest falsehood.—(Loud cheering by the 013
position.)—He would appeal to the lion. Gen-
tlemen who cheered him, to prove whether. any
such proposition was made.—(Continued cheers.)
When a Member came forward to make a corn-
plaint of a • breach of its privileges, were Mem-
bers by their cheers- (Repeated cheering.)—
The Gentlemen who cheered (More cheer-
ing.)—Here the Honourable Member appealed
to the Speaker, and order having been restored,
the Honourable Member proceeded. It would
appear by the cheering% , he had heara that
some Gentlemen supported the libel. As long as he
was a Member of that House, he had a right to
declare his opinion. By the statement it was in-
tended to convey an imputation upon the motives
by which the majority had voted, ahhough he
would defy any One to prove that any such pro.
position had been made ; no such expression 'was
uttered ; and even if it had, no one had'a right
to charge the majority with having adopted the
sentiments of another ; if such Was to be the case,
then there would lie an end to all freedom of de..
bate. He might not, perhaps, have taken so
much notice of the present complaint, had he not
seen a similar :insinuation accompanying a late
division on a motion for the reduction of the taxes.
He called upon the House earnestly not to pass
over this violation of its laws, and he trusted it
would exert itself in protecting its privileges.
Under these circumstances, he should move that
J. Lambert, the Printer of The Morning,Chroni.:.
de, be ordered to attend at the Bar of the House
on Monday next.
Mr. G. RENNET congratulated the House that
the lion. Member had plucked up courage
enough to bring forward this complaint. Whe-
ther it was an act of discretion or otherwise, it
would be for the House to determine. lie was
present during the discussion, and from what he
then heard, he believed the statement in the
pa-
per was true.—(No, no !)—lle repeated, it was
substantially true, although perhaps the words
literally might not have been used. He 'had,
since •he heard of the intended charge, looked
over the Journals, and found lists of majorities
and minorities had been published for upwards
of a century. [The Honourable Member read
from a statement in his hand a list of the divi-

'Sions to. whi,di, he had alluded.] -Thisiias the
first time that. anycharge,had, been mac!e.against
their being published,and,- the:present ccimplaint
is as at the best.of- very doubtftil.fiMmi.e;*-fpr he
must again repeat, that" the Made
upon lii3 mind was, that the staterneaid to
be a breach of the Privileges of the "House, was
substantially:true. lie considered it a good omen
that Gentlemen were tenacious as to the judg-
ment that might be formed by the people Of their,
conduct, by' the publication- of their votes; 'low-
ever it might suit them to give their votes in that
House, although no Metriber ought to be aShamed
of any thing he might, propose in it. For him,
self he did .give his vote against -the 'Petition
being rejected before it was read, and he 'Would
also add, that he did so in opposition to the ad-
monition that had been given by the Noble Lord.
The lion. Member not having been preSenf, bad
bebu iiroperly ptit• forward upon this.occasion,
beCausr he. Was no party to the question,' how=
warmly he had supported it. ile'by no
means wished to interfere in the progre-ss of-pub.
lie business; but as lie knew no_ other'way of
getting quit of, the complaint,• he should 'move
that the House dp.pow adjoUrn. •

Sir C.. LONG was surprized:that the charge of,
warmth Shodld have been brought forwartragaiust
his Hon. Friend, who deserved it as little as any`
individual in that House; but it came with a pew
'culiarly ill, grace from the. Hon: Gentleman who
had made the charge, who was more liablOV fall
into,warutth of expression than xmost.other Mem-,
hers in the House. The Right Hon... Meinber •
then entered into a defence of the conduct of the
.11oue hi the vote they gave on the.oci:a.'sion" in
question ; and denied that Lord Castlereagh had
used such expressiOns as, those imputed toliiin ;
still less had the House divided on an v such
lion as that put at the head of the list ou.this'Oc-
.
casion.

WILSON did not rise to defend the.pa-,
ragraph,
,but he trusted, after the lenity which
had been recently extended to the Printer of the
Gazette, for the•insertion of kgross libel
,1n the
Address of a certain Scotch Presbytery, thatAhe
Hon. Gentleman would imitate that condUct;and
contenting himself with having called the:lath*.
.tion of the House to:it, withdraw his motion. •
Mr. CREEVEY was one of the 37 who formed-
this minority ; and. speaking of the impression
Made on his mind, the NOble Lord had used•the
words imputed to him in this alleged libel and,
in his ;opinion, -the Printer had stated no more
than what passed, though he did not intend to
impute to the Noble Lord that he intended to
use the. term admonish generally, and without
qualification.

Mr. WALLACE said, the question now• before
the }louse did not regard what had been said, by
the Noble Lord, but related to the motive which
had been imputed to the House on the vote it had
come to. Ile was not prepared to say that the
house could pass ever this breach of privilege
without noticing it. •
Sir J. NEWPORT recollected, and was able to
repeat, the expression used by the Noble Lord,
which was" as stated, tt recommendation to Mem.,
hers to admonish the People of England :how
they presented their Petitions to the House ;
though he was ready. to acknowledge that 'the
Noble Lord afterwards explained, 'and qualitiA
the expression he had used.

Sir M. W. RIDLEY was.not present during the
debatein question, but felt bound to allow' that,
if the Noble Lord .bad 'used • the 'expression so
imputed to him, his subsequent explanation had'
done' it away. He hoped, however, .
Friend would be content to witlkdraw his motib'n.
Mr..l.lu4Eissom. complained of the pai.agrapli.
as giving a false colouring to the grounds'nfion
which the House came to its vote's
,on the even-.
ing in question. It would appear that the vote
was come to for the purpose of admonishing he
people. not to petition. He must conderna im-
puting motives to any Member for his vote, even
though it should be assigned to the MeMber for
Appleby to ascribe what those motives were:.
Air. S. 'WORTLEY replied. The Hon. Mem-
ber for Shrewsbury had accused t!im of indiscre.
tion ; • but he would ask, was ppt that Hon. Mem-,
ber more indiscreet in defending what was, not
true ? The Hon. Member -had also accused. him
(Mr. W.) of having been put forward on. this
occasion. lie denied that he bad ever been put
forward on this or any other occasion whatever.
The Hon. Member for Shrewsbury might have
been, he knew not when or by whom that lion.
Membei' was put forward, but he knew this, the
lion. Member supported one party, whilst he
supported another. He did it conscientiously,
and 'he was willing to alloW that the Hon. Mein-
bet- for Shrewsbury acted with the same feeling:
Sir M. RIDLEY (to Order), said, he understood
his Hon. .Friend was inclined to withdraw his
motion. He therefore trusted he would not now
enter into argument. . ,

Mr. S. WoaTLEY was ready to withdttly ids
motion against a poor Printer, who wag not the
great delinquent ; but as the statement'ivas iil it-
calf libellous.and false, he must expect that Hon.
Members opposite would state that the person,
whoever he was, who sent it .to the Paper inques-
tion, had been guilty of an indiscretion.
Lord CAsTLEREActi had only just entered the
House, but understood sufficient of the, subject
under discussion, to enable him to know to.what
it alluded.: The paragraph in question: hart been
pointed out to him, and he had ,been told he
ought to, call,- the attention of the House to it,
but. there Ni•ere such a multiplicity of these things
before the public continually, as applying to Mi-
nisters, that he' trusted he should be excused for
`not regarding them—(a tamh)--especially 'when
their 'own absurdity, as in the present instance,
.rendereti them 'so ridiculouS as to discredit them
altogether. The Noble LOrd then entered into
an explanation of the eXpressi6n lie had used on
'a fernier night, and said he Used the term
admo-
nish not as'alluding to.the petition, but that the ,
people -should:'be advised, that the House of
Commons was not a Court of Appeal from the-
Court of King's Bench ; and he was'per'SUaded
no fair mmi could have mistaken his Meaning.
' Lord A. ilAmwroN thought the .oabfiefition
discreet, but he did not consider it ;:s of a charac-
ter to call for the serious attention oithe
Mr. C. HuTc.t:lNsoN. did not mean to impute

to:the Noble Loal;a-meaning which he had Ilk:-
claimed ; but he must be allowed-to say, -he had
mistaken the•Noble.Lord's meaningat the time ;
and had understood-him as reading a lecture to
th-e People of
.Ett:4larid to refrain from petitioning
i t future.
-.tit%MoNtcx said, that as the Mover on this oc-
casion hail discovered the unfortunate paragraph
in question to be false, and another had discover-
ed it was :libellous as well as false, he should not
be surprised if the Attorney-General was to find
out thcit it was also blasphemous and seditious.
.Now with regard to the paragraph and the reflec-
tion it was said to convey on the House, if G entle-
men would read it they would see that all the re-
flrction was cast on Lord Castlereagh, and that the
House escaped free. lie considered the whole
as a political squib, and as such it ought to be
passed over. •

Lord CASTLEREIGn did not know whether the

Hon. Mernber was here as counsel for the Printer
--(Spoke,. spoke.)--The paragraph I-as particu-
larly levelled at hiM, and he hoped in courtesy
to meet indulgence. I f the Hon. Member intend--
rd-19 defend.the, paragraph, he should, against
his inJinatiou, be forced to support the motion
against the Printer.

Mr. Cu uwEN hoped the motion would be with
erawn.

Mr. S. Worrrt.Y.y had no. objection to with-
erawiiig the motion, if Gentlemen ceased to
clefend the paragraph ; but he on his conscience
believed the paragraph affected even the safety
of the 'House ; and Whilit-he saw any party or
,set of men in the House inclined to defend the
paragraph, he would divide the House, even
thirigh he should go out alone.
Mr. J. P. GRANT said, no Member could in-
tend to defend the paragraph in question, in the
view.-the Hon. Member seemed to insinuate. He
considered the paragraph as most indiscreet, and
as such condemned it.- He trusted, however, the
lion: Member would withdraw his motion.
Mr. HoßilOusE doubted Muchif the House had
the power to entertain this motion.
Ile SPEAKER said, no doubt could exist of the
powcr of the House to inquireinto a gross breach
of their pzivilege.
Mr.
,lionHousr said, he must bow to the au-
thority of the Chair ; but he must observe, that the
Hen. Member for
.Yorkshire must not attempt to
make a condition the ground of withdrawing his
motion ; for he could not consent to say he con-
sidered.this paragraph as imprOper. The Hon.
IVrember said, he knew .of nothing so calculated
to'injUre, the House as such publications as this ;
he would tell the House what was much more
miSchievo-us; namely, such motions as the pre-
sent. :The Noble Lord last
.Session had given
what he (Mr. H.) considered as a most discreet
opinion on the subject of The Western Luminary.
The Tioble Lord said, if they began to notice
these. things it would be impossible .to say where
they would end. So he would say norw, for was
there a day in which libels were not published
reflecting on Gentlemen on his side of the House
--for-himself in particular, was there a day in
which he was not represented as a person desirous
of overthrowing
.the Constitution. The Hon.
Gentleman's friends might be obliged to him for
h.is defence of them, especially when it was re-
collected, that on one occasion he had voted them
incapable ; but of that he did not complain, as
some new lights might have broken in upon him
since.

Mr. S. WORTLEY declared, that consistent
with his notion of duty he could not withdraw
Lis motion.—Mr. 13tvaING opposed the motion.
BA•ruoltsT thought the motion could not
he withdrawn unconditionally,. there must be
sorne censure expressed upon it.
Sir R. Fr.r.ouso's said, on a former night he
had expressed himself with great warmth on the
language used by the Noble Lord. The Noble
Lord's explanation had, however, convinced him.
he had misunderstood .him. lie trusted under
all the circumstances; the Hop. Member would
withdraw his motion.

14r. S. WORTLEY wished to know whether, if
he withdrew his -motion, it was to be considered
as an acknowledgrn2nt that the paragraph was
dicapproved.—(NO, no ! Question, question !)
Mr. liEral.tx put it to:the Hon. Member for
TOrksliire;, whether he would persevere-in a mo-
tion, against the sense.of the House, because two
or thi.ee individuals refused to accede to a pro
positiol. he miglt malce.-7—The gallery was then
cleared for a division—,

} or ailjourrisiig
Agnirist it

155

hlj;)rity the A mendm.• tit .. 1I I
Whilst strangers were.excluded, Mr. 14.1:40T0N
moved the previous question. •
Mr. fir.74Ni.7 was anxious that the tine of.the
should not be wasted.. 1.3. q H t the on. Ge-
ntleman was offended even by a cheer ; and was.
induced Co make a different motion. from what he
at first ii,tended.

Mr. b. WonTLEy said? the . Halve must be
sensible of the con.ciiiatory speech of the Hon.
GenliPthati. He, (Mr. W.) stood on the privi-
leges of the Huuse, which was. denied by
.some
G.,mtlernau.—(No, no !)—lf an infringment
was ad:nit ted, he would withdraw the motion.
Lord CASTLREA.GII thought, some misconcep-
tion prevailed, as no vindictive step was meant to
be taken. The question was, if it was such a
breach of privilege, as called for the appearance
df the indii,idual at the Bar. lie thought •no one
could doubt that there was a breach of privilege ;
but it was a question, whether it was such a one
as pilled- for. the interference of the House. lie
hoped the 'previous qUestiou would be with-
drawn.

Lord A. HAMILTON said,: that .the subject had
been purSued in the most. injudicious:manner, as
. the usual course was to move ffat the individual
had been guilty of a breach of privilege. The
motion had not been made on account of the cri-
minality of the man, but because•the Mover was
not pleased with the condUct. of some five.or six
of his oppoents. The Noble Lord (Castle-
reagh) had set a becoming example of modera-
tion ; and he hoped the Delover;would be. kft in
a minority. .No ground had been • stated far the
'nation ; he felt confident that.the Noble Lord,
and those who acted with him, would vote against
it._ He denied that the latter part of the article

was a criminal libel on the. House, though it
might be disrespectful to the Noble Lord.
Mr. S. WonTLry would submit to the Chair
the propriety of the course he had taken.
e SPEAKER stated; that as many cases had
occurred where, in the first instance, the inGivi-
duv I had been called to the bar, as when the
Hoese had come to a previous vote on the ques-
tion of libel.

Dr. LUSIIINGTON had no doubt that the article
was a breach of the privileges of the House, and
as that was the general feeling on his side, he
hoped the motion would be withdrawn.

Mr. S. WoitTLEY, after what he "had heard
would withdraw his motion.

Mr. la IMBTON said, that he would also with.
draw Hs motion, from a wish to save the time o
the House.

Mt.. S. WartTLy.y would leave it to the country
to judge betuifi“ hint anti the lion. Gentlemen
opposite.

The Amendment of Mr. LAMETON was then
withdrawn; and Mr. 5.11,' ORTLEY also withdrew
his Motion.

ARMY MEDICAL EXPENCES,

Lord PALMERSTON presented papers connected
with the Medical Expences of the Ariny.---Laid
on the table.

COUNTY COURTS' BILL

Lord ALTIIORP postponed the—secohd reading
of the County Courts' Bill, which stood for this
day, to Thursday next, 15th inst.

GRANIPOUND DISFRANCIFISENIENT.
Mr. STUART WoitTLLY postponed to Tuesday
next, the further consideration of the Gratnpound
Disfranchisement Bill.

BANK CAM-1 PAYMENTS.
The• CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER stated,
that on Monday.he should more that the House
should, resolve itself into a Committee O'n the
subject .or Cash Paymt,hts.
Mr: 13.k_RISO hoped that the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman would state what he Meant to propose to
the House, and also that he would postpone the
Committee to a future day,
The CHANCELLOR of the Excuvaurrt said, that
his object was to accelerate by a year payment
in cash, and also to make the exte4t of 51. instead.
of 21. a legal tender in silver.:
Mr. BARING said, as the question was one of
the greatest possible importance, he should move
as an amenjrnent, to send it to a Cominittee above
stairs.

After some further observations, on' the part of
the CIIINCELLOII of the •EXCHEQUER arid Mr.
BARING, the Committee was posti)oned. to Mon.
day se'nnight.

CORN AVERAGES.
Lord C.HTLEatAon moved for Copies 9f any
recent Accounts received from any of his Majes-
ty's Ambassadors at Foreign Courts, of the prices
of Corn in tho(:e countries.

Sir JOHN NEWPORT moved that there be laid
-before the House an Account of all sums of money
paid by the Commissioners of Excise in Ireland,
for seven years last past, for Stamps and Law
Proceedings.—Ordered.
TIMES LEASING BILL.
Sir G. HILL begged the Hon. Baronet, Mem-
ber for the Queen's County, would postpone the
second reactinz.of- the Tithes Leasing Bill, which,
stood for this day. Sir H. PARNELL consented.
Second reading postponed to Wednesday next.
FOREIGN TRADE.
Mr. WALLAEE brought up the Report of the
Committee on Foreign Trade, and stated, that on
an early day he should call the attention of the
House to the subject.—The Report was laid on
the table, and ordered to be printed.
PE I'MON FROM ILCHEsTER GAOL.
Mr. Alderman Woof) presented a Petition
from a person of the name of Charles Hill, con-
fined in Ilchester Gaol, for the space of 15 years,
and then 74 years of age. The man had been a
Collector of Taxes, and a deficiency had taken
place to the amount of 7191.; but effects of his
had been sold to the amount of 4671., and
taxes had -been collected to the value of 2.171.;
so that the actual deficiency was only the
amount of. thirty-four pounds. To make up
that deficiency, tire petitioner had offered all his
property, and had petitioned the Treasury, the
Commissioners of Taxes, and Parliament. After
the Petition to Parliament, the Gaoler had open.
ed Jfis boxes and taken away all his papers,
and removed him to the common side of the gaol.
Many, complaints had been made of the conduct
Of the, Gaoler ; but all that lie (.old. Wood)
wanted was, the release of the individual, parti-
cularly as other defaulters, to a much greater
amount, bad been overlooked. Mr. Hunt, who
had formerly been treated with great indulgence
by the late Sheriff, had latterly experienced a
great alteration in his treatment. He (Aid. W.)
intended soon to move fur a Commttee to inquire
into the state of the gaol:
_ _

M. CREEVEY thought -as the sum for which the
Petitioner was confined was so small, the case
must have escaped 'the notice of Ministers. Mr.
VillierS had been a defaulter to the amount of
100,0001:and-there should be but one law to the
rich and .poor. •

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCUEQUER said, that
in this case, the Treasury had no power to inter-
fere. The case lay between the individual and
the- parish.

Mr. DICKENiON thought the sum was greater
than 31/. The individual might have formerly
been liberated had he consented to give up a
certain property. He understood that he acted
as an Attorney in- the gaol, and remained there
from his- own inclination. Ile was ready to meet
the Hon. Member in the Committee he intended
to move. He had heard that the Worthy Alder-
man had made a Report on the State of the Gaol
from a printed book, and that he had never en-
tered the walls.

Sir T. LETalittlndE courted inquiry into the
management of the Gaol, and defended the con-
duct of the Magistrates.

Dr. LCsIUNtrroN said, as Member for Ilchester,
he had been asked to support the Petition. Much of
the Petition was true, but the facts, if examined,
would assume a different face. The Petitioner
had been confined for a much larger snm than had
been staled, and would Crave been released had he
chosen to execute a certain deed. That he. had
at first refused, but, four years ago, he. had ex-
pressed a willingness to do so. The sum at
stake betwixt him and the parish was 701.

'Though the Magistrates were unable to do all
they wished, much had been.done within the last
15 years. The Gaoler had been found a valu-
able man in the hands of the 'Magistrates.
Sir I. COFFIN bore testimony to the good con-
duct of the Gaoler.
After a few words from Sir F. OMMANEY, the
Petition was brought up, and read.
Alderman Wool) stated, that since his Petition
to Parliament the Petitioner had been unable to
act as au Attorney, as all his papers had been
taken away. He had made no report from a
printed book, but from actual inspection of the
prison. He had heard that a person, upon a
charge of fraud, (he meant Kinneir) lived in the
house of the gaoler.. He would refer to the
book of Visiting Magistrates to prove that he had
examined the gaol.
Mr.-BmttNa stated, that he had been informed
upon -the most respectable authority, that the
Gentle Men sent by the City of London to ex-
amine the gaol, had ordered a dinner, which had
lasted so long that they had no time to visit the
gaol ; and the statement they had made refer-
red to the former state of the prison, which had
been completely altered a-year before.—(Loud
Laughter.)
Mr. BENNET said that a hearsay tale was not
to be opposed to the testimony of the Worthy
Alderman himself:
Mr. F. BURTON had been informed that the
Worthy Alderman and his party had not been
within the, walls of the gaol. He (MT. B.) had
experienced much pleasure from the conduct of
the gaoler.
Alderman Noon stet(' that he and Sir J.
Perring, then a Member of the House, and the
Town-Clerk, had been two hours within the
prison. There.haA"been no dinner in the place.
Mr. C. Ilt:Tc-nriiwNt thought the Worthy Al-
der Man hadnot'been fairly dealt with, and felt
much regret at what had taken place.
Mr. BARING said, that as the Worthy Alder-
man had said he had been within the walls of the
prisoi., he must suppose he had been misinform-
ed. But the account of the state of the prison
referred to what it had formerly been.
Dr. LUSHINGTON wished to know if the Chan-

cellor of the Exchequer would consent to the re-
lease of the prisoner.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER must be
guided by an examination of the facts of the case.

CONINIFI"I'EE 4)F SUPPLY.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved
the Order of the Day for the House resolving it-
self into a Committee of Supply.
Mr. CR EEVEY must oppose the motion. Nu-
merous Petitions had been presented to that
House, complaining of distress, and yet the only
two motions, with that of the Member for Abing-
don (Moberly) and the Member for Cumber-
land (Curwen), with a view to alleviate that
distress, had been negatived by the House.
There were 70 Members of that House who had
150,0001. a year among them. There were 70
Distributors of Stamps of England and Wales,
and 70 Collectors of the Land Tax, all given to
the relations and dependents of that House.
There were also many other sources of influence
in the Customs and the Excise ; nor could he
shut his eyes to India, the Colonies, and even
the Estimates on the table of the House. He
should move, as an amendment, that the House
should-take into consideration the circumstance of
Members of that House holding Offices under the
Crown, and that to the amount of 150,0001., and
should move a Resolution, that an Independent
House of Counnons was essential to the redress
of the grievanc,es of the people.
Lord PALMERSTON thought that the lion. GPn-
tleman had made" this motion to obstruct the
whole march and machinery of the Government.
The House would consider that the Mutiny Act
expired on the 24th of this month ; and unless

the number of men were voted the Mutiny 131
must be stopped. He considered this as a recor

of the Hon. Gentleman's opinion, which he held
11 years ago, of the necessity of Parliamentary
Reform.

Colonel Davies wished to know whether the
Hon. Member intended his motion for a bar to
the grant in supply altogether.
Mr. CitEEVEY said,he should divide the House
011_the subject.

Mr. BENNET assented to the proposition of his
Hon. Friend ; but he hoped that he would bring
in this motion on every occasion when supplies
were to be granted.
Mr. CA r,crt.t FT could not assent to this motion ;
for hostile as he was to the present Administra-
tion, he could not consent to clog the:wheels or
Government, for he kuew the Mutiny Bill must
be renewed. Still he could not agree with the
Noble Lord opposite (Palmerston), that the
Mutiny Bill must soon expire ; for he might
pass a short Mutiny Bill till the first of May,
and then the Mutiny Bill might be renewed
every. lstof May.—Mr. Cueuvuk explained.
After a few words from Sir J. NcWPORT, Mr.
HUSKISSON,. and Mr. Moxcx, the House di-
vided

F,,r the Amendment Si
Against it
!Majority -1.44
The SPEAKER then put the question, 6 That
Le should leave the Chair."

Mr. HumE did not rise to oppose the business
of the House needlessly ; but he meant to sub-
mit a motion that the Military Eitablishment of
the country was too great; and therefore he was
induced to recom-nend economy on this the first
of the regular Estimates. The Chancellor of the
Exchequer had said that the Estimates of this

year would be a million less than last year ; but
the House would find that the expences of the
Army and Navy exceeded those of 1819 by
above a million, and were only less by 300,0001.
than those of last year. He complained that the
E,timates of the Army were not fairly stated to
the House. He entered into the usual compari-
sons between the Military Establishments in
Great Britain, Ireland, and the Colonies in 1791.,
-and those 'of the present day ; the result of which
was, that we had now 20,000 Men more than we

had in the year 1792. He therefore would call upon
the HouAe to rednce the regular troops by 10,000
men •; for he did not wish that so large an
Estaiblishment should he reduced all at once.—

,s would leave to the Noble Lord a surplus of

10,000 mrn; for the.new Colonies and other pur-
poses. The House will be surprised to find
that we had 125,000 men in arms, or ready to
be called out in a few hours. He appealed to the
Agricultural Members whether they would not
do more good -to the country by reducing the mi-
litary establishment,.and by consequently
ing the taxes, than by increasing their own rents,
which it.was in vain for them to deny as being
their object. If they did not do so they would
feel their pockets still lighter before the year
was out. He contended that there was an ex-
cessive number of llousehold troops kept up by
Ministers for the mere purposes of parade and
show. It was the duty of the House to oblige
Ministers to look how they could make
these troops become of less expence to the
country. We had got, he would contend,
an overgrown military establishment in Arne-
r;ca ; and a still greater establishment in
the Staff. When they looked at the 14001.
.12001., 800/., and 600/. a year to clerks in the
War-Office, would any man say that-we could
continue in that unnatural state of things, which
was occasioned by the War Taking every
thing into consideration, there would be seven
millions for the army, exclusive of the Half-pay
and Pension list, when in 1792 it only cost two
or three millions at the utmost. He thought the
House had a right to complain that time Noble
Lord had not proposed a reduction of the num-
ber of regiments from 92 to 72. He should op-
pose the expence of the Staff and other Corps,
especially the Ordnance Department. At the
same time he .believed that the duty at the Horse
Guards, as far as he knew, was much better
done than that of any other Department under
Government. But it was their duty to stop every
species of extravagance in every branch of the
State. lie complained that our colonies of the
Cape of Good Hope, and the Mauritius, and Cey-
lon, were taxed without their own Represen-
tatives having any share in voting a way their
own money. The only one of these colonies that
had received any boon was Ceylon, which had re-
ceived the Trial by Jury—a circumstance which
had given the greatest satisfaction to all classes
in the Island. If those colonies received Bri-
tish laws, they would cheerfully provide for
their own military establishments. The House
might perhaps be surprised that pay and clothing
for the stations abroad, amounted to 1,018,0001.
As he was credibly informed, almost the whole
of these Colonies supported _themselves before
they came under our Government; and this
was only altered by our sending out a set of men
to till sinecure offices. We had ruined and
spoiled every thing by giving away idle and use-
less places. Until all thew branches of econo-
my and retrenchment were attended to, it would
be impossible for this country to prosper. The
Hon. Member then proceeded to a review of
the expenditure of the office of Secretary, at
War. Ile intended nothing personal to the
Noble Lord, who he dared say was no worse
than others; but it should be recollected, that in
1796 the whole expence of the Office of Secre-
tary, wasB2sol. now it was upwards of 60,0001.
and at the commencement of the war the ex-
pencez of the War-Office was 8,0001. only, now
it was 61,0001.; after further observations the
Hon. Member said he tyoutd not now detain the
House, but would refrain going into detail till
the House went into the Committee. He con-
cluded by moving a resolution in substance as fol-
lows :,----Resolyed,that in 1792, the military force
of the Empire was only 48,474, whilst in 1821 it
was 81,106, and that in the opinion of the House
it ought to be reduced.
Sir H. WILSON seconded the motion. He

strongly condemned the conduct adopted in the
management of our Colonies. He particularly
alluded to the Cape of Good Hope; he was there
at the time we took possession of that Colony,
which, previous to our taking possession of it,
supported itself without being any expence to
the Mother Country. As soon as we took pos-
session the case was altered, and the Colony be-
came and had continued ever since a heavy ex-
pellee to the country ; he was convinced that an
immense saving might be made in the manage-
ment of the Colonies.

The Resolution was then put and negatived,
and the.question for the Speaker leaving the Chair
was adopted.
Mr. Humc said, he bad two or three Resolu-
tions to propose.
The SPEAKER said, this could not be done re-
gularly now, as the sense of the House had been

taken on his leaving the Chair.

Mr. liumE had entirely mistaken the course,
he had three Resolutions, and had intended to
suirt-r the two first to he negatived, intending to
take the sense of the House on the third, and
thus get them all entered on the Journals.
The SPEAKER said, this might be.done on the
Report being brought up, but not on the Com-
mittee. Nothing which passed in the Committee
would get on the Journals.

Mr. TIERNEY submitted the impropriety of
going into the Army Estimates at this rate hour.
Ile ►r:is aware the Mutiny Bill pressed ; but he
was ready to lend his aid to any step which-would
get rid of that difficulty.
Lord PALMERSTONE thought the House might
go into the Committee, and take the argument un
the Report.
Air. P. GRANT and Mr. DAMES opposed go-
ing into the Committee at this late hour.
Mr. M. A, TAYLOR, Oil the part of the Public,
must protest against the House going into this im-
portant discussion at so late an hour, and would
therefore move that the House do now adjourn.
The HOuse was accordingly proceeding to di-
vide, when

Lord CASTLEREAGH, although , he considered
the House would have come better prepared to
discuss the subject on Monday, if they had gone
into the Cotntnittee, and heard the detail to-
night ; yet at (Iris late hour, well aware of the
reluctance which Gentlemen would have ta,go
into discussion, he considered it would be better
to adjourn to Monday.
After some further conversation, as to the order
of proceeding, between the Speaker, Lord Castle-
reagh, end. Mr. A. Taylor, the latter withdrew

his motion, and the Committee was fixed for
Aionday.

The Irish Treason Bill,. brought from the
Lords, ‘s:as read a first, and ordered to be read a
second time on the 22d instant.

The other Orders were disposed of, and the.
House adjourned at Half-past Twelve to Monday.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT or' KINU'S BENCH, MARCH 9.
110DGiON V. WA Unlit.
This trial, which has excited an unusual de-
gree of interest among the News-venders of the
Metropolis, came on this morning before Lord
Chief Justice Annovr. Sir J. COPLEY and Mr.
GUI:NEY appeared for the plaintiff, and Messrs.
SCARLETT arid DENMAN for the defendant. It
was an action for an assty.ned libel, and injury
sustained by the plaintiff, -in the pro ecution of
his occupation as a caws-Vender. The damages
were laid at 10001. The circumstances or the
case, as they appeared in evidence, were:—
Mr. Hodgson, it appsars, is a News-vender at
the west end of the town, and from the distance
of his connexions from The "thee, was
some time in J une last induced to remon-
strate with the Publisher of The Times Paper
upon what he consitkred an unfair priorit;., of
the distribution of that Journal ; out orthis re-
monstrance some unpleasant feeling arose against
Mr. Hodgson, and the Proprietor of tire
Paper thought proper to insert a paragraph in !fs-
Journal, reflecting on the character of the
tiff, and indirectly advising his customers to ob-
tain their Papers of some other per-:on, as the
Proprietor of The Times stated he was deter-
mined not to let the plaintiff have any from his
office. To obtain reparation for this injury the
plaintiff brought this action.
Sir J. Coe.t.F.y and Mr. GuItNEY addressed
the Court at very considerable length, upon the
dangerous tendency and malicious motives of the
defendant, who had used the powerful ineana
their Journal gave them to circulate an injurious
impression against the plaintiff.
Several witnesses were called, who spoke to
the altercations between the plaintiff and the
publisher, and to the general demeanour of the
plaintiff ; none of them, however, proved any
damage sustained by him in consequ,aice of the
offensive paragraph in question.
Mr. SCARIETT and Mr. DENmAn made a very
brilliant reply generally, contending, that as the
plaintiff had failed to establish the damages al-
leged in his declaration, they were entitled to
verdict.
The CHIEF JUSTICE made a very impartial
summing up; and the Jury, afterar little consi-
deration, gave a verdict for the plaintiff—Da-
wages 501. costs 40s.