The Sun.
London, England, 1821-05-17 00:00:00

man Wood) on the subject, that he would watch at his post
from ten o'clock in themorning.until tenon the followingmom-
ing, for the purpose of opposing the measure now proposed,
should the Honourable Member for Surrey persist in it.—(l-rear,
hear !)-_The Committee were willing to go on examining the
evidence in support of the Bill, and then to hear that adduced
by its opponents.
.. -
Mr. DAWSON hoped the House would seriously consider
whether this Bill was necessary or not. If the House was to
decide that the Committee was to be re-appointed, then, in his
opinion, no private Bill could be brought in at all. He had re-
peatedly attended the Committee, but he had never known
them to come to any other decision than that of an adjournment
—(Hear, hear!)--:He could not help observing, that much pains
were taken to oppose the Bill,-"and, as a-proof of it, he would
instance what had been just said by an Honourable Alderman
opposite expressive of his determination to oppose it. For him-
self he was ready to vote for any thing which was likely to bring
the question to a fair conclusion.
Mr. Alderman WOOD and Mr. DAWSON mutually ex-
plained.
Sir F. BUR.DETT hoped, that as there was a motion of hn-
portance about to come on, the further discussion of this ques-
tion would be postponed. He therefore moved that the fur-
ther debate upon the Newington Vestry Bill be adjourned to
Friday next. •
The Marquess of LONDONDERRY said, that Friday
being a Supply day, he should oppose the fixing of this question
for that day. •
Sir F. BURDETT then proposed that the discussion should
be postponed to Monday next.
Mr. H. SUMNER hoped that the House would now proceed
in the discussion. Honourable Gentlemen on the other side
had done every thing which the ingenuity of man could .devise
to obstruct the proceedings in Committee. If this course was
not put a stop to, it would be impossible for any Member to
conduct a -Private Bill up stairs.
Mr. MABERLY denied that he had used any,efforts to cause
delay in the proceedings of the Committee upon this Bill. lie
had gone to the Committee with a fall determination to do jus;-
tiee to all parties, but at the same time determined to oppose
certain clauses of the Bill. There was certainly _a determina-
tion on one side to create delay, but, he mustsay, that the Ho-
nourable Member fele Surrey. (Mr. H. Sumner) had prOciuced
much delay, and he would tell him how. He (Mr. S.), instead of
sitting still as Chairman, and hearing all parties, had acted
throughout as a complete defender of the measure—(Hear,
hear !) —and did not allow its opponents time to proceed.—
(Hear, hear !).—lf 'the Honourable Member had presided as
Chairman usually do, much of the -disturbance which occur-
red would have been spared. He hoped the House would
not accede to the Honourable Member's (Mr. Sumner's) mo-
tion, as, if carried, it would go to do away with all the Commit--1
tees on private business.
After a few words from Mr. Serjeant ONSLOW and Sir W.
DE CRESPIGNY, . .
Mr. G. BENNET could call this nothing. else than the
Honourable Member's own job—(Order,!).
The Marquess of LONDONDERY said, that this discus-
sion was likely to impede the veluile public business of the even-
ing.—(Hear, hear !)
Mr. BENNET was not surprised that the word job should
have alarmed Gentlemen on the other side. .He would how-
ever repeat his words, this- Bill was a rank job, and deserved
to be.called by no other name. It was a job brought forward
in defiance of the wishes of the majority of the Parish, and this
job was now attempted to. be supported by calling into alliance
Gentlemen on the other side, who did not attend the Commit-
Itee, and who had no other inducement to suppOrt it than party
feeling, and their attachment to the question at- issue, namely
a job.---(Hear !)—He saw no proposition againSt which coin-
mon sense revolted more than that of taking a private Bill out
of the hands of a Committee for the purpose of placing it,
where ?-a.in the hands of a packed Committee, selected by the
Mover of the job. Gentlemen- opposite would in this way have
an advantage on private Committees, for when they failed above
stairs, they could come down secure of the support of Minis-
ters, and of that majority of which they themselves formed a
part. This would be placing the private business in the hands
of the majority against the minority, and this principle, if act-
ed upon, they would owe to the Honourable Member for Sur-
rey (Mr.. Sumner), and he hoped the time was coming when
they would be able to express to him their sense of the obliga-
tion.L-(Hear, hear!)
After a few words from Mr. S. Cox, Mr. PRICE, and Mr.
SUMNER,
Mr. CREEVEY said, it appeared to him that the Honour-
able Member (Mr. Sumner) must consent to adjourn the dis-
cussion to Monday. His (Mr. Sumner's) first motion was,
that the 'Committee on the Newington Select Vestry be dis-
charged, and then he intended to propose that the subject should
be referred to a Select Committee. Now, without attaching a
word of blame to either side, it was clear that that would pro-
duce a total change in the law of Parliament, and surely it was
not too much to ask that a question of such great importance
should stand over for Monday next.—(Hear, hear !)
After a few observations from Sir James Graham, Dr.- Lush-
ington, Sir Robert Wilson, and Mr. John Smith, the Gallery
was then cleared. It was understood, that after strangers were
ordered to retire, the terms of the Amendment were altered to
Friday instead of Monday next. The House divided—
For the original Motion - - • - - 67
For the Amendment - - 74
Majority for adjourning the question to Friday-7.
Lord LONDONDERRY brought up a Copy of the Con-
vention between his Britannic Majesty and the Emperor of
Austria; dated 4th May, 1795, relative to the Austrian.Loao......
Ordered to lie on the table. -
Lord J. RUSSELL presented a Petition from Weston Hat-
field, of Cambridge, printer, praying a repeal of the Bth and 9th
chap. of the 60th of the late King.—Ordered toile on the Table.

MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.
A Message was sent from the Lords, with several Private
Bills.

Mr. W. SMITH presented a Petition from the Merchants
and Manufacturers concerned in the Woollen Trade of the
City of Norwich, praying for a Repeal on the Tax on Foreign
Wool.—Ordered to be printed.

IRISH WINDOW TAX.
Mr. SHAW said, that he brought forward his important
motion at the pressing desire of his Constituents, who felt the
severe pressure of the Window TaX, and who still remained in
the opinion that the Tax was continued in violation of the
pledge given .to the Irish Parliament by the Government o:
t :a: day.' The Hon. Member then referred to the 40th of the
late King, which stated, that the tax was intended as a war tax.
—Since the tax was originally laid on, the Act of Union was
passed, an Act which was ,a calamity to the City of. DL:bli 1,
which deprived Ireland of .a resident Nobility, .and all the ad-
vanta7;es of a domestic Legislature.- Such wag the distress to
which the City of .Dublin 'Was reduced, that for the last seven
years there was an increase of 4000 insolvent houses. The
Window. Tax, far from being productive, had* fallen off for se-
veral years; and if continued in its unmitigated state, he had
little dOubt but thatin no remote time the.tax would become
totally unproductive. The Hon. Member concluded by mov-
ing Air a Select Committee to take into consideration the Re-
peal of the Window Tax. '
General HART seconded the motion.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, that he
could not consent to the repeal of.the Tax ; it could not be re-
waled without doing injustice to other parts of the Empire.
He could not see what tax could be proposed as a substitute
that would not he more disagreeahie to the City of Dublin. .
Sir J. NEWPORT said that, it.was not his intention to go
into the merits of the case. One thing was clear a ith respect
to the people of Ireland, they groaned under heaVy burthens
and yet. there was a diminish: d revenue. lie foresaw that ths..t
would have been the case in 1803, since that year to the pre-
sent there was a diminution of the fruits of taxation of from 6
to £BOO,OOO ayear. -
*Mr. HUME said that the question_ was not whether there
could be found a substitute for the tax, but whether, if con:.
tinned, the tax was not likely to become unprOductive, as it was
confessedly odious to the citizens of Dublin ? hoped that a
Committee would be granted to the Honourable-Member ; in
that Committee he had no doubt valuable information might be.
obtained, not only with respect to the tax in question, but as to
many taxes which pressed upon the peOple of this country, and
did not afford any material increase to the revenue. If the mo-
tion were pressed to a division, he certainly would support the
•
original motion. -
General HART said a few words in support of the motion.
Sir W. DE CRESPIGNY said, that it - was a just and ge-
neral complaint, .that taxes which pressed upon the country
were yet unproductive in point of revenue. The cause of this
was in a great measure to be attributed to the expmccs attene'inj •
the collection of the revenue.

. After a few words from Mr. MoNom and Lord LONDON-
DERRY,

•
' Mr. SHAW replied, and said, he should not press the mat..
ter to a division, but he gave notice that he should bring on the
subject again in the next Session.
lONIAN ISLANDS.
Mr. HUME wished to ask a question of the Hon. Gentle-
, man opposite. Two persons natives- of the lonian Isles, had
been arrested for signing an address, which was intended to be
sent to-this country, and thrown' into prison, They had escap-
ed, and proceeded to England with the address, and had sent
a petition to the Colonial' Department. •He wished. to know
whether that petition had been received. He wished also to
know, whether by the Alien Act, as it now stoad, persons
coming from the lonian' Isles, being natives, would: be consi-
dered as aliens in this country, and were liable as.such to. be
sent out:of the country ? . .
Mr. GOULBURN said that the! petition alluded to by the
'ffon. Gentleman was received. With respect to the question,

was
whether an lonian islander an alien or not in this country,
he confessed he was not lawyer enough to answer it, and could
give no opinion updn the subject.
Mr. HUME expresSed his hOpe that the Hon. Gentletnan
would ascertain that point.
ADJOURNED DETUTE,---MANCHESTER.

Sir ROBERT TV'LsON .nigied the Order of the
Day on the- motion of Sir'Francis Burdett, rela=-
tive to the Transactions at 'Manchester, on the
16th of August, 1819.
The question on the -original motion being put
from the Chair,
Sir R. WILSON, in reply to the observations
which had been made on the preceding night by
the Solicitor-General, said, that though -the
Learned Gentleman had, according to his duty,
endeavoured to .shew that the ,Government and
constituted authorities had been in every instance
temperate, regular, and judicious, and the people
always irregular and criminal, or actuated by
criminal intentions ; .he was not able to put the
business at Manchester in such a light that they
could gaze on it with diminished feelings of shame
and horror. - It was not necessary for him (Sir
R. Wilson) and those who took the same view of
the question, to. refute all the statements which
had been made on the other side. _lt was enough
to shew that there were counter-statements of a
strictly :contrary description, and the existence of
the conflicting statements was in itself the strongest
argument for inquiry—(Hear, hear !)—But some
had been made to introduce evidence which it
was necessary to reduce to its proper value. The
Solicitor General had referred to the Bills thrown
out by the Lancashlr6 Giand Jury, and had ask-
ed triumphantly, would they impeach the honour
of the Gentlemen of the Grand Jury, especially
when the Noble Lord (Lord Stanley) who usual-
ly sat on.the Opposition side of
.the House, was
Foreman ? Now, it was too much to throw the
'responsibility on the Noble Lord, who,. though
Foreman, might, for aught they knew,. have dif-
fered from his Colleagues--..--(Hear, hear !)—But
he took a more enlarged view of the case. It was
very probable that the Lancashire Jury threw
out the bills from an erroneous view of the law,
conceiving that the Yeomato'y could not be the ob-
jects of pro3ecutiop, acting under what they consi-
dered proper authority, -thus blending political
considerations with. their view of the case. This
conjecture was corroborated, by what fell from
the Noble Lord (Lord Stanley) last night on a
Petition ; for when the Petitioner had offered to
shew his wounds, the Noble Lord had told him
that was not necessary, as the-grounds 'on which'
the Grand Jury acted were not connected with
that_ fact. It was asked, too,- why there was no
verdict of murder' by a Coroner's -Jury ? It was
not necessary to go into the history of the Inquest
at, Oldham, but it was enough to say, that a ma-
jority of the Jury had declared that they should
have brought in a verdict -of murder if the. Coro-
ner had not taken Means to prevent any verdict
from being given. He had notthe faith necessary
to remove the mountain- of common sense 'which
stood in the way of the -belief that the Coro-
ner was acting in that illegal way -merely on
his own authority.- He must have had hope's of
supports and indemnity ; but at any rate it was
too much, after such a proceeding, to ask why no
verdict of_ murder had been returned ? They
were asked also; why civil actions had not
been brought, and the Solicitor General had ob-
served, that there was a sum of money in the
hands of Mr. 'C. Pearson. lit was singular to
hear men, and lawyers too, talking of law as i
was, a cheap and unexpensive commodity.-

_ -
,Hear, hear !)—For-the legal expences, and the
relief of the sufferers, 3,408/. had been collected.
The laiw expences on the Oldham Inquest and
at Manchester amounted to 10774 those of the
trials at YOrk to 'lO/..though one of the Attor-
nies, Mr. Harmer, most liberally gave his ser-
vices to the public without , remuneration.—
(Hear, hear !)—There thus remained 1,2061. to
be divided among 600 sufferers,-and twenty un-
fortunate persons who had been apprehended
unjustly,, and released' without any bill being
found againSt them, for in such case. alone the
CoMmittee granted. ,relief. But if one action
had been brought for, instance,the Gentleman who
now told them to proceed at law, would have
turned round and said, " you have your redress,"
The dispersion of the meeting had been Justified.
He knew that constables were justified in dis-
persing an illegal meeting—that; even if they
disperSed an illegal meeting, acting Under error,
and with a good' intention, they might be pro-
tected from punishment ; but,. in either case,
force was not justified beyond the necessity of
the case, and CaPtain Porteus, who, was con-
viCted of murder, Was ,so convicted, not
cause he had at first, acted illegally against
the rioters, but because he , had fired when
necessity no longer existed. bi answer to the
assertion of an 'Honourable Member (Mr, B.
Wilbraham) that some persons sent down from
the Conunittee for the relief of the Manchester
sufferers had inflamed the people's mind, he Ob-
served, that.the. strictest instructions had been
,given (which he read) to the person sent down
not to give any' bpinion:as-tc;—the conduct of the
persons by whose acts the individuals to be re-
lieved might have suffered. This instruction
had been strictly adhered to. , Am)ng the depo-
nents'whose testimony was brought before them,
he observed the name of " Birley.", Now what
value could be legally attached to the deposition,
, however respectable he might be, when Mr.
Birley s one of.the persons accused ? This
deposition affirmed that' stones were thrown.
There was with reference to this fact of the case
a testimony of immense importance, - that of the
_Reverend Mr. Stanley, who went to the Magis-
trates on business, and was at a window in
a.room over them. He stated, that there were
lines* of constables which kept
,- an uninter-
rupted communication to the hustings, which
Mr. Hay also 'mentioned in his dispatch ; that
,after Mr. Hunt had spoken.a few minutes, there
was a cry of " the Soldiers. are coming," which
created great
.confusion, and some began to
jump down from the Hustings ; that the yeomanry
advanced a few paces, not rapidly, and with some
appearance of following their officers in files of
si*; but that theypresently increased theirspeed
with the natural ardour of men " advancing," as
he expressed it, " against a foe (not against their
fellow-titizens), by whom they had been long