The Sun.
London, England, 1844-06-05 00:00:00

5 WEDNESDAY MORNING, JUNE 5, 1844

thought it desirable to bring it forward the third time,
and therefore he (Lord H. Vane) had taken upon him-
self to direct the attention of the House to the sub-
ject. The circumstances were different now to what
they had been when the subject was last before the House.
Then there was a deficiency in the revenue, now there
was a surplus. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had
thought it right to propose reductions in the duty
payable in other articles, and he thought that the
coal trade had a claim upon the Government for relief.
If he could prove tlat the coal trade was suffering under great
depression, he thought that he was entitled to call upOn the
i House to mete out the same measure of justice to that trade as
to others. The fact on which he rested his ar-
gument was the injurious operation of the tax, not
oily upon the coal trade itself, but in the displacement of labour
in the collieries, and in the effect which it had upon the ship-
ping interest. The returns which had been presented to
the House showed that there had been a great diminution
of the expert trade in the last year, and there had been
a consequent diminution of employment and wages. The
decrease of exports had been more than 100,000 tons in 1843,
as compared with 1842, although in the same period there had
been an increased consumption of coal upon the Continent, and
there would have been an increased demand for ours,
if it had not been ler the duty. The coal
that was exported in that year consisted altogether of small
coal, upon which there was no profit. But the effect of the
tax was to prevent the exportation of large coal, upon the pro-
duction of which the greatest amount of labour was employed.
In consequence of the duty there had been a great falling off in
the exports, notwithstanding the great and increasing demand
fur the article from the mare general use of gas-lighting, the
extension of railways and steam navigation, and the greater de
mand that was found to have been created in the Mediterranean.
In 1841 the export to Russia was 75,595 tons; in 1843 it was
114,605 tons, being au increase of 39,000 tons. But this in-
crease was owing to the treaty of navigation. The export to Nor-
way, in 1841, was 15,207 tons; in 1843 it was 18,233 toes, being
an increase of 3 026 tons. This was owing to the establish-
ment of certain works; and this could, the, efore, be only a
casual increase. The expert to Denmark in 1841 was 148,724
tons; in 1843, it was 134,425 tons, being a decrease of 14.195.
The export to Prussia in 1841 was 115,000 tons ; in 1843 it
was 147,000, being an increase of 31,000 tons. But this was
a special case. In Germany the export in 1841 was
169,000 tons ; in 1843 it was 147,000, being a decrease
of 32,000 tons. In Holland the export in "1841 was
171,000 tons, in 1843 it was 149,000, being a decrease of
24,000. The export to France in 1834 was 59,692 tons; in
1841 it amounted to 451,000 tons, being an increase in 8 years
of 391,313 tons, or an increase each year of 48,000 tons.
With regard to Spain to Italy, and to Turkey, he would admit
that there was a slight increase, but that was owing to accidental
circumstances. Unless the duty were reduced altogether there
could be no doubt but the export of coal would diminish every
year. He would net trouble the House by entering more at
large into statistical details,' but he would state that
he had received communications from persons well
informed on the subject, from master colliers, from
the owners of mines, who declared that in consequence of
the diminution of export which was occasioned by the im-
position of the duty it was out of their power to
give full employment to the colliers, who were conse-
quently deprived of one day's labour in the week.
He thought that he could claim the support of the
Hon. Members for Newcastle, Gateshead, Tynemout h.
and Shields, and others connected with the shipping interest.
He had stated that there was a considerable displacement of
labour arising from the non-employment of colliers one day in
the week. It must he recollected that this was a most hazard-
ous kind of labour, and that it demanded a high rate of wages.
This duty operated most injuriously to the working classes
in the collieries, and of course the injury recoiled upon other
classes. Was it good policy to continue a duty which ope-
rated so prejudicially to the commercial interests of this coun-
try? They were bound to take into their consideration the
suffering of the working classes in consequence of the depressed
state of the trade, and by every argument of justice and of
policy the Government was bound to take off the dut v, and to
give to the coal trade the same advantage which they lied given
to every other trade. The revenue derived from this duty was
so small, that there was no necessity for its continuance, whilst
irremediable mischief would be inflicted it were not removed.
He did not believe that it was the intention of the Government
to continue it for more than one year, and was it worth
while to continue a tax which was productive of such
injurious effects? If the duty were removed, it would
have a tendency to settle the unhappy differences
which existed between the working people in the coal districts
and their masters, by enabling them to give their work people
employment. On these grounds he trusted the Government
would give up the duty, or, if they refused, that at least the
House would give him a considerable degree of support.
Mr. H U FT seconded the motion.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER thought that
whatever difference of opinion might exist on the subject, the
House would agree with him that the Noble Lord need make
no apology for bringing forward the subject, for he had never
heard a more clear and lucid statement than that made by
the Noble Lord.—( Cheers.) It was, however, unfortunately,
his fate to differ in opinion with the Noble Lord on the subject.
It was not out of any want of respect to the Nobla Lord that
he should abstain from adverting to his argument on the state
of revenue, and on the small amount which the duty brought
into the Exchequer, because the same argument would apply
to every other case in which the produce of any duty to the
Exchequer was small. The Noble Lord had advocated the abo-
lition of the duty on the ground that it had had the effect of
producing the displacement of labour in the coal districts of
this country. Now he thought that if he could satisfy the
House that the amount of coal raised since the imposition of
the duty was equal to that which had been raised before its
imposition, they would agree with him that the Noble Lord
had not made out that the imposition of the duty had occa-
sioned any displacement of labour, and if the quantity of coal
exported amounted to very nearly the same quantity to which
it had amounted prior to the period at which the duty was im-
posed, he trusted they would agree with him in opinion that
the duty had not acted prejudicially. The Noble
Lord stated that a diminution -•eof - export had taken
place in 1840 as compared with 1842 ; but he
admitted that an increase had taken place in 1843 as compared
with 1841. Now, in 1842, in consequence of the announce-
ment of the intention of the Government to impose the duty
an effort had been made and an immense increase in the
export had taken place in the former half of that year, which
as compared with the latter half of the same year showed an
increase of some hundreds of thousands of tons. The fair
comparison therefore was between the years 1841 and 1843,
and in the latter year there had been an increase. In order
to show that any diminution which had taken place in the ex-
port of coal, was not attributable to the imposition of the duty,
he would bring the matter to this test. He would take those
places in which there was no variation of the duty. The
quantity of coal exported to the colonies was, in 1841, 344,000
tons; in 1842, 353,000 tons ; and in 1843, 307,600 tons. The
export of coals from London had in 1643' declined to a verb
large amount as compared with the two preceding years. The
Noble Lord adverted to the depression of the shipping interest;
of course the falling off in the exportation of coals would
affect that interest, but in France, for instance, that exporta-
tion had increased. The export of coal to France was greater
since 1842, than it had been in 1841. With respect to
Russia, the coal trade with that country had considerably in-
creased ; the Noble Lord attributed this to the fact of coal
having been sent to Russia in former years in foreign ships
which had to pay a heavy duty, whilst latterly, in consequence
of the reciprocity treaty, coal had been exported in British ships
which had paid a lower rate of duty. The quantity of coals
exported to Russia in 1842 was 83,000 tons, whilst in 1843
116,000 tons had been exported to that country. In 1842 we
had sent abroad 148,000 tons of small coals ; in 1843, 456,000
coalehhrat est st
gtriarnwed
tiea
nas;
Idlsc
buton fiwnaes dt
ht
eo r
et
nh
oa
tt
gd
eenp
rr
at ml
ye tl owf e
ri
.t
tons. The Noble Lord seemed to say that the depression in
branches of trade ? And if that
were there for referring the de-
cpetwi honnr
eaegegrlsaess
?ghiooefit
ofn nl
tgatt
hfhhs
freights
wgtshpping interest generally to the duties on
respect to the colonial shipping interest, a
greater quantity of coals had been exported into Canada last
year than on any antecedent years. When he had the honour
to submit to the House the financial arrangements, he stated to
the House the grounds upon which it was impossible to extend
the further remission of taxation during the present year. The
propositions he then made were, he thought, received with ge-
neral and cordial concurrence by the House ; and perhaps he
might have made a better selection of articles on which duty
was to have been remitted; but, as regarded the coal duties,
he must say that since the measure had been laid before the
House he had received assurances from shipowners that the
measure would be beneficial to that class. From gentlemen
extensively interested in the coal trade, he received assurances
to the same effect. Although it was painful to him to resist
any motion having for its object the relaxation of duties on so
important an article as coals, yet it gave him some satisfaction
to think that at present there was no need for further inter-
ference, and that the present measure was working beneficially
for the country.
Mr. GRANGER supported the motion of the Noble Lord.
The Chancellor of Ole Exchequer went upon entirely different
grounds from those upon which the Right Hon. Gentleman at
the head of the Government argued lest year. That Right
lion. Gentleman said that he could not conceive a more legiti-
mate object of duty than the coals exported into foreign coun-
tries ; but the Chancellor of the Exchequer had abandoned
that ground. The Chancellor of the Exchequer said he would
not discuss the question of the expediency of remitting the
duty, but went upon the supposition that the duty was bene-
ficial. Would the Right Hon. Gentleman say, too, the Go-
vernment measure had raised the price of coals in foreign mar-
kets ?—there could be no doubt butathat the duty depreciated
their price, for coals were lower in the markets of France and
Russia. Then the fact was the duty had been paid by the coal-
owners and by the shipowners—those classes who were most
able to hear it. The coalowner must export because his capital
was invested in coal, and the shipowner must carry at a
reduced freight because he had no other means of employing
his vessels. In 1833, the quantity of coal sent to foreign
countries was 449,665 tons; in 1841, 1,500,000 tons; anti if
it were not for the injudicious tax imposed by the Government,
the exportation would have continued to advance in the same
ratio, whereas, even according to the admission of
in
fthteheßitgxh-t
Hon. Gentleman, it had not increased in anything like
of
kethe
same proportion. He thought they might jusshtelyuladpspuepapl
support
the
e
ceGhooaevlciseu,resnrem,e
iaennngdt
hfioatrt
wttahhseeroenawbt
asohliist abolition
wo
ground
dstuthhrepaltudhsuety on the export
motion of the Noble Lord.
Mr. WARBURTON did not intend to defend this tax on
revenue principles, although he thought it might be defended
on those principles. What he contended for was this, that if
the matter were fully inquired into, it would be found that
only a certain quantity of coal existed, and therefore it was per-
fectly justifiable to regulate the sale of that article, so as to
ensure the first supply of it to the inhabitants of this country.
In a Committee of that House, a Mr. Taylor had stated that
there was enough coal in Northumberland for 1,727 years'
supply; but he (Mr. Warburton) believed that that gentle-
man had under-estimated the consumption; for he believed that
more than twice as much was consumed, as was estimated by Mr.
Taylor. (The Hon. Gentleman here read from the evidence
which was taken before a Committee of the House of Commons
in the year 1830, on the subject of coal mines, to show that
.many of the coal mires in the country would be exhausted in
about sixty years from the present time.) These were the best
coals, it would be remembered. On this evidence then, lie
contended that no facilities should be given up for the exporta-
tion of coal from this country. At present the foreigner could
purchase coal at Newcastle for about 185. a tore while the home
consumer had to pay at least 70 per cent. wore, or near 30s.
per ton. Those gentlemen (the coalostners) did not come be-
fore the House with clean hands.--( Hear.) Let them do
away with their own most odious, most extensive, and most
oppressive monopoly.—( Hear, hear.) The best coal selling
in London at 305, a ton could be had at St. Petersburgh 50 per
cult. less. If the monopoly could be removed a cheap bargain
would be made for the country with coalowners. But until
that could be effected he thought that the Government would
'act most wisely in maintaining the present duty, so as to
equalise the price at which the best English coals could be had
in English and in foreign markets.—( Hear, hear.) He should
therefore give his support to the proposition for the continu-
' aace of the tax.
Air,AODGSON HINDE said that, in giving an opinion on
. this subject, he thought it right to state that he was not a coal-
owper: An Hon. Gentleman opposite had stated that the
coal field wouldisooo be exhausted unless there was some restric-
tiop upon the exportation. The same argument would apply
to the laying an additional duty upon the coal supplied to Lon-
don.—( Hear, and a laugh.) The House should bear in mind
that other nations were rapidly rivalling us in the production
of coal, and the supply of foreign countries. It had been said
that there had been as great a decrease in the export to the

colonies, upon which there was no tax, as in the export to
foreign states. But the decrease in one direction had been
more than compensated by the increase in others, age's where
there had been a deficiency in the supply from Englaud, that
had been made up by coal from other countries. With regard
tot lie effect of the tax in depressing the shipping interest, that
argument had been answered by an Hon. Gentleman opposite,
by referring to the distressed state of the shipping interest gene-
rally, without reference to the coal trade. But he did not
think that was sufficient to show that the distress of the gene-
ral shipping trade was not aggravated by the 'diminished em-
ployment in the export of coal. If the tkx re continued to
1850, it would be an incentive to other nett' to open up new
seams of coal for their own uses, at Wl7 Efe expense that
might be done. He gave Irs cordial suppo '''> the motion,
and thanked the Noble Lord for blinging it forirdid.
4
Mr. H L AIE looked upon the coal monopoly as most dis-
graceful and pernicious. A few years ago (in 1836), he em-
ployed a whole year in endeavouring to expose that
iniquitous monopoly, but he understood that it was now as
powerful and as much combined as ever.—( Hear, lielse), He
believed that the brokers of London were as much to blame as
the coal-owners, for it was they that fixed the price at which
coal should be sold ; and the consequence was that, at times
160 or 200 ships would be lying in the river until the coals
should reach a certain price fixed by the brokers. There were,
he understood, from 200 to 300 sail of colliers in the river,
waiting until the price should rise, although, if they chose to
unload, they would readily find a market.—( Hear, hear.) He
had done everything to support the Stockton and Tees, and
other railways, with the hope that they would facilitate the
supply of coals in London. But the fact was that the pro-
prietors of those railways had joined the monopolists. It had
been proved that 4,000,000 of tons could be raised annually,
but the proprietors would allow no more to be raised than would
be sufficient to supply London at a fixed price. And it was
only against London that this monopoly was directed,
for there was no restriction of the supply for the north of Scot-
land or the south of England.—( Hear.) There could not be
a more detestable conspiracy than this, although it might not
be so easy to obtain a conviction of the parties as tt had been to
convict O'Connell and his coaejutors.—( Hear and a laugh.)
However, he had opposed the imposition of the Outy ; and what
he said at the time was borne out in the result. Before the
duty was put on, the quantity of coal exported to France was
50,000 tons, and from 1834 to 1843 the sh•pping at the three
ports of the Tyne, the Wear, and the Humber, employed in
the export of coals had increased 2,703 ships ; and now a large
portion of those ships were rotting, and other countries were
supplying France.—( Hear, hear.) The commercial navy was
the great defence and support of this country, and it was pain-
ful to him to see it so much injured by a Government which
had the power to foster and improve it.—( Hear, hear.) He
thought the Act ought to be repealed.
Sir. F. BARING had seen nothing in the returns laid on
the table that had changed his opinion of the extreme inex-
pediency of laying on the tax.
Mr. LIDDELL concurred in the propriety of the tax, but
trusted that it would be removed. At the present moment
the pits were not being worked, and the stocks were becoming
exhausted ; the price of coal, too, it should be remembered,
was still further reduced by the numerous tolls and charges to
which it was subjected in the port of London. It had been
prominently put forward this evening that the coal-owners had
a monopoly of the article. They were charged with being
monopolists; but it should be recollected that there was a
constant competition in the market between the colliers of
Northumberland and Durham, Scotland, Wales, and all the
inland collieries. What monopoly could be sustained in the
midst of so much competition ? There were three kinds of
coal known in the market, which were principally supplied by
the collieries of Northumberland and Durham. The first was
household coal, at an average price of '2os. and 21s. per ton ;
steamer coal, which was from 15s. to 183. a ton ; and small
coal from 13s. to 15s. a ton. He did not think these charges
were sufficient to justify the injurious expression of monopoly,
when out of it had to be paid the cost of all the raising, car-
riage, &c., to which it was subject. The House had the means
of satisfying itself on this point; no disguise was attempted on
the part of the coal-owners. They might summon
all their agents to give evidence on the subject.
There were, indeed, some regulations come to, by mutual
understanding, for the governing of the trade, but those re-
gulations existed in other trades also. Yet it was not called
monopoly. Why, then, were they to say to the coal pro-
prietors that they should not make such regulations? He was
convinced that the more this question was understood and
examined the less foundation there would be found for the
charge. He hoped he had in some degree answered the charge
as to monopoly. There was another subject connected with
this question, which he should not have thought proper to
notice did he not see the Hon. Member for Finsbury present.
The Hon. Member had presented a petition yesterday, from
the working men who had struck in the collieries, signed by
30,000 or 40,000 men, embodying certain representations.
But, except by one feeble link, the subject was not connected
with that before the House. The coal-owners, in the face of a
declining trade, were loaded with an impost to which thoythad
been unaccustomed. The men, in spite of 'ffiel'ilan-
gerous nature of their occupation, had many corrfftiitii, and
even luxuries, not possessed by the labourers in other
parts of the kingdom ; and he hoped if they were not
ill advised, that the time was not far distant when these un-
happy disputes would find a termination. He thought the
Hon. Member for Finsbury oughf not to have presented such
a petition without due notice, or without being prepared to
make some substantial motion. The subject had been entirely
exhausted by the Noble Lord who had brought it forward, and
by the Hen. Gentleman opposite who had spoken upon it.
He should not, therefore, go further into details, but conclude
by again conjuring the Government to give its attention to the
subject, and not to persevere longer in attacks so obnoxious
and injurious; and he trusted those who did support it at a
time when it was believed to he necessary, would not again
sanction it with their support.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said it was not his intention to have
brought the prayer of the petition he had presented further
before the House; but he must confess that there was one ob-
servation which had fallen from the Honourable Gen-
tleman to which he must allude. In trying to explain
the causes of the present price of coal, he had said that it was
enhanced by the roughness of the colliers.—( '' No, no," from
Mr. Liddell.) The Hon. Member might not have meant to
have used the phrase, but he certainly did do so, as lie (Mr.
Duncombe) had taken down the words. Now, looking at the
number of men out on the strike-20,000 or 30,000—he
thought there never was a set of men who conducted them-
selves more peaceably, or in a more praiseworthy and meri-
torious manner. During the eight weeks the strike had lasted
they had shown the utmost respect for property, and the rights
of property. He was not going now to bring the question of
the strike before the House. He could well understand why
the masters were not prepared to go into that question. He
knew there had been great misrepresentations abroad with re-
spect to the men, and if the House were to go into the ques-
tion at all, he would undertake not only to satisfy the
House, but the public also, that the masters were
the men who had struck, and not the miners.
This had been no question of wages. The question had been
entirely one relating to the personal safety of the men, which
had been neglected by the masters. In addition to this
neglect, certain bonds had been introduced by the masters this
the
enever
objected, been
akwnndo
hen tt
ho
otahgehmt men
mostbefore.
justly
ob-
jected; jtyeheeea :see d whichrn andds ha d
ifthey
would read the petition they would find
that the men were ready to submit the whole points in dispute
to the arbitration of honourable and disinterested men. Could
there be a fairer proposition than this, and would the masters
meet them on that point ? If they would not, then were they
in the wrong, and not the men.—( The Hon. Member here
read
titioTn,heoffmeerningalato demanded
to settle the
matterthat they should be paid by the weight of the coal raised, and
and not by measure. The Hon. Gentleman said it was only
thien
a feeble link which connected the petition with the question
propositiondispute
petition,
before the House. Why surely this was a material portion of
the whole question. He agreed that this was an interest much
too important to be treated with levity in that House.
There were 15,000,0001. of capital invested in the coal trade.
There were from 35,000 to 40,000 employed in it, and they
were out on strike. They mentioned that their demands were
not exorbitant. They wanted protection, and they asked to be
paid for their labour rby weight instead of measure. They
stated that being paid by measure they were often defrauded
and imposed upon by the masters. The measures given them
often contained beyond what they were told they did, and after
working a certain time they often found that instead of raising
twenty-one pecks of coals, for which they were paid, they
found that they had raised twenty-six or twenty-seven pecks.
He said then that they had a right to demand that their labour
should be weighed. Coals were sold in the metropolis by
weight. The Act of Parliament enforcing that regulation was
passed to prevent the frauds that were discovered in the trade,
and had preyed a great protection to the public. Then he
wanted to know why, if they sold coal by weight, they should
not pay the miner by weight also. But this it seemed the mas-
ters would not agree to. The men asked for legislative inter-
ference, but they did not wish Parliament to fix what wages
they should be paid. But they asked the Government to ap-
point inspectors of the mines to see that the works were made
safe. In consequence of the had regulation of the mines suffi-
cient lights were not afforded them. The consequence was,
that they were obliged to send up foul coal to the surface. For
this they were heavily fined, so much so, that often after
working a week or fortnight they found that instead of re-
ceiving wages, they were in debt. Now a better regulation of
the mines would enable them to have better light, and the foul
coal would not find its way to the bank.
if,L•ye was another
grievance under which the miners laba -7: . Their wages
were not paid every week, but once a' • L i ht, and one
week's wages were always kept in ' ' Why not
lit leave these points to the arbitration of disi rested men ?
He wished to see an amicable arrangement made between the
employers and the men, and he believed that an arrangement
might easily be effected if the master 3 would not stand aloof,
refusing to deal with any but the men belonging to their own
collieries. Were not the masters in union as well'a4lse men
--in union not only against the men but the public, and com-
bined to keep up the price of coal to the detriment:of the con-
sumer? There was the monopoly in the City of London,
which the Lord Mayor was endeavouring to put down. The
Lord Mayor would not allow more than three days for the col-
lier ships to unload, so that they could nor wait till prices got
high, and if they wanted to continue longer they must go down
the river and come up again. He believed the Lord Mayor would
abate this combination of the masters against the public, and he
hoped he would succeed. He would certainly vote for the re-
peal of the export duty on coal. He heard no reason advanced
to induce the House to continue the duty. It was most inju-
rious to the masters, and consequently to the men, and it was
injurious to the consumers. He did not think the duty was of
sufficient importance as an object of revenue to induce the
Chancellor of the Exchequer to continue it, and, therefore, he
had the greatest pleasure in voting for the motion of his Noble
Friend.

Sir G. CLERK would endeavour to recal the attention of the
House to the real subject before it. It had been said that
there was now no reason for continuing the tax, as the grounds
upon which it was imposed no longer existed. Now he ( Sir
G. Clerk) denied that there was any change of the grounds
upon which the tax had been imposed by his Right Hon.
Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer. lie confessed that
he thought there was a good deal in what had fallen from the
Hon. Gentleman the Member for Kendal. The coal which
was near the surface was of a botter quality than that which
was deeper, and the expense of working it was less. As they
went deeper the mines became more difficult to work, and
therefore it was perfectly clear that in the course of time a rise
in price must take place, and the consumer would have to pay
more for his coal than he paid at present. A great increase
had taken place in the export of coals, and though he did not
agree with those who thought that their coal-mines would be
exhausted in a few years, yet he thought it ought to he taxed,
though not to such an amount as would prove prejudicial to the
coal masters. His opinion was that the export of coals would con-
tinue to increase, though not in the same ratio as before the tax
-was imposed. If coals were exported at that rate, which some
Hon. Gentleman seemed to suppose, it would be absolutely
necessary to impose a check in order to prevent it. One
object which the Government had, in imposing a tax, was
that it would give an advantage to British vessels over foreign
vessels, because there was a differential duty of four shillings,
in favour of British vessels which carried out c-als. There
was no injury, inflicted on the coal interests which should
induce the House to abolish the duty which had been imposed,
as he thought most properly, on coals by his Right Hon.
Friend.

Lord HOWICK said that having, on a former occasion, fully
_stated his opinions upon this subject, he should not, ou the
present occasion, occupy the time of the House at any length.
But as he represented a constituency which was deeply in-
terested in'getting rid of this tax, he thought it right to make
a few observations ; and if he wanted a proof to show how
much at a loss her Majesty's Government were for a defence

t .

of this impolitic tax, that proof was clearly afforded by the in-
consistent arguments of the Right Hon. Gentleman who had
just sat down. The Right Hon. Gentleman, it appeared to
him, seemed, from the latter part of his speech, to be only
desirous to give time to his friends to come to the division.
( Hear, hear. ) In the latter part of his speech he said that the
tax inflicted no injury on the coal trade, while in the first part
of his speech he said there was much force in what had fallen
from the Honourable Member for Kendal as to the
danger of the supply of coals being exhausted.
Their argument must be one or the other. If they imposed
this tax to husband the supply of coal, then there was an end
to the latter part of the Right Hon. Gentleman's speech. If
they rejected this argument, the question must then be con-
sidered with reference to the effect of the duty on the teethe—
( Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Gentleman must have great
confidence in the gullibility of the House, to come forward
with the argument that the coal mines were in danger of
being exhausted.—( Hear, hear.) The Hon. Member for
Kendal, who had a sort of monomania on this subject—(Hear,
hear)—was the only Member who took that ground. In ad-
dition to the supply in the North of England, the best geo-
logists told them that the Welsh field contained a supply for
2,000 years; and, besides this, they must not forget the supply
to be expected from Scotland and Ireland.--( Hear, hear. )
Now as to the trade being injured by this tax, he really thought
that her Majesty's Government had confessed that the case was
against them.—( Hear, hear.) The fact %seas clear and indis-
putable, that they had had A trade thriving beyond all example
—a trade created by the repeal of an impolitic tax upon ex-
ports. For eight years this trade was growing faster and
faster. The Government were warned what would be she
effect of imposing the tax ; it instantly caused a falling off of
the trade; and Hon. Members knew that there was only a step
between the falling off and a total stoppage in commercial
matters. His Hon. Friend, the Member for Kendal, had re-
ferred to the regulation of " vends," and had defended that re-
gulation. For his own part, he would only say that he ob-
jected to all combinations, whether by masters or workmen.
He was perfectly persuaded that great injury had been
inflicted by the coalowners upon their own
terests by the injudicious course which they had
pursued. They had brought upon themselves the competition
of the coalowners in the neighbourhood of the Tees, and they
were now bringing upon themselves; the competition of Sete-
land and Northumberland. In Northumberland, a very valu-
able coal field had been discovered, and the coal of that district
would very shortly be brought into the market. They were
profiting by the mistakes which had been made by the coal-
ownin sof other parts of the country. Large contracts for the
exportation of coals had, however, been thrown out in the im.
mediate neighbourhood of Northumberland by the imposition
of this tax, and he contended that it was not just to punish,
on that account, those who were no parties to the regulations of
" vends." Allusion had been made to the unfortunate strike
which now existed among the pitmen of the north. He re-
garded with the deepest anxiety the dispute between the mas-
ters and those whom they employed ; hut he mtist confess that
he deeply deplored the circumstance that his Hon. Friend the
Member for Durham. and the Hon. Member for Finsbury, had
thought fit in that House to discuss these painful differences.
He thought they had no right whatever to interfere in that
matter, and, as the House had no right to interfere, he ( Lord
Howick), as an individual Member of it, would abstain from
doing so. Ile would only express a most earnest hope that on
both sides there would be a strong desire for an amicable termi-
nation of those disputes. With these few observations he
begged most cordially to support the motion before the House.
Jr.A Alderman HUMPHERY said he should not have ad-
dressed the House, if it had not been stated by the Hon.
Member for Sunderland that it had nothing at all to do with
the differences between the coalowners and their workmen.
A case had come before him within the last week which bore
upon that question. There were 50,000 sailors employed in
the coal trade ; a number of these men who had been em-
ployed in bringing coals to the port of London complained that
they had made an agreement with their masters for 4/. per
voyage from Newcastle and back again. They arrived in London
last April, and had remained here up to the present day. The
coals were not sold, and in looking at the charterparty of the
masters and coalowners, he found that it said, " if you re-
main in London after three market days you," that is the
owners of vessels, " shall have lid per ton for each market
day." The owners were thus secured from loss by receiving
4id. a week. But the poor men who had contracted for 41.
were placed in the position which he had stated to the House.
He would be glad to know whether the House had nothing to
do with such a case as that'—( Hear, hear.) What was to
become of these men, many of whom had wives and families at
home with eight or ten children ? Now, with respect to the
question before the House, he begged to say that the same coal
which in London cast 20s. per ton, could be bought in France
for 15s. Why should the French manufacturers have that
advantage over our own?—(Hear, hear.) He confessed that
he was rather for increasing than diminishing the duty. The
Frenchmen, he concluded, should not have coals cheaper than
ourselves.—( Hear, hear.) It had been said that, if the duty
were continued, Belgium would supersede our own coal-
owners. Why did she not supersede them in France ?
( Hear, hear.) He was anxious that the Govern-
ment give way on this question—they should cer-
tainly shouldhav notehiscordial support.—(Cheers from the Ministerial
benches. )
Mr. HUTT said that if the men whose case the Hon. Gen-
tleman commisserated found the terms in question so un-
favourable to themselves, they would take care not to consent
to such terms in future. With respect to the question before
the House, he had hoped that this tax would have been treated
in the same manner as the augmentation of the Irish spirit
duties. The tax was imposed in distinct opposition to the re-
commendation of the Committee; and the argument in re-
ference to the exhaustion of the mines had proved a complete
fallacy. He must protest against what had been said by the
Hon. Members near him on the subject of the monopoly
of the coalowners. They had attempted to raise a cry against
that class of persons, and the author of that very remarkable
and entertaining production " Coningsby," said that, to act
upon popular feeling there was no better instrument than to
raise a cry.—( Hear, hear.) A monopoly created by legislative
enactment was a gross abuse, and he would go as far as any one
in denouncing it. It was a robbery committed on one portion
of the community for the fancied benefit of another. He would
ask the Hon. Gentleman if the monopoly of the coalowners
was a monopoly of that description ? Was it the subject of
special legislation ; or was it not rather a monopoly arising
from the very institution of private property ? The coalowners
had a right to dispose of their property in the best market they
could find ; they had a right to sell it when, where, and bow
they liked, and they had a right to abstain from selling it at
all if they thought proper. It was a most impolitic proceeding
to raise a cry against the coalowners on that account. He
would ask why this cry was specially directed against the coal-
owners? Did not the same species of combination exist in
every other department of trade? Did not the iron-masters
assemble together in some large town, and agree to raise the
price of iron ? Did they not hear the same statereitie a ith
regard to the manufacturers of copper, of tin, of soap, and of
various other articles, the produce of industry ? They had no
busirnss to single out the coalowners in partienlar ; they had
no right to denounce any of these parties. He was aatonis,,ed
to find those who set up for transcendental philosophers and
economists mai ing the coalowners the subject of attacks of this
character.—( Cheers, and cries of " Divide.")
Mr. HUME rose to explain. He would with regard to the
question of the coalowners' monopoly, refer his Hon. Friend
to the evidence given before the Committee.—( Here the
Hon. Gentleman was interrupted by loud cries of " Order !
order I " " Chair, chair ")
The SPEAKER said the Hon. Member must confine him-
self strictly to an explanation.
Mr. WALLACE agreed with his Hon. Friend who had not
been permitted to go on jttA now in his denunciations of this
monopoly, which was one of a most injurious kind, and had
been carried to the utmost possible extent. He was astonished
to find the Noble Lord the Member for Sunderland rating his
Hon. Friend below him for laying before the House the griev-
ances of 30,000 of the labouring population. His Hon. Friend
had done his duty by directing the attention of the House to
that subject, and their interference was certainly called for in
such a case as that which his Hon. Friend had stated when the
parties were rich and powerful on the one side and poor and
powerless on the other. The statement made by his Hon.
Friend that this immense body of working men were prepared
to submit the questions in dispute between themselves and their
masters to arbitration, was well worthy the attention of the
Government. His Hon Friend on his left had introduced a
law for providing for the settlement by arbitration of disputes
between masters and men in one branch of manufacture,
but the meaning of the Act had been so perverted by the
lawyers in Scotland, that the people had not had the full benefit
of it. As a representative of a considerable number of ship-
owners he must protest against the continuance of this export
duty on coals as most unjust and injurious, causing, as it did,
800,000 tons of coal to lie wasting at the bottom of the pits, in-
stead of being brought to the surface and exported. This
coal was not even suffered to be brought up to the surface and
sent to London, and that was one of the effects of this law.
He should cordially vote for the motion of the Noble Lord.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the House
divided, when there appeared--
For the motion ...
Against it
Majority against the motion — 36
THE COMNIERCI AL MARINE.
Mr. L 1 ALL then moved for a Select Committee, to in-
quire into the state and condition of the commercial marine of
this country, and to take into consideration and report on the
best mode of encouraging and extending the employment of
British shipping.
Dr. BOWRING moved, as an addition to Mr. Lyall's mo-
tion, that the said Committee do examine into the effect of the
taxes on the materials used in the building and equipping of
British ships; also into the effect on wages and ships' stores of
our restrictions on provisions (in respect to the expense of na-
vigating British ships), and to consider and report to the House
en the expediency of removing the same, in so far as they may
be found to prevent the British shipowner from competing suc-
cessfully with the foreign shipowner.
Mr. GLADSTONE supported the motion, but was anxious
to guard against misrepresentation of the objects of the Govern-
ment. It had been industriously circulated by a certain class,
that the reciprocity treaties were about being abandoned.
Nosy, so far from this being the case, the Government were
roost anxious to adhere to them. It was absolutely necessary
to adhere to them—there was no alternative but in going to
war, which they must all deprecate.—( Hear, hear.)
Sir C. N APIER gave his cordial concurrence to the
motion of the Hon. Gentleman opposite. The shipping
interest had declined. In 1840 the number of steam-
vessels registered was 77 • in 1841, only M. He hoped the
Committee would consider the subject fully, without any
reference to party isbjects.—( Hear. hear.)
After a few words from Mr. CHAPMAN,
Mr. HAWES proposed, as an amendment, that the words,
" to inquire into the causes of distress," be added.
Mr. GLADSTONE doubted the expediency of introducing
the words which the Hon. Member for Lambeth had proposed
into the motion. He thought that the word., if introduced,
would lead to the belief that reciprocity treaties had caused
the distress which existed in the shipping interests, and would
lead the Committee into an inquiry into that subject.
Mr. HUTT recommended his Hon. Friend the Member for
Lambeth to withdraw his amendment. Ha (Mr. Hutt)
wished to ask the Right lion. Gentleman opposite why it was
that a return relating to the tonnage duties, on British ships in
foreign ports, which he had moved fur last year, had not been
produced.
Mr. GLADSTONE said it required a great deal of time
to make the returns required. They would, however, be made
as ea r
(11
NyuviaArs
possible.
yLbTefEo before
sk
thisMES Committees id i t
asw
and lull be
as
fair desirableas poto s
ihavepossible.
I
theSiinr
Mr. WAWN could assure the House that in the place
which he had the honour to represent, the shipping interest
was in a most deplorable state, and he trusted that the Com-
mittee would suggest some remedy for that distress.
Lord PALMERSTON did not see any difference between
the proposition of his Hon. Friend and that of the Hon. Gen-
tleman apposite. It had been said that if these words were in-
troduced, the Committee would be induced to go into the
question of the policy of reciprocity treaties, and the necessity
of those treaties. He thought it was obvious to everybody that
no Committee would think it consistent with their duty to re-
open that question. The Right Hon. Gentleman apprehended
that if tho words proposed by his Hon. Friend were adopted,
either the Committee or the public out of doors would imagine
that such was the intention of the proposer of the Committee.
Now he (Lord P.) did not think there could be any objection to
the introduction of the words. It appeared to him that inquiry
was necessarily involved in the motion of the Hon. Gentleman
opposite. He (Lord Palmerston) thought that if they inquired
into the state of the mercantile navy, and if they were to in-
quire how to encourage and promote it, they must of necessity
inquire into what was the cause of the distress. Unless the;

a
investigated the cause of the evil they could not propose any
adequate remedy for that evil. It, therefore, seemed to him
that the words suggested by his Hon. Friend were in eff et in-
cluded in the motion itself. It was a mere matter of words
and not of substance. He ( Lord Palmerston) had risen for the
purpose of alluding to the question of the Stade duties.. There
had been very long negotiations on this subject. They wt re told
twelve months ago that these negotiations were virtfaily brel.sn
off, when they hadasked for papers en the subject they were told
that the papers could not be produced while the nsgotia lens
there pending. The negotiations had been defunct I'2 months,
and he therefore now asked the Right Hon. Gentleman what
had become of that unhappy negotiation, and whether the Go-
vernment could, without prejudice to the service, lay before
Parliament papers which would show what had been done on
the subject.
Mr. GLADSTONE said the Noble Lord was quite correct
in saying that there had been long negotiations, inasmuch as
they had been in existence during twelve years of the Noble
Lord's tenure of office.—( Hear, hear.) But the Noble Lord
was not altogether correct in calling theni unhappy negotiations.
He thought there were substantial reasons for congratulation
on the part of the mercantile body of the country in respect of
those negotiations, as arrangements had been concluded be-
tween her Majesty's Government and the King of Hanover,
terms, they were not yet reduced to formal term as sense of the
details were at that moment in process of adjustmelt, but
they were not in such a state as to enable the Govertipent to
lay any information on the subject at present before theßnuse.
At the same time he could give a plain and intelligNe ex-
pression of opinion with respect to this subject. He, thought
he might safely say that the arragements which had been made
would come into operation in October next. The,' Govern-
ment would be very glad when the proper time shiStfltarrive
to lay the papers connected with the subject before tile 'Houses
and he hoped they would be laid before the House in the court"
of the present session.
Lord PALMERSTON wished to know whether the ar.
rangements which had been made would place the Stade tell
at a maximun of 9-16th,.
Mr. GLADSTONE must decline answering that qneetiou.
Mr. M. GIBSON could not see what authority Hanover
had for imposing any tolls at all. There were also the
Sound dues, which required to be thoroughly sifted ; and be
hoped the Committee would not lose sight of them. It was a
readygetting rid of difficulties, to say that this or that
wasnot comprehended in the notice. But he thought that the
n y cif
motion of his Hon. Friend, the Member for Bolton, ought not
to be met in that way. He hoped his Hon. Friend would not
abandon the words of his motion which refereed to ships'
stores. He hoped the House would not go into the inquiry
with a notion that some parts of it were to be looked upon as
religious questions not to be touched at all. The word's inex-
pedient" was a very vague, if not an unmeaning one; mad if
his Hon. Friend did not insist upon adding these words to the
motion, he would move their addition by way of amendment.
Dr. BOWRING said he could not Pee any reason why the
inquiry should not be made larger; and he hoped the Clouse
would allow, him to move the addition of worts to the effect
that it he an instruction to the Committee to inquire into the
effects of the duties npon the food, &c., of the persons employed
in the commercial navy.
Mr. HUME said that as the Government had agreed to a
Committee for general inquiry, he would recommend his Hon,
Friend to withdraw the amendment.
Sir C. NAPIER expressed a hope that the Committee
would not be a picked one.
The motion was then agreed to.
COMMITTAL OF A HAWKER.
Mr. HUME rose to bring before the House the case of Alfred
Moore, a licensed hawker, who was committed to prison for
three months by the magistrates of Shrewsbury, on the 2d of
may, 1843, upon the charge of obtaining alms under false pre-
tences. Moore was accosted by a policeman of the name of
Thomas, who asked to see his license. Not having it about
him, he required time to produce it ; but he was brought before
the magistrates, and by them committed to prison for three
months as a vagrant. The license was afterwards produced,
and forwarded, with the petition to the Secretary of State. He
(Mr. Hume) had seen both the documents. In fact, the poor
man had no remedy but to apply to the Secretary of State, but
the Right Hon. Gentleman when applied to said Moore might, •
if he felt aggrieved, take an action against the magistrate; but
that, with so pour a man, was out of the question. He had no
idea of the extent of summary punishments by magistrates,
and the extent of punishment which they in a summary man..
ner awarded to those who were brought before them. This
poor man had a card on his person, on which were written
the names of Lord Althorp and Mr. Smith, and certain sums
of money were appended to these names. It was assumed
by the magistrate that the prisoner had raised these sums hs,
begging, whereas in reality they were the amounts of goods
sold at the houses of these individuals. A begging letter had
been brought forward by a lady, which it was alleged had been
forw‘rded by Moore ; but if the magistrate had compared the
writing on the card and the letter, he would have found that
there was no similarity between them. He owned he had
been altogether ignorant of the extent of summary jurisdic-
tion in this country, and the natute of the punishment in-
flicted. By the last returns it appeared that 72,000 persons
were committed in a summary manner by the magistrates—not
by the unpaid but by the paid magistracy—and if the case
he now submitted to the House was a fair specimen of the
mode in which these magistrates commonly adminstered justice,
the sooner their power was abt idged the better ; and the
sooner the matter was brought under the consideration of the
Legislature the more advantageous to the public. By these
returns 34,000 had been sentenced to one month's imprison-
ment; 21,621 to two months, and between one and two
months imprisonment; 7,649 to between two and three months'
imprisonment ; 6,106 to between three months' and six month,'
imprisonment ; 796 to six months' imprisonment; and 169 to
be fined and whipped, and confined for an unlimited period.
The man had been punished for being drunk and insolent, but
he (Mr. Hume) had been informed by the landlord of the
house in which he lodged, and by another party who knew
him, that he was a man of decidedly sober habits, and had
never been seen drunk. As for the charge of insolence, the
man's anger was naturally excited by the overbearing conduct
of the policeman. He did not complain of the conduct of
the Mayor, by whom he had been courteously treated, but he
thought the Right Hen. Baronet, upon the represeutatitm
made to him, would have directed an inspector of prisons, et•
some other competent functionary, to inquire into the:case.
The Hon. Member concluded by moving for a copy of the
commitment of Alfred Moore, licensed hawker, at Shrewsbury,
on the 2sl day of September, 1843.
Air. DISRAELI said, that if the Hon. Member had given
notice of his intention to bring so important a question as.
that of the excreise of summary jurisdiction by the magis-
traey under the consideration of the House, somebody more
prominent than himself would probably have thought it 'sera*
while to reply to the Hon. Member. Perhaps even the
Right Honourable Gentleman beneath him (Sir James Grit
ham) would have condescended. Surely the Honourabie
Member justified his opinion on very slight grounds, when he,
adduced the isolated case of a Shrewsbury hawker. A num-
ber of his (Mr. ()Israeli's) constituents alarmed by the charge
which was about to he brought forward by so powerful an ad-
vocate as the Member for Montrose, came up to town not to
wait upon their own representative, but to wait upon the Hon.
Member, and to lay the real facts of the case before him. They
were astounded at being informed by the Hon. Member that
he intended to bring the subject before the House. They theta
came to him (Mr. D'lsraeli) and asked what they should do
He told them there was only one chance ; he thought it teals
not impossible, from the observation he had made of the Ho-.5.
Member's conduct during the time he had a seat in 144.1ia.
merit, that he might misunderstand their case and Inise,ate his
own.—( Great laughter.) It had turned out exact'• as he had.
'ne had brought
anticipated. He had wholly mistaken the circure.stiteces that
occurred,o ar d .
Tanhdei entirelyri se mmisunderstoodr v thet
hoasp:, en
distinc
Lion had been made here. A person was convicted o
who bad after-
wards an opportunity of appealing to the visiting magis-
trates, who would not interfere; the Secretary of state
had refused to interfere ; and now the case was brought
t allege.
before the House of Commons. The Hon. Gentleman had;
alleged a case of horrible injustice. He would state, in a fen
words, what had occurred. A person, who appeared to bse a
hawker, was called to account for being drunk and brawling le
the market-place. The Hon. Member said (as if t was a fact
that could not be proved) that it was rumourert the nann was.
drunk. In the depositions, it was sworn to, oy a reepectable,
and intelligent man, that he was drunk. He Ives confined,
and, though not immediately brought be ore a magistrate,
was seen by one ; he was held to bails but good bail was re-
quired,etfarho
radgt,ehwr[dihe isa'foofil
ifitthohoee
osHon.oinmaittiulstrs.esimo
thio,eir.btosaiht,dwiroi
c. 114.12:
in consequence of certain }netters that were found upon
ep;
draoomvreoddne among
orders
forhbee ma
r on
cutleryts.
as at
himwt
ai twined
Member for Salop, and of Mr. Field, the Town Clerk of
Shrewsbury, so perfect in their imitation that they could snot
be detected by any one not very well acquainted with **hear
writing. The case was carefully investigated, the examina-
tion lasting the whole day.
Mr. HUME—Who were the witnesses ?
Mr. D'ISRAELI—The Hon. Member was proving himself
even more ignorant of the case than he had iv,agined him.
to be.—( Hear, hear.) The witnesses weres the officer
who took him into custody—(" Hear, heae-," from Mr.
Hume)—the head of the police force-(" Near, hear," from
Mr. Hume)—the county clerk—( Hear, heer)—the keeper of
the ledging-house where the hawker had vtopped, and a female
named Priscilla Rogers. This took
.place in the month of
September last. A local print—not influenced by the Hon..
Member for Montrose, but one that certainly greatly admired(
him—had said that this case vsas a consequence of having ma-
gistrates appointed by a Tory Government. But it happenedi
that all the magistrates concerned in the ease had brew ap-
pointed by the late Government, or put on the bench by muni-
cipal influence. There could, therefore, be no party, feeling
in his vindication of their conduct. In fact, there never wit., a
' case at any time, in any country, brought before Parliament bv
any Member, even by the Hon. Member for Nlointrose himself,
so singularly shabby.—( gear, hear.) It ve., a case than
, which the Hon. Member, even in the greenest part of his
rpubliccareer, when he brought forward cesses o f grievances
from every part of the world—which generally ,1 turnee out the
very reverse of what he represented tiler
4---even when he told.
Mr. Canning that he was the greatest " allegator" in the'
House—(Laughter)—had never brought forward one moue
unfounded. He thought the House would decide as th
gistrates, the visiting magistrates, and the Secretaryera"
o f ear els
had already decided,that the man k
was ta en upasla brawler ; that
in consequence of his possession of
certain papers, a complicated
fraud hail been discovered, and that he was, thereffere,treated
as he deserved to be—according to the law of Enidand—com-
mitted to prison as a rogue and vagabond. He ' d ted
the Hon. Gentlemen would have
"I)"
aye some shad ow of a case, and.
that he would not now, this case having happ'etied in Septem-
ber, have to ask were there any witnesses a'. all. He was sure
tho mayor or the town clerk, with whom he was in constant
communication, would give him an answer on this point.' He
could not doubt that the House would negative the motion.
Mr. COLLETT (Athlone) wisher% to know from the Hon.
Gentleman for what offence this person had been taken up and. imprisoned.
Mr. D'ISRAELI said he was •saken'up for being drunk in blew
marketplace, and was convict'ed for living as a rogue and as
vagabond.
Mr. HUME said that if bold assertions were to carry a main
though, the Hon. Gentleman had done his beet.—(Laughter.)
If perversion of the facts—no doubt, done unwittingly EaDth
unintentionally—were to suffice, the Hone Gentleman had donee
justice to the case. But he asked the Right Hon. Gentleman:
the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he
concurred in the view of the Hon. Gentleman? When that
Right Hon. Gentleman was applied to, be said he could do
nothing—that the person had no remedy except to bring_ an
action at law. That showed the opinion of the Right P.ou„
Gentleman was that this individual had been injured. This
person was taken up, because it was alleged that he wa!a drunk.
That was denied by four persons, and be was toneitted on the.
single testimony of the policeman who took k;usa up. He•
thought the greatest injustice had been done This individuals,
and he hoped the Right Hon. Gentleman vrou'id not approve oZ
the manner in which he had been treated.

Sir J. GRAHAM said that, as the, non. Gentleman bad
referred to him, he would make it few observations on the
matter. To the best of his recAlect!lon, this person had sent
the petition to him (Sir J. Gralvart) while he was in prison,
begging him to extend the mercy of the Crown to him, and to
liberate him. He referred to the convicting magistrates; and
the mayor, who 410 a ',magistrate chosen by popular election,,
informed him of the facts, which were almost identical witlPs-
those stated by the Hon. Gentleman behind him. This peillesie
was drunk in the market-place of Shrewsbury, when o.te
policeman came up, and being abusive and disorderly:he was put
into prison, and was convicted on the sworn testimony of
this
oftcer. He considered it most unsatisfactory to arrive at a
conclusion on ex parte statements, as the Hon. Blembia for•
Montrose seemed to have done. He was apprehende d and:
taken to the station-house, la the station-how be %sues

searched, and upon his person was found a certificate recom-
mending him to charity, to which the signatures with sums
of money were attached. Just at that period several frauds
had been committed, and amongst the rest a letter in the
French language had been addressed to a French gentleman,
which came under this description. After a full examination,
which lasted the whole of that and the following day, the ma-
gistrates were satisfied that Moore had written the certificate
himself, and that the letter addressed to the French gentleman
was in his handwriting, and they sentenced him to three months'
imprisonment on the charge of obtaining money under false pre-
tences. He had received this explanation from the mayor. He must
say that upon the whole he thought that the magistrates had
exercised due caution before they came to their decision, and
lie had felt that it was not a case in which he could recommend
the prisoner to mercy. In the letter which he had written to
she prisoner he had stated that the term of his imprisonment
having expired, there was then no course open to him but to
procee at law against the magistrates fur false imprisonment.
He was of opinion that under the circumstances three months'
imprisonment with hard labour was not too severe a punishment.
Mr. HUME begged to ask of the Right Hon. Baronet whe-
ther there had been a single witness brought forward against
the prisoner beside the policeman?
Sir JAMES GRAHAM said it was impossible for him to
try the facts over again.—(Hear.) He believed the magistrates
had no interest in distorting the facts.—(Hear.)
Mr. WAKLEY wished to know from the Right Hon. Ba-
ronet whether he considered that it was lawful for the officer
to take from this man his papers, when he had been arrested
merely on a charge of drunkenness ?—( Hear. )
Sir JAMES GRAHAM said the police-officer complained
of the man's conduct, when he became noisy and disorderly,
upon that he was taken to the station-house, and on being
taken to the station-house his person was searched.
Mr. WAKLEY asked was that orderly ?
Sir JAMES GRAF:IAM said he believed it was.
.Mr. AGLIONBY said he was not aware that the magis-
trates had the power of summary conviction for obtaining
money under false pretences.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM raid he must really object to dis-
cussing the question of law against the acuteness of the Hon.
and Learned Gentleman, but out of courtesy he seould de what
he could to satisfy him. He demurred to sitting there to try
the conduct of the magistrates.—( Hear, bear.)
Mr. AGLIONBY said all he wished to know was, whether
the man was punished for obtaining money under false presences?
Sir JAMES GRAHAM then read the minutes of the pro-
ceedings before the magistrates, in which it was stated that the
prisoner, on the 26th of August last, endeavoured to procure
charitable'contributions under false and fraudulent pretences,
and the conviction for obtaining money by those means. Theßight
Hon. Baronet also read the clause under which he was con-
victed. He. observed that it was a most inconvenient practice
to endeavour to turn that House Into* court of appear an such
. ...
cases.
Mr. WAKLEY 'agreed with the Right Hon. Baronet in
considering it an inconvenient practice to make that House a
court of appeal fromthe decision of naa.gistrates ;
.and it would
be a most objectionage Practice-If it were, possible, to cln without
it. It was true the courts of law were open; but what could
A poor man without money do there ? He had no prospect of
justice unless he employed a lawyer, and no lawyer
would assist him a ithaut money. He., considered that
iin the present *instance*a grievous wrong had been demi
—(Hear, hear)—and the case , had not been , mad
better by the manner in., which it had been argued'by th
Hon. Member for Shrewsbury.. It, ryas' a perversion, of hi
,
powers to attempt by eloquence and , wit to . gloss over tlu'
• atrocious conduct of the authorities of Shrewsbury.—(Hear.`,
The man had been arrested en a charge of drunkenness, anc\
that charge had never 'been investigated—he had never beer
acquitted or convicted on it.--(Hear, hear:) The Right Hon
Gentleman said-that the charge had been proved. Now there
was no proof whatever of it.L.Lno, 'witness had beep exa,
mined, except the officer who had .
_felt his * officia
dignity • offended by the conduct of the man, and
/hey all knew haw captious police-officers were. ll'
made no complaint of the manner, in which the Righ
4lonourable Baronet Performed his duty with regard to th
praols, but he could assure the Right Hon. Baronet that iti
v..any instances a sentence of imprisonment, even, for a shor
period, amounted in fact to a Sentence of death ; he had se-,
veral cases before him recently of thi's nature; and. Plese cases
..t summary conviction could not claim too much of; atten-
tion of the Governrnent, or,be too closely investigated by •that
, !ouse. He flrml believed' that there were hundreds—hi
might say thousands-of innocent periona incarcerated,` at the
)•resent moment.—(Tlear:) Yes, he *firm believed such wee
t fact. He wished to ask the Right Honourable 13aronef
one question. This man had been taken into custody simpl)!
on a charge of drunkerness. He had been asked 'for his lit
cense, and that he hadproduced.
, ' .
Mr. D'ISRAELI—He was abusive. ~
Mr. WAKLEY admitted he might have Vied abusive lan-
rmge. Drunken then were not often civil; and he won,
4tered what the officer expected from a drunken man ; but the
roan having been taken into custody simply on a charge of
eirunkenuess; he wished to ask the, Right Honourable Barn.
rvt if he considered it lawful on the part of the. offi4
. ere of Shrewsbury to search the . mast to, tak
J.:5 papers from him, to submit them to the meddling, Officiou
..,, fayor of Shrewsbury, who, by a prying, pettifogging,. paltr
. (amination of these documents, had, when no charge bu
. , unkenness was brought against the man, manufactured
.4
charge Out of those documents, which he had no hesitation i
saying the authorities of Shrewsbury had stolen from this man'
person.—( Hear, ' hear, from Mr. D'lsraeli.) There -wa
s.o law to justify their taking them., ' If ther
's ere, let the Honourable Gentleman produce th
Act of Parliament which justified them in what they ha
done. The Right Hon. Gentleman said that it had bee
proved that the own had made an attempt to procure money
-there was not one tittle of evidence to that effect—there wal
ssot any deposition of any witness proving that any application!
for money had been made.—( Hear, hear.) He trusted hisl
Sion. Friend would see further into it, and would, with the
aid of others, furnish the man with means to go int
a court of law.—( Cries of " Hear, hear.") He for on
-could willingly assist the man in getting his case tried
( Ironical cheers from the Ministerial benches)—and as Hon.
Oentlemen opposite seemed so delighted at the idea, he truste
that they too would grant their aid, and then not a word furthe
would be said on the subject until it had been submitted to
ie,,zal tribunal
The motion was then negatived without a division.
Mr. WALL ACE moved for a copy of the protest, with thei
signatures attached thereto, as delivered to the judges or the
clerk of assizes. by ten of the jury who were impannelled td,
try Alexander Walker, on the 3d day of May last, at the assizes,
lucid in the city of Glasgow, on that and other days of the said
month, " for an assault with an intent to ravish ;" also the
s.ames of the judges before whom the said case was called and
'tried, on the said 3d day of May, and the name.
sn- names of the advocate-depute or deputes, assis-'
vent or assistants, who appeared or acted as public:
prosecutor in the aforesaid case. Also, copy of an entry or
entries in the records of assizes, or in the records of the Court!
of Justiciary,' or books of adjournal referable to, the said case.
Also, return of the 'number of civil cases which were intimated
.or put down for trial with a jury at the time 'the aforesaid
assizes were held in Glasgow, but which were not then tried;►
;also, the names of the parties to each causer and the date of its
:commencement, and the name of the court in which it was
originally instituted.—Agreed to. .
Mr. HUME moved that the petitions 'of the Agricultural
and Horticultural Societies of the East Indies be printed with
the Votes.—Agreed to. .
Sir R. H. ING LIS moved that a Committee be appointed
4,) inquire into the state of Westminster-bridge,—The Corn-
..i, oittee was accordingly appointed. '
On the motion that the report, of the Committee of 'Ways
:tad Means be brought up. • .
, •
Mr. P. M. STEWART inquired when the. Sugar Duties
Bill would be again 'brought before the House.
The CH AN CELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said thel
Sugar Duties Bill would be the, first thing introduced on Mon-
,Jay next, and the Bank Charter Bill on the Thursday fol-I
,
l.,wing. ' . . I
,
The Report was then brougbt, up, and the resolutions were)
Agreed tc ; after whiCh -leave was given to bring ins Bill;
-founded thereon, and the Bill Was read a first time, and Ordered'
sto be read a second time on Thursday. , ,
' • The other Orders of the Day were disposed of, and the House,
scorned at a Quarter to One.o'clock.
~ .

DIS3ENTERS! CHAPELS .BILL.
TO ~THE EDITOR OF TEE
Strt,—..The Viesleyans,' in their petitions against-the Dig-
renters' Chapel till, aver' that ifth e lieCarne law, it would
kiangerouslyintevfdreivAth the, trusts ortheir ch apels, •
Now the clause, about Which so . much has wrongly been
Tut ' forth, runs thus To? prevent Chapels; in' 'the trust
,deeds of which there is re9nirement es to the .partienlar
4loctrines to be -taught, from "tien.ig. taken_ away from, their
present holders:l. . • .; -; • .
This is. intelligible' enough ; and Who cab say it would, in
Ile most remote' degree,. infringe. upon the' crusts of any
,chanel, much More endanger them ? '' If the Wesleyans were
io-nikant of this,-they aught :before 'petitienip 'to haVe in
formes' themselves of the plain '
June

-

gresterci.y T001e,7 -of 'the -last India
proceeded down the river in the Vesier.steglalpacket
with a chest'of. h4oki, consisting the :works of Sir
-Walter Scutt, Charles •Dickens, the. Penny Magazine,
the Lives of Wellington And Napoleon, and some relk
I,gious,bool4, to the:Wellesley ttansport, lying off Grave -
and delivered !the same. to W. Toiler, master, for
t-he use of the Hon. Eastindia;C'Ompany's troops about
ec sail for India. The chest contained about 16Q vo-'
isales, and is termed a "military library," and every
okker on board has the free' use of the volumes for
threes,guys ; but if lie tears or defaCes them the, amount
danik-e iOtoppec.'. put of his pay. Some officers also
proceed.'‘ by the same vaCket to join the Wellesley.
LAVIVC,n, OF THE. Alcolancu.-4he launch of an
3zdiamap of first class, frc-oi the yard ,of Mr. Green, at
2ilackwall, • too,( place on Sauirday, in the preSence of
"thousands of spectators. The yard; which was very kindly
-thrown open to thei public by the spirited proprietor, was
..:rowded with visitors ; carriages were continually 'arriving
---`or some time with people of rank and fashion, and the.
aeteamers. and railroad trains were pouring fresh suPplies into'
town of Poplar:. This very fine vessel, the Monarch, is
I.oilt upon the improved principles of..naval architecture; and
;ssouepf the hest models of mehip of her dais •: sheis termed
lo Vet.* in sailing, with sufficient breadth of beam to make
:her A good sea-boat, and with plenty, of room Mr stowage of a
icargo and 41ae aeconunodation of passengers. 4 Her tonnage
213' mePtireent is
.1,150 tons. Thenaming of the :Vessel,
Ireaking a I,,ottle of wine upons.
her boivs,- at.the signal that
:she was off the ~?lips, was performed in the usual manner by
.one of. the ladle** \of Mr, green',
tlroundchet, a family,fir. and for
it hose immetliatelj-h was erected for
-.their better accouutNdation. A lareb platform
which contained 1
ssome hundreds of per,aons,.was also erected crorriei side of the
vv
acid
an
-vessel, anitin it were k hose who -had the
tentree: There was-i*PtY'°ttrrweaultedfowreitvh7pO'llieen'ess all
pws:1100
:came to see the launch were'
4(1(10 withplaces. At; was -16:1f-past `one o'Elock when thi;
woe ahWeated into. theThat,nes, amid 4the,.firing .of some
(10 pis of ordnknce and the .cheers of the immense host
we persons 4pFrueetl, -.514 was ornamented •ith the .union
lack and other, ags, and her,deck .7ras covered with /Apple,
%rho' returned the cheers, of those on :shore.. In the course
of
he dal' she was towed by a tug steamer into the basin of the
:Zest
•Inflia:Docks., • '
SALE or Guatio.---On Monday at two o'clock, a
,ale by :action, took, place.at the auction-rooms,' Mirk-lane,
-of a large folamtity of piano, in anticipation of the arrival of
-.the cargo wNhich at present on board a vessel in the Downs,
"that has imp, orted, it: from the coast of Africa.• 'There were
..about 450 too 9, this being the. largest importation in one
-vessel, and win'eb. was brought from the island' of 'lelliboe.
Ilse analysis of ,the guano was slated to be about as follows
ammoniacal salt, conssting of phosphate oxalite,
warboinite and luanate of ammonia, (containing seven-and-
Dialf Ter cent. of freePsunmenia), twenty-sin per cent., ,and
:organic animal matter, eight, together thirty-four pet cent:,
:fixed alkaline salt ptincipally phospate; muriate, and sulphate
potash, elevenper cent. ; phosphate of lime And- !nag-
x,esia. and oxalite of lime,, thirty per cent. with only half
_;jet y of :add, and of moisture 2450 per cent. 'There Were
„vxhc4,tiY cud ten tens each ; the ...average prices of
tie. per The whole was disposed of
41",4 which, as. the 4011,7 expenses were freight,
and the support of the crew during the
fro, would leave very large profits to the

.

TRUTH.

ti,J4

-11 • L„..t,; , tha i6....12.1

TUESDAY NIGHT'S GAZETTE.

CROWN-OFFICE, JUNE 4, 1844.
MEMBERS RETURNED TO SERVE IN THIS PRESENT
PARLIAMENT.

COUNTY PALATINE OF LANCASTER.—SOUTHERN DIVI.
Entivisle, Esq., in the room of the Hon.
R. B. Wilbraham, deceased.
DISTRICT OF BURGHS OF KILMARNOCK, &C.—The Hon.
E. P. Bouverie, in the room of A. Johnston, Esq., deceased.

FOREIGN OFFICE, MAT 31.
The Queen has been pleased to approve of Mr. Francis Reid,
as Consul at Glasgow for his Majesty the King of the Belgians,
Commissions by the Lord Lieutenant and High Steward of the
Stewartry of Kirkcudbright.
J. C. Maxwell, Esq., to be Deputy Lieutenant ; W. Max-
well; Esq., to be ditto, May 9.
Commission by the Lord Lieutenant of Westmoreland and

-20 r alSOtil—tdi,-;
• 47, J. ay
--AQAn fix
lkst • *P-' -
r-ed-, -14)
- ,
.4 a