The Sun.
London, England, 1827-04-11 00:00:00

CORN LAWS.

The Earl of MALMESBURY moved for a Return of all
sheeps and lambs' wool imported int 6 this country since
the year 1826, distinguishing such as had paid a duty of
one penny in the pound, from such as had paid only one
halfpenny. His Lordship explained, that this return would
shew their Lordships what sort of wool had been imported
into this country, and in what manner that importation had
injured the agriculturists. His Lordship also moved for a re-
tnrn of the quantity of grain and flour warehoused in this
country, or entered inwards to be warehoused, up to thelatest
period to which such returns could be made up,distinguishing
the place where such corn and flour were warehoused. This
return was already before their Lordships up to Feb. 1 ;
but with a view to the discussion of a pending measure, it
was desirable to have it made up to as late a period as pos-
sible. His Lordship also called their Lordships' attention
to the returns relative to the duties levied on our mannfac-
tures in foreign countries, for which he had previously
moved, and which were now of considerable importance, in
consequence of an important clause which had lately been
added to the Corn Bill. That clause was: important, not
only from its bearings on the doctrines of free trade, but
also from its stamping that Bill with its true commercial
character. He did not refer to the returns for which he
had previously moved, that they might be forthwith pre-
sented to their Lordships ; but only that they might be
laid on their Lordships' table before they were called on
to discuss tl.e Corn Bill.
INDIAN ARMY.
The Earl of CARLISLE, seeing some of his Majesty's
Ministers in their places, begged leave to ask them a ques-
tion. He was not in the House, when a Noble Duke, not
then in his place, had asked his Majesty's Ministers whe-
ther or not it was their intention to propose a vote of thanks
to Lord, Combermere and the Indian Army. He under-
stood the answer to have been, that high and meritorious as
were the services of Lord Combermere and the Indian
Army, they were not of such a character as called for a
vote of thanks from their Lordships. He wished to know,
now that the combined services of the Army in India had
been concluded, and the war had been brought to a suc-
cessful termination, if the Ministers did not think it right
to move a vote of thanks to the whole? He had less
scruple in putting the question, because he understood a
notice had been given in another place of a motion for a
vote of thanks.

The Duke of WELLINGTON answered, that in the
absence of his Noble Friend, he could only say, that he had
reason to believe a vote of thanks would be proposed after
the holidays.
ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE.
The Marquis of LANSDOWN also wished to ask a
question, but of a much less military nature than the last,
and of less national importance. He wished to 'ask if any
day were yet fixed for the Adjournment of Parliament,
and if it were yet settled of what duration the holidays
would be?

The Duke of WELLINGTON said he could give no
answer till he had seen his Noble Friend.
On the motion of the Marquis of LANSDOWN, the
Costs of Distress Bill went through a Committee, and was
reported to their Lordships with Amendments ; which, the
Noble Marquis said, would make the Bill more efficacious,
and prevent brokers and others from levying more than a
certain amount for costs, and prevent them from mixing a
distress for rent with tithes and poor rates.
Several measures were forwarded one stage.—Adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, APRIL 10.
BOROUGH OF READING.

Mr. F. PALMER took the oaths and his seat for the
Borough of Reading, in the room of Mr. Spence, who has
lost his seat by the decision of an Election Committee.
INLAND NAVIGATION, IRELAND.
_ _

Mr. Johnson, from the Office of the Chief Secretary for
Ireland, brought up a copy of the Report on the Inland
Navigation of Ireland.—Ordered to be printed.

CATHOLIC EMANCIPATION.

Lord DUNCANNON presented two petitions from the
Roman Catholics of Galls Town, and another district in
Ireland, praying for Catholic Emancipation.

EMIGRATION.

Mr. MAXWELL presented a petition from the Opera-
tives and Cotton Spinners of a district in Lanark, praying
assistance to emigrate.

TEST AND CORPORATION ACTS.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL postponed his motion relative
to the Test and Corporation Acts, to the 10th June.
Mr. SPRING RICE presented a petition from a dis-
trict in the county of Limerick, praying for Catholic Eman-
cipation.
Mr. GOULBURN presented a petition from several
persons in Dublin against Combination Societies in that
city-.—Ordered to be printed.
Mr. B. WILBRAHAM presented a petition from a
District of Lancashire, praying the House to fix a mini-
mum of wages.—Ordered to be printed.
Mr. PAULETT presented a petition from the House-
holders of South Shields, in favour of the Roman Catholic
Claims.
COUNTY FIRE OFFICE.

,inapbuourstualn,7co;o7;f
persons
his 6
oc notice, ,
the o
present
Ha OpeStiFtriOZSsignedrose,
highest respectability, who were Directors and Subscribers
to the County Fire Insurance Office. About 600 of these
petitioners were his own constituents ; and the subject on
which they approached the House was an injus • • tice by
which they complained of being affected by the Report
of a Commission of Inquiry, constituted under the high
sanction of the name of the Right Hon. Gentleman op-
posite (Mr. Wallace). It would be in the recollection of
the House that some years ago, in consequence of abuses
which had arisen in the collection and management of the
revenue in Ireland, a Commission was appointed to inns- '
tigate the nature and extent of those abuses ; and that the
inquiry was afterwards extended to Scotland, and its ope.,
ration subsequently applied also to England. Several
Reports had been made by the Commissioners ; and the
Fourteenth Report, which related to the Stamp-office, had
been laid before the House. Having stated these prelimi-
nary circumstances, he would now come to the grievance
of which, on behalf of the petitioners, he complained.
The County Fire-office was, as the House was aware, a
great and flourishing commercial establishment. It had,
for many years, enjoyed the confidence of the public—it
had issued nearly a million of policies—and had connected
with it names of the highest respectability and distinction
in the city of Westminster. In the summer of the year
1925, certain individuals, authorised by the Stamp-office,
called at the County Fire-office, and demanded to examine
the books of the concern. The Directors were also ap-
prised that tl!e Commissioners wished to see some of the
clerks in their employment at the office, and orders were
received that the books should be sent to the Commission-
ers for inspection, which orders were complied with, and
the books, to the amount of four coach-loads, were sent as
directed. The natural consequence of these proceedings,
and of the notoriety of the investigation which had been
instituted, was, that conaiderable rublic anxiety and Atli-

4410,. 'lOl4/4..V,
;
• 114..,V r.riY P `)`
oe,
Alf
rumours conmerie were ; And
tion wereprdireee
joitedeidlotothtteCahtyXr e.eStel; ' sus
these rumours went stf fart that astatement of Exchequer
processes haying been ;mud against the •ffice got into the
newspaPeras This led to the withdrawal of some of the
insurimees, and the stability and profits of the establish-
ment suffered a very material prejudice. It was natural,
undex those circumstances, thet the Geatlemen having the
direction of the County_ Fie Office, should be anxious to
know what was the subject of the inquiries which bad
been set on foot, from whence they had been instituted, and
to what object they were directed; and accordingly the Ma-
naging Director, Mr. Barber Beaumont, wrote certain let-
ters, in a tone, perhaps, not so measured as might have
been palateable, but which the injurious tendency of the
steps taken against the County Fire Office had excited.
Mr. Beaumont desired to be examined by the Commis-
sioner,. He was so examined, and having been examined,
he thought that the investigation was favontable, to his own
character, and to the reputation.of the office with which he
was connected. But,the Directors were not content with
this, they wished for further investigation; and seeing
from the newspapers that it was possible that Exchequer
processes might be issued, they were desirous that this
opportunity should be given them for their justification,
and it was not without regret they found that this course
was not pursued. However, after suffering from the most
unfounded imputations for a period of more than seventeen
months, out came the Report of the Right Hon. Gentleman
opposite, and his colleagoes, accompanied by extremely
bulky evidence. The first point of which the petitioners
now complained, was that instead of the Report. having
been presented within one month after the meeting of Par-
liament, as was directed by the Act of Parliament under
which this, as well as all similar commissions, was insti-
tuted, it was delayed so late as the 26th of May, 1826
the consequence of which was, that Parliament having been
shortly afterwards dissolved, those who found their cha-
racters thus impeached, had no opportunity of applying to
the House of Commons, by petition or otherwise, for re-
dress. When the Report appeared, the Directors imme-
diately perceived what the character of the investigation
was. They found that they were charged with crimes,
and with very great crimes, • on-the evidence of persons
whom they conceived to be perjured informers. They im-
mediately resolved upon bringing forward a prosecution
against these, individuals, and they applied to the Right
Hon. Gentleman opposite, and his colleagues, for the
means of giving effect to their proceedings ; for in order to
lay a successful indictment, it was necessary for them to
have not the Report itself, which would be of no avail for
that purpose ; but the short-hand writer's notes, -or the
confession of one of the Commissioners, or the' form of the
oath administered. They accordingly applied for these
formalities, and hs now held in his hand theanswer return- -
cid by the Commissioners, in which they stated that they did
not conceive it their duty to furnish the information te-
quired. Now hi would like to know from the Right Hon.
Gentleman, as the Commissioners refused to give the
information necessary to sustain an indictment for perjury,
he would like to know why, by the Act which constituted
the commiesion, power was given to the Commissioners
themselves to institute prosecutions against perjured wit-
nesses- Surely this authority could not have been con-
fided to them solely with a view to be exercised accord-
ing to their own arbitrary will. It must have been in-
tended for the protection of the revenue and of the public.
And without impugning the motives of the Right Honour-
able Gentleman and his colleagues, he (Mr. Hobhouse)
must say that when a great and respectable commercial
body was charged by the Report with that which in an
individual would amount to the total loss of honour--when
they were charged with fraud—he could not think that it
was just or reasonable in the Commissioners to withhold
from them the means of rebutting the accusation. Now,
with respect to the suspicion conceived by the Directors,
that the charges against them were bottomed on the evi-
dence of perjured informers, that appeared to him to be a
rational and well-grounded suspicion-_for who were those
informers? They were persons who had been discarded
from the County Fire-office for misconduct, and the first
amongst them, when asked his name, refused to make it
known. He (Mr. IL) would put it to the Mouse, and to
the candid and impartial sense of justice of the Right
Non. Gentleman opposite, whether this respectable com-
mercial body had not reason to complain of having
been denied the means of establishing their innocence of
the acts imputed to them. He would now come to
another branch of the complaint, and ask the Right Hon.
Gentleman how did this inquiry come to be instituted
by him and his colleagues, seeing that, the Stamp-office
had sufficient power to accomplish its objects without an y•
intervention of Parliament ? By the 22d of George the
Third, chapter 48, the Stamp-office was invested with
authority to inspect the books of Insurance Compinies,
with a view to the protection of the revenue and of the
public. He would beg the attention of the House to a
portion of the evidence on which the charges were founded.
The principal evidence was that of Mr. Godfrey Sykes,
the Solicitor to the Stamp-office. That gentleman was
not present, but as he was in no danger of being with-
out defenders, he (Mr. H.) did not apprehend that he
ran the risk of being accused of attacking him behind his
back, when he declared that throughout the whole course
of the Report and the evidence, he did not find any thing
which could reconcile or account for the conduct of this
very respectable Solicitor, as he supposed he must call
him. Mr. Godfrey Sykes alleged as the reasons Why the
Commissioner. had taken up this subject—fitst, that Mr.
Barber Beaumont might have thrown some impediments
in the way of an investigation by the Stamp-office; and
secondly, that the Stamp-office had no authority to inspect
the accounts. To both of these propositions, he (Mr. H.)
gave an unqualified denial. It had been in the power of
the Stamp-office—it was in their power under the Act of
Parliament which he had quoted—to institute an inquiry,
and he would venture to say that this was the first time it
had been found necessary to scrutinise the private books of
t commercial body through the agency of a Parliamentary
Commission.—(Near, hear.)--The next cause of com-
plaint was couched in the evidence of Mr. More, Mr.
Sykes's clerk, who it appeared commenced the inquiries,
not only without ascertaining the name of the person
on whose intelligence be proceeded, but even after that
informer, having been asked his name, refused to dis-
close it. On this description of evidence, and on
this extraordinary mode of obtaining evidence, what charges
would the House suppose the Right Hon. Gentleman and
his colleagues bad felt themselves justified in advancing
against the County Fire-office ? It was alleged, that when-
ever the country collectors failed in their returns, 111 r.
Beaumont ordered lists to be made out, and claims to be
made to the ;mount of those defaults ; and it was stated
that this practice was carried on to the extent of 2,0001.
annually. He (Mr. Hobhouse) did not hesitate to say,
that if such a charge as this were true, the Commissioners
would have been deficient in their duty if they had neglect-
ed to institute an inquiry into a practice so fraudulent in
itself and so injurious to the revenue and the public. But
he took upon him to say, that the charge was unfounded.
or at least that, even if true, it was not borne out by that
on which alone the House was to form its judgment, name-
ly, the evidence. The petitioners denied it positively and
in toto, and he must beg to say that the petitioners had
ci•foehraasrrogen to complain of injustice, and to affirm that the
that after a legal ininiaecsiintoiggnattooiof
etuagrnasinosft
duty,
owasfn the
haem.
on
iontuf
osnrut
Ds
oft sustained, nr
country
whene
solitary t i appeared
anc
defaulters,
o
title of x 9
wd9dheconaeu death
colafi mcoslfai,tmhtheselni'garraase.
se-
lected at the option o
was at length found out, of the default of a cti.lector at
Edinburgh, amounting only to the aunt of twenty-four
amountngs,
sb_Afterliotfhanethdeexthaamt defaults of the Edinburgh agents was only
7561. odd, thus approving the statement of their own wit-
nesses; but the conduct of the agents ought not to jus-
tify a charge of fraud against the whole body in London.
The directors submitted their accounts to a public ac-
countant and two uditors, and on the examination of the
hooks of the Fire-office from 1807 to July 1825, the gross
amount of the defaults of the whole concern during that
y
period was 6,5707. This examination was conducted
ica 00i.iae:b
most respectable persons. He was aware that it was very
possible that ce.-tain persons connected with the County
Fire-office may have been guilty of certain defieienees of
to
duty with respect to the Reventuohene.entalimmt
avoid certain errors and frauds being committed by their
agents.e ih thTehceroeunwtyasFairtwe_esooffinceoaft
of
ed but6i LI
dy a.:e is
mpossible
wilful
i f ugedl
in a conspiracy to ruin them. The petitioners declare
fraud, they would give up their case. The Fire-office
that if they can
r-
were in the habit of paying a profit in advance on all po-
licies, and he (Mr. H.) could not see why the Right
lion. Gentleman (Mr. Wallace) complained of the . .
Re-
venue being inured by this means, if they chose to pay
5,000/. or 10,000/. in advance. The Commissioners in-
terpreted this proceeding as a charge against them, of en-
deavouring to make it appear that they were doing more
business than they really did. This could not be the cases
for when time duty came to be claimed bythe Stamp Office,
the real state of the affairs would appear. The net pro-
duce only appeared at the Stamp Office. The Commis-
sioners have found out another charge against the Directo re,
not less criminatory than this—namely, that of accusing
Mr. Barber Beaumont and the Directors of throwing im-
pediments in the way of the examination of the books of
the office. This would he most positively denied, even by
the evidence before the COMmiesionere. Mr. Haynes etatee

that every assistance vvas given by Mr. Barber Beaumont,
which is corroborated by the evidence of Mr. Johnston, in
page 639. He would refer the House to two letters from
Mr. Barber Beaumont, in page 173, soliciting inquiry
into the transactions of the office- He would also deny
the charge against the Directors of making out new books,
as stated in the evidence.
Mr. WALLACE—It was so stated by the informer.
Mr. HOBHOUSE continued—Mr. Sykes suspected
some frauds, some tampering with certain persons, and also
suspected Mr. Barber Beaumont of throwing impediments
in the way of inquiry. This was too bad, and most un-
justifiable in every point of view, that a great commercial
establishment should be found guilty on the information of
a person who would not tell his name, and could give no
other reason than this, that "he suspects, he thinks it
probable." These suspicions would tend to ruin the cha-
racter of any private individual, as well as a large public
establishment. It was most surprising that the Commis-
sioners should allow these suspicions to remain as evi-
dence. Mr. Barber Beaumont is accused, like the un-
just Steward in the Scriptures, of taking up his pen
and writing 4,0001., instead of 3,000/. However, on
inquiry it was found that the whole difference against this
gentleman was 611, from 1819 to 1825. The Com-
missioners asked, whether it was by his, Mr. Beaumont's
success in carrying on the establishment, that he, Mr.
Barber Beaumont, remained in office. This gentleman
replied yea, and further stated, that the establishment was
most anxious that inquiry should take place as to the charge
of throwing dust in the eyes of the public. There
was another charge, that of collusion with Mr. Sedg-
wick, late Chairman of the Board of Stamps, to increase
the number of policies, in order to prevent the Commis-
sioners from making out the frauds. In page 672 there
was the amount of the deficiency in the returns of three
quarters, making 758/ ; but these were not the successive
quarters of the same year, but there was one quarter taken
from 1815, another from 1821, and another from 1822.
He should like to know how the Commissioners could ex-
cuse themselves for such a proceeding. He supposed they
would say, that they, the Commissioners, had some sus-
picion of these frauds. But it appeared to him most ex-
traordinary, that these disjointed quarters should be sin-
gled out as a specimen of the disorderly state of the Re-
turns. What he complained of was this, that in the in-
vestigation by the Chmmissioners of the charges of fraud,
amounting to 2,000/. a-year, an accusation should be
brought against the Fire-office of making out a new set of
books, and also a char;.7e of collusion with the Chairman
of the Board of Stamps, in order to prevent the examina-
tion taking place, when this charge was not supported by
evidence. They begged of the Commissioners to give the
parties a direct acquittal, or an immediate trial, to make
out their innocence. In reply to this, they heard from

the Right Hon. Gentleman, as a satisfaction and justice
to them, that an Exchequer process would be insti-
tuted against them for offences against the Revenue.
—This surely was most soothing to them.—
After two years, these charges hanging over these
gentlemen, which were enough to destroy any establish-
ment in Europe ; and after demanding the means of pro-
secuting the informers for perjury, when no prosecution
was instituted by Government against them, yet now, when
this petition is about to be presented, they are told that an
Exchequer process was taken out against them. The
Right Hon. Gent. may say that the Court of Exchequer
was the proper place for inquiry into those matters, and
not mix up Parliament with such proceedings. But he
would ask the Right, Hon. Gent. if the Report will not
prejudice the petitioners in a Court of Law. He would
also ask, whether this Exchequer process will give the op-
portunity of disposing of the charge of fraud of 2000/.
a-year, or the charge of making out a new set of hooks ?
The petitioners complain that the Exchequer process will
not do what substantial justice in this case demanded.
The prayer with which the petitioners conclude is, that
this Hcuse would be pleased to make the inquiry, as the
best mode to prevent the recurrence of these grievances in
future. _ _

Mr. SIBTHORPE implored the House to grant the
inquiry. There never was a more unfair attack made on
any establishment; it was like a secret assassination.
Mr. WALLACE would be wanting in his duty if be
did not offer sante observation in reply to those imputa-
tions cast on himself and his colleagues by the Hon. Gen-
tleman. With respect to the Petition he did not com-
plain, but to the grounds on which it was brought, and
the allegatiens put forth by the lion. Gentleman. Before
he went into the details of these transactions he would say
a few words which do not immediately belong to this in-
quiry. Endeavours had been made to make the acts of
this commission considered as the acts of a secret
inquisi4tioo. He was sure this would not have the least
effect on aroy of those who were acquainted with the man-

Tier Al -
There was no marl on the commission, whose integrity
could be so far influenced as to induce him to act contrary
to the strict line of his duty. He should not withdraw
himself from any part of the responsibility. He was too
well satisfied of the results of the recommendations of the
commission, if carried into effect, to be at all desirous to
withdraw himself from any share be bad in the conduct of
the commission. :is to the applications for minutes, there
bad been two applications for minutes, in order that pro-. ,
eecutions might be carried on aguinst some of the wit-
nesses ; and he. in common with the refit of the Commis-
sioners, declined to produce the minutes. The first applica-
at:on was by letter, desiring a communication of the minutes,
and threatening, if they were not produced, to subpoena the
members of the Commission, and make them state the con-
tents in evidence. The subpoenas were actually served,
but it was aftere-ards discovered that the indictment could
not be framed without some preliminary information? and
then came the second application, which was for a part of
the minutes. The same reseemis which induced the Com-
missioners to refuse to comninnicate the whole, induced
them to refuse to communicate a part of the minutes.
They conceived, that having had a duty to perform for the
Crown and for the two Houses of Parliament, and having
performed that duty, the minutes, which had been taken
in the performance of that duty, did not belong to them,
nor could be made use of by them for any purpose, with-
snit the previous consent of those, for whose benefit they
weee taken and to whom they belonged. Minutes taken
for any particular purpose, were the property of the per-
sona for tashom they were taken, and could not he disclosed
without their consent. In the case of minutes taken in the
Court of Excheener, the same sort of application hail been
made and repeatedly refused. The Attorney-General, in
such cases. always exercised a discretion on the part of the
Crown. It was the same with respect to all evidence
taken before the Houses of Parliament. Neither the House
of Lords or Commons allowed any communication of mi-
nutes without their especial permission. In 1819, in con-
sequence of one of the shorthand-writers of the House hay-
ing been subpoenaed to produce on a trial minutes taken
before a Select Committee, a resolution was brought for-
ward by Mr. Bragge Bathurst, and agreed to by the House,
Aat no communication of minutes should ever be made
without the express permission of the House. If such a
commisnication were allowed, commissions might be ap-
pointed, Lett no testimony would ever, be obtained, and the
inquisitorial power of the House would become a mere
name. The next charge was the abuse of the discretionary
power of inquiry int:, the conduct ,t 4 individuals. One of
the Managing Directors had given a description of the sort
of inquiry in something like the following terms If
our books and papers are to be ransacked, our clerks hur-
ried away to a secret tribunal, and subjected to an exami-
nation amidst a formidable array of Commissioners, law-
yers, and stertband-writers, the boasted freedom of our
Constitution, will become a mere name." This was far
from being a true description. A person was sent by the
Commissioners to the County Fire-office, and not only the
Managing Directors, did not object, but they stated to the
individual that the meaenre was a highly proper measure to'
be taken if there was any suspicion. The Commissioners
keel only exercised the power given to every Committee of
the T!ouse---of sending for persons, papers, and records;
and when a witness attempted to conceal or prevaricate,
they desired the clause in the Act of Parliament, applicable
to prevarication, to be read. The commission was consti-
tuted for the exprese purpose of making a full and accurate
investigation into the collection of the Public Revenue.—
They were bound, as a mai!er of right, to inquire into the
collection of the Revenue arising from stamps. They had
thought it necessary that the inquiry should extend to the
collection of the Revenue in England, Scotland, and Ire-
hnd. The revenue derived from stamps was not less than
7,000,000/. They had made a Report, and, in conse-
quence of that Report it was found necessary to reconstruct
both the superintending powers in &otland and England.
One of the duties of the collectors of !damp.; was to super-
intend the collection of duties on insurances. in certain
cases the duties were remitted, upon an affidavit being
made by the party applying for their remission. It was
ashvious that inch a system might lead to much &sad, unless
strict examinations were made at the Stamp Office. 'These
atlidavite were made partly `ay Mr. Beafimont, and partly
by the Clelef Clerk. With respect to Mr. B. it appeared
that although for four or five years I,e said he bad alit-lined
the accounts, yet after that time he bed sesame ever looteed
at the accounts ; and notwithstanding that, he was the per-
whot
._!1 occasionally made affidavits of their accuracy. The
Aght Hon. Gentleman defended the course pursued by ,
Mrs Sykes, who, he said, had instituted the inquiry with
-111sPerfeet approbation of the Commissioners. It did so
liaPneenet'nwever, that out of five cases of charge, two were
zisemetly provsdi
send it was in this state that she affair

had been brought regularly before the Commissioners, who
were bound, on the statement laid before them, to take im-
mediate cognizance of its allegations. It was suggested
that a communication might have been sent to the Insur-
ance Office, and an explanation demanded, inasmuch
as the whole appeared to have originated in mistake. Now
it would have been Mr. Sykes's course to have done so,
provided he thought that the cause of inquiry originated in
mistake. He did not think so ; he had an opinion that it
originated in fraud, and he acted accordingly. The charges
were brought, and the defence was, that the ground of
charge either proceeded from mistake, or that it was a
contrivance of one of the clerks of the office. With re-
spect to its being a mistake, the thing was quite impossi-
ble ; the nature of the transaction rendered such a suppo-
sition out of the question. As to the other pretence that
it was a contrivance to injure the office, Mr. Beaumont
made a statement calculated to throw discredit on one of
the witnesses, and endeavoured, by the production of letters,
to confirm his account of this person. But one thing was
very curious, however—namely, that the person so charged
had no interest. in getting up the fraud. Was it to he sup-
posed that he would have entered into this complicated
scheme of destruction against his employers, and yet,
that when he should have accomplished his purpose, that
he should have made no earthly purpose of the instrument
50 contrived ; for he gave no information—he made no
discovery—and it would not have been detected, but for
the inquiries of the Commissioners ? Was it possible that
this person could have predicted the inquiry, and that he
would have made no possible use of the train of mischief
he had laid, until the existence of a Commission which it
was impossible he could have foreseen ? Thus, then, the
only effect that had accrued out of this elaborate act of re-
venge, on the part of this clerk, was to put so many pounds
into the pockets of the Company, without the slightest ad-
vantage to himself. They had proof of the hand-writing
of Shepherd, the clerk. But it was the evidence of all the
witnesses, that Mr. Beaumont was the direct influential
person in the Company—that nothing took place without
his knowledge—and that he generally superintended its
affairs. Again, although it was said:that one clerk had
received his instructions from his predecessors, yet it was
proved that in this case the two clerks, who were speci-
fied, never saw each other. He did not mean to make
any charge against any individual, but he was firmly
of opinion, that the office was the responsikle party.—
He must beg to refer to one other statement of
the Honourable Gentleman—he had stated, that this was a
question of only a few shillings, whereas he referred to an
affidavit, which alluded to an amount of 756/., all the
items of which, he contended, were a direct fraud. He
had only to say, that the entries now under consideration
were fraudulent, and that the claims made on the Stamp-
office, in consequence, were illegal, improper, and un-
founded. He did not mean to say that Mr. Beaumont had
put the money in his pocket--perhaps he had no other end
in view than making the accounts square. The Right
Hon. Gentleman next alluded to claims upon cancelled
policies for 2,176/., of which 1,6261. was made at two dif-
ferent times. This mode of charging he denounced as
strongly tinctured with suspicion ; because as, by the course
of the office, all policies not used within the year ought to
be cancelled within that period, there could be no honest
pretence for claiming twice upon them. This he consi-
dered a material fact in this case.

Mr. HOBHOUSE asked whether the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman was stating this fact upon the authority of the printed
evidence?

Mr. WALLACE--No. What I have now stated Wag
disclosed at a subsequent examination—(Cries of " order.")
Mr. HOIIHOUSE—Then it is not part of the com-
plaint as occurring subsequently.

Mr. WALLACE presumed that he was at liberty to
state the whole case to the House, in defence of the Com-
missioners.—(" Order.")
Mr. HUME rose to order.

The SPEAKER thought it a question of relevancy to
the rnattor in debate, not of order.

Sir R. WILSON said they were meant as an appeal to
the liberality of the Right Hon. Gentleman.
Mr. WALLACE was willing to give up the line of ob-
servation, if it was considered unfair.—(Hear.) He him-
self did not, however, think so. His object was to show to
what an unlimited extent the practice of reviving policies
which had been once cancelled (if they had not been dead
before the money could be got upon them) might have
been carried. A great deal had been said of the high cha-
racter of those connected with the County Fire Office. He
had nothing to say against them, individually, and what be
was now stating was upon the authority of the Commis-
3ionera' Report. But he was not aware whence this esta-
blishment could derive any sanction which would make it
inassailable to the inquiries of Parliament. The Commis-
sion would have been a mockery, if it had not made the

complaint, if it did not report them. The Commission
had made its report, but it was in other hands to say,
whether the malversations detected should be punished or
not. This was not the first time he had felt that the task
in which he was engaged was an invidious one. Insinua-
tions the most monstrous and absurd had been thrown
out, as if a whole Government could, to a man, he guilty
of a conspiracy (for such was the charge) to oppress an
infirm old man, and, forsooth, to persecute an individual
who had been unmeritedly made the object of attack.—
(Hear.)—Was it likely that any set of public men could
be so blind to public opinion, to say nothing else, as to
engage in such a scheme? But Mr. Sedgwick was to turn
accuser in his turn. What case bad he made out for him-
self ? Even if his statement was clear and conclusive, as
he (Mr. W.) contended it was confused and unsatisfactory,
still it would not remove a particle of the charges made
against the Board, of which he was the head. The Commis-
sioners were charged with collusion ; he (Mr. W.) flung
back the charge upon the individual, and those implicated
with him. He charged them with collusion from almost
tl.e beginning. It was the duty of Mr. Sedgwick, as a
public officer, to have communicated the discovery of mal-
practices, when it came to his own knowledge in other
quarters. Had he done so ? The fact, he (Mr. NV.)
would mention which he thought conclusive. A number
which had been missing, was seen in Mr. Beaumont's
hands, and identified by one of the clerks, and from
all the evidence taken on the subject, it would appear,
that the information respecting it could not have been
furnished from the books of the Stamp Office. He
hoped, therefore, he had said enough to show, that the
Commissioners were warranted in the report which they
had made.

Sir ROBERT WILSON complained of the Right Hon.
Gentleman's introducing matter into his defence which was
not in evidence. He contended that the report so much
relied upon was built upon the most exceptionable evidence.
One of these witnesses was a clerk in the employment of
Mr. Beaumont, who had been discharged for bigamy, and
was afterwards accused of forgery. Mr. Beaumont bad
great reason to complain of the manner in which the Com-
missioners had conducted the inquiry. In justice to him
and the Insurance Office, they ought either to have brought
the matter to a prosecution, or given up the names of the
accusers, that they might he punished for their calumnies.
He now understood that it was only last night determined
upon to sue out Exchequer processes against the Fire Office,
but this would not give the accused party an opportunity
of vindicating themselves.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said, it was very true
proceedings had been taken in the Exchequer, and were
now in a great state of forwardness against these parties,
to compel them to come to an account with the Crown for
their deficiencies. He was unwilling to usa harsh words,
hut fraud had certainly been practised by some parties. If
it fell to his lot to open the case for the Crown in the
Court of Exchequer, he should carefully abstain from the
use of intemperate or offensive expressions, but colifine him-
self to the money claim. They could rebut the charge of
fraud in each claim in the Exchequer.—(Hear.)
Mr. CURWEN adverted to the hardship of keeping
these charges suspended over the beads of the County Fire-
office for two years, without either putting its accusers to
the proof, or giving the Fire-office gentlemen an oppor-
tunity of vindicating themselves.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, that
the Commissioners had a moot ardent duty to discharge,
which they had done without shrinking. It was their
duty to report the information which came before them,
even though it must implicate the individual who had pre-
sented this petition. There was enough shown to exhibit
a prima facie case, at least of a debt due to the Govern-
ment ; and his Right Hon. Friend had placed the matter
in a train for trial. He would not, therefore, prejudice
the case by further observations.
Mr. HUME said, that this was a complaint preferred
by these Commissioners against this Company, for having
practised systematic fraud for many years. It appeared to
him that in the whole course of this inquiry, the Commis-
sioners had been led away by some extraordinary power,
which he would that undertake to describe. The Commis-
sioners had accused Mr. Sfiiigwick of having connived at
these practices, although it was proved he had no connec-
tion with the offices until many years after the period. He
thought Mr. is-cdgwick was a very ill-used man, and was
sacrificed to some party piiiae or feeling.
Mr. WALLACE explained.
Colons DAVIES defended the conduct of the Commis-
sioners, and said he considered the removal of Mr. Sedg-
wick perfectly justifiable ; but it was too much when Gen-
tlemen opposite bad discharged their duty faithfully, that
the only return they should meet with from his (the Op-
position) side of the Houts was? indiscrimito,te celuure.--

(Loud cries of disapprobation from Mr. ilobhouse and
other Members on the Opposition benches.)
Sir FRANCIS BURDETT expressed his astonishment
at the language of the Hon. Officer, that the Cpmnais-
sioners had been visited with undeserved censure. He
agreed that Fire Offices were not to be considered more
sacred than other public companies, but they were not lees
sacred, nor were they less entitled to justice; and he could
not believe that the House would allow such an important
case to remain uninvestigated. The petitioners complained
of a denial of justice. He condemned those secret pro-
ceedings.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said the only point to
which the House ought to confine itself was, whether the
Commissioners had so grossly misconducted themselves as
to bring forward these charges against evidence; and
readily admitting, as he did, the respectability of this in-
surance-office, he must say, however, that the evidence,
though it may appear of a more or less serious character,
according to the different habits and constitution of men's
minds, bore out the Commissioners in their report.
Mr. HOBHOUSE, in reply, said he could not avoid
paying a tribute to the excellent speech of the Solicitor-
General. From such lawyers there was not much to fear,
and if he were on the Commission, the report, he had no
doubt, would he drawn up in a different spirit. But the
lion. and Learned Gentleman did not touch upon the real
grievance—that a charge was made which the individual
had no means of rebutting. His Hon. Friend, the Gallant
Colonel, stated it was the practice of this side of the House
to oppose every thing that came from Government. Now
if there was any thing with which he had to charge him-
self snore than another, it was giving too hasty an approba-
tion to propositions from that side ; and, as said in the
Eton Grammar, " I am now weary of this wedlock." The
evidence, in his opinion, did not bear out the report ; and
the House, taking all the circumstances into consideration,
would only think that he and his colleagues had done their
duty in bringing forward this petition and occupying the
attention of the House so lows.
Colonel DAVIES explained.
The petition was brought up, laid on tha table, and on
the motion that it be printed,
Mr. WALLACE objected.
Mr. lIOBHOUSE did not expect this motion to be op-
posed, or he should have been a little more vigorous to
meet it.

Air. WALLACE said it was a matter of indifference to
him whether it was printed or not ; and he should there-
fore withdraw his objection.
Ordered to be printed.

Mr. H. GRAtT AN obtained leave to bring in a Bill to
amend the laws regarding the setting fire to or demolishing
Roman Catholic altars or places for Roman Catholic wor-
ship in Ireland.