The Sun.
London, England, 1829-05-13 00:00:00

O

cellor. But I can take upon me to say from ex-
perience, that such a plan would bq attended with
great inconvenience. It is of great importance that
appeals from the decisions of the inferior tribunals
in bankruptcy, should be heard by the Lord Chan-
_ _

. .
cellor ; arid besides, such au arrangement as that
would not enable the Court of Chancery to under-
take the business of the equity side of the Ex-

chequer, without the assistance of another Judge.
I think that plan very objectionable in point of prin-
ciple, and that the one I now recommend is far
preferable. In either case there must be a new
Court and a new Judge, and that is only what I
now propose. Ido not say whether the subject is
now under the consideration of Government, but I

do say that the jurisdiction in Chancery ought to
remain as it is until a plan manifestly preferable can

be suggested and carried into effect. The Bank-
ruptcy Commissions are divided into what are
called lists, fourteen in number—in the metropolis;
and this machinery is very well adapted to the nature
of the work to be done. Sometimes there is a great
pressure of business in bankruptcy, and some:at-les
not, and the several commissions are very well
adapted to this state of things. A great part of the
business of the Commissioners is Ministerial ; but
they have also very important business of a judi-
cial character, which is upon the whole admirably
done. They have often an immense number of
. .

questions to decide; and although people are gene-
rally ready enough to appeal, yet few appeals com-
paratively are brought from their decisions, and
even of those which are brought under appeal few
are reversed. I appeal to the Noble and Learned
Earl on the cross-bench (Eldon) whether I do not
state the matter correctly, when I say that
the Town Commissioners do perform their duty
faithfully, and diligently, and well. I cannot say so
much for the Country Commissioners. 1 have read
the Report on this subject, made to the House of
Commons in ISIB by a Committee of that House,
of which a gentleman very competent to form a cor-
rect judgment on that subject, Mr. John Smith,
was Chairman, and I have been considering whether
the suggestions of that Committee ought not to be
carried into effect. I give no opinion on the matter
at present, but it does engage the attention of Go-
vernment. This Bill has one great object in view,
and that is to facilitate the hearing of causes as soon
as possible after they are ripe for hearing. When
that shall have been done, and causes shall be heard
soon after they are ready, we shall have done much,
and then will be the time to attend to the various
other particulars which have come under the consi-
deration of the Chancel), Commission. Then, with
the assistance of an enlightened Commission, I hope
we shall succeed in removing all just grounds of
complaint with reference to the proceedings of the
Court of Chancery, and with regard to the consti-
tution of that Court ; and in the mean time I have
only to say that the Commissioners, by the manner
in which they have executed the task assigned to
them, well deserve the warmest thanks and grati-
tude of their country. I move that this Bill be read
a second time.
The Earl of ELDON—It was his wish to take
some time to consider the provisions of this Bill
before he gave en opinion. As to the Report of the
Common Law Commissioners, I never heard of any
such Report having been presented till the day
.

before ye,terday. It was impossible for him at that
moment to follow the Noble and Learned Lord
through his description of all the stages of a Chan-
cery suit. But if he were obliged now to give an
opinion, there were some things stated by the No-
ble and Learned Lord in which he did not entirely
concur, although he did not mean to urge his ob-
jections in the way of opposition, till he considered
the whole of the various branches of the subject,
and then it was possible that in the main they might
agree on the subject. As to what had passed this
evening, he had nothing more to say, than that the
person with whom the Noble and Learned Lord re-
presented himself as having some political difference,
was one who, however ready to be angry, was not
unwilling to be reconciled when much more than
justice was done him.—(Hear, hear.)—When he
held the Great Seal, he had done every thing in his
power to remedy the inconveniences connected
with the Chancery system—and more he could not
do. He fully agreed with the Noble and Learned
Lord, that it was of the greatest importance that
the Lord Chancellor should decide as much person-
ally as he possibly could, and leave as little as pos.
sible to the decision of others. As to the Master's
Office, whatever might be said as to the delays that
occurred there, he was convinced that the delays
were owing much more to the suitors themselves
titan to the Master, The Lord Chancellor had much
to do in their Lordships' House ; bat he wished it to
be unders!ood, that it was of great importance that
the Lord Chancellor should devote a large portion
of his attention to his own Court, where he bad

they should attend in the Court of Exchequer, un-
less it happened that they should have no engage-
ment
at the moment in the Court of Chancery. The
Lord Chancellor now sat at Lincoln's-inn, the Vice. '
Chancellor near him, and the Chief Baron of the
Exchequer at the lower part of Chancery-lane. The
leaders of a cause began in one Court, then posted
to another, and returned to reply to a speech which
they never heard. Under such circumstances how
could a Judge know the real merits of any case un-
less he took the papers home to read ? It was
most material, therefore, to consider if means could
not be devised to give the Lord Chancellor a better
attendance of the bar in his own Court. In agree-
ing to the second reading of the Bill he begged to be
considered as doing so without prejudice to any
opinion he might deliver on its future stages. No
man could deny that it was necessary to apply some
remedy to the existing evil, whatever difficulty there
might be in determining what it was proper to select.
Lord REDESDALE, when lie considered the
great increase of legal business, arising from the sub-
division of property, and the augmentation of the
public debt, was surprised that the Courts pro-
ceeded with so little delay.
The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered
to be committed on Monday next.—Adjourned.
(We observed Sir James Scarlett, Sir Charles
Wetherell, Mr. Sergeant Bosanquet. Mr. Sergeant-
Cross, Mr. Sugden, Mr. Bickersteth, and many
others of the long robe below the throne, as well
as numbers of Attorneys and Barristers below the
Bar, all anxious to hear the speech of the Lord
Chancellor.)

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—(LAST NIGHT.)
(A considerable number of persons had assembled
this afternoon in the neighbourhood of the House,
it being generally reported that Mr. O'Connell
would attempt to take his seat ; but, evidently much
to the disappointment of the curious, the Hon.
Gentleman did not make his appearance.)
Several private Bills were read a third time arid
passed.
Mr. Alderman WOOD moved the third reading
of the Bill for Improving the Approaches to the
New London Bridge.—Read a third time and passed.
Mr. GRATTAN moved for a return of the
number of Houses of Industry in Ireland, and the
sums expended therein for the maintenance of the
poor since the year 1825.
Mr. LINDSEY presented a petition from the
Hammermen and Corporation of Perth, against the
Scotch Gaol Enlargement Bill.
Mr. R.-GRANT presented similar petitions from
the boroughs of Inverness and Nairn.
Petitions to the same effect were also presented
from the boroughs of Linlithgow and Selkirk.
Mr. S. RICE presented a petition from the Apo-
thecaries of Limerick, praying that the laws relating
to Apothecaries in Ireland might not be altered.
EAST INDIA TRADE.
Mr. W. WHITMORE presented a petition from
Manchester, praying that the trade to India and
China might be thrown open. He fully agreed in
the prayer of the petitioners, but as this important
subject would came under the consideration of the
House on Thursday next, he would refrain on the
present occasion from making any observations.
Mr. LITTLETON presented a similar petition

from the Manufacturers of the Chamber of Com-
merce in the Potteries. He hoped ample oppor-
tunity would he given to supply Government with
the necessary information on this important subject,
and that it would be coolly and deliberately argued.
Mr. HART DAVIS presented a petition from
the Merchants, Bankers, and others, of the city of
Bristol, praying that the House would not grant
any extension of the East India Company's Charter.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM presented a similar pe-
tition from Carlisle, and another from a place the
name of which we did not hear.
Sir EDWARD KNATCHBULL presented a
petition from the Hundred of Tenterden, in Kent,
against that clause of the Bill, for regulating the
subject of Anatomy, which directed that the un-
claimed bodies of paupers dying in workhouses
should be given for dissection.
LIVERPOOL PETITION.
Mr. HUSKISSON said he rose for the purpose
of presenting a petition of paramount importance, of
which he had given notice yesterday, although he
did not anticipate any debate upon it, as the motion
of the Hon. Member for Bridgenorth on this mo-
mentous subject stood for Thursday night, yet
he would not feel gratified in not shortly stating the
grounds upon which the petitioners ventured to
address the House. It would be recollected in the
year 1813 the East India Company's Charter was
renewed, when a long itiqu;ry took place ; that in-
quiry was instituted in consequence of the number
of petitions that were at that time presented,
praying for a free participation in the trade to Bri-

often to establish precedents for the other Judges. fish India. The result of that enquiry it was not
He did not mean to say that this was not sufficiently necessary for him now to state. Men of the
attended to at present; but, at the same time, the greatest eminence and intelligence were examined
business of the Chancellor in this House did some- ma the subject, amongst whom were Mr. C. Grant
times trench on the time that was much required in and Sir Thomas Monroe. It certainly was the
the Court of Chancery. When, in 1801, he took opinion of these eminent characters, that the free
the Seals as Lord Chancellor, he had but compara- intercourse with India would not increase the
tively few Appeals and Writs of Error, although trade, the natives of that country leading such
many matters at Common Law were now disposed a simple mode of life that there was no proba-
of in the -Hay of cases, which were then turned into hint), of extending commerce amongst them.
the shape of special verdicts. But then there were He believed, however, that every person must allow
at that time DO Appeals from Ireland—whereas that the opinions contained in this petition were
since the Uniou, there was a perfect deluge of Ap- those of persons best acquainted with the commerce
pails, both from the Irish Court of Chancery and of Great Britain. The trade was partly thrown
from the Equity side of the Exchequer there. And open, under many obstacles and many difficul-
then, the Court of Session in Scotland was divided ties to persons who know nothing of the country.
into two Courts, and that almost doubled the num- Commerce might be partly said to have been thrown
ber of appeals from that country. Upon this divi- open on the Ist of April, 1814. Now the country
,ion, when, instead of appeals coming from the had had the experience of about fifteen years. If
Court of *cssion, sitting as one Court, they came he supposed that fifteen years, even in the life of an
from each of the divisions, the appeals became in- individual, would not leave him in a period of in-
credibly more nunnefous. At that time there was fancy, still when it related to the commerce' of
a proposition under consideration, that a Court two great parts of the globe, he could not but
of Error should be established in Scotland, consider it any thing short of a sufficient experience.
something like what prevailed here, when the He would not go into the details which had already
decisions of the separate Courts were reviewed been stated to the House by other Hon. Members,
by the twelve Jodges, which, no doubt, pre- but he thought it necessary to say, that in the year
vented many cases from coming to this House 1814, when the trade was first thrown open, the
which otherwise would have come to it; and whole export of this country to India, amounted to
so it might have been with Scotch cases only one hundred and sixty thousand pounds, but
if that proposition had been acted on, and pro- in the last year the export amounted to 5,800,0001.
bably it would have been a great improvement.— Another complaint of the petitioners was, the mono-
He repeated, that it was of great importance that poly of the trade to China by the East India Corn-
the Lord Chanfellor should sit in the Court of parry. He thought it singular indeed that all
Chancery more freiwntly than, from the pressure foreign countries should have the privilege of
of business in this House,
,he was sometimes en- trading to the English ports there, and carrying
abled to do. *rider a regulatii-iti of the late Lord back their return cargoes of British produce to
Liverpool, he (Lord Eldon) sat three thas in the China direct, whilst the English merchants were
week in this house on Appeals, and these thee debarred f• from doing so. He knew that in the
days were abstracted from the business of the Court course o .last year no less than eleven American
of Chancery, and at the expeyce of the suitors of ships had entered the port of Liverpool, and
that Court—very much to the detriment, and, as it hud taken out cargoes which they were at liberty to
appeared to him, not a little to the scandal of the carry to any part of th,e world. It appeared the
efusc„cellor's Court. There was another circurn, more strange that the Company should persist
stance wind he was happy the Noble Lord advert- in keeping up the prohihitiori in respect to
ed to—and that was the regulation of the Courts British merchants, when others were exempt
with reference to the attendance of Counsel, as he from such restrictions, arid he was also led
Keit t,baX without some such regr44ion nothing effec- to think that the monopoly was a serious injury to
tual coulcl bg 4one. How, when the Co4risel were trade in general. These were the principal grounds
passing and repa.as;og from one Court to another.; upon which the petitioners called for redress, and he
having causes going or in each at the same time, apprehended that he had said enough to show the
Gould
,the Judge obtain from them a thorough view House that the subject was worthy of the fullest
of the ,eaute?—it sometimes happeniil,:g that a lead- consideration. Indeed? independently of its
ing Counsel cas-e;te in to reply to an argument, sloi,one great importance as a' commercial auestion, he
word of which he had heard. What in such a case thour;ht that he might put it even 'upon higher
could the 'Judge do, except take home his papers ground. He considered that we held that cotintry
to read, and gain by his own labour that information by conquest, and in proportion as we stimulated the
which he ought to have been supplied with by tile exertions of that people, so were we bound to en-
Counsel? He thought there wan great Weight deavour to raise them in the scale of moral worth.
t
-co thp proposition for transferring the Equity M. BA4IAITP said that this was not the proper
jUristbctiOn of the Exchequer to the Court i time to go into any detail on the great subject of
of ClaMcery. Nie remembered when he and the renewal of the :Charter. ip would only ob-
the late Sir Jaines ..kianstleid had to conduct a serve that, by the monopoly of the East India Com:-
eansid,erable portion of the triages came into pany, they prevented this country sharing in that
the doort,of Chancery, and they wefe atm) soli- trade which foreigners carried on. He would sug-
cited to atterideisopeg in the Court of Exchequei:,— I lest to the Chairman of the East India House wile-
Put the way they managed was this :—To those .Iher; before the renewal of the Charter, it would
wire desired their attendance intiy Exchequer, they not be a gracious a 4---t
,to bring in a Bin g , giving
to the
said that they would attend the consultations of other traders of this eotiatrY a participation in that
their Exchequer Counsel, and give their best advice trade which was carried on by foreigners.
and assistance, butt that it must not be expected that • MT, ASTELL trusted the House would not form

- • AkltNt
N. 7

any opinion uiibk the subject till they heard the op-
site statement.

Sir C. BURRELL would not now go into the
question of monopoly; but he must say that the
price of tea was dearer by one half in England than
in any other country. It was alio very hard on the '
shipping interest that America and other foreign
nations should make large profits at the expense of
our exports. On these grounds he agreed entirely
in the observations of the Right Hon. Gentleman.
General GASCOYNE supported the petition.
Sir G. PHILLIPS, in the course of some obser-
vations to the same effect, contended that even the
partial opening of the trade had been productive of
the best results, and if the monopoly were done
away, a very great extension of commercial inter-
course must follow.

Mr. WHITMORE spoke briefly in support of the
petition.
The petition was then read, and it proved to be
from the merchants of Liverpool.
On the motion that it do lie on the table,
Mr. ASTELL said he must deny that tea was
cheaper in foreign countries than in this, considering
that Government imposed upon it a duty of 100 per
cent., from which foreigners were exempt. On the
contrary, he maintained that tea was not only not
dearer in this country than in foreign countries, but
much cheaper ; and the Right Hon. Gent. and others
never once took the superior quality of it into consi-
deration.

tiaras which appliet. the supply and retail of good
malt liquor to the working classes of this' country.
There was no single manufacture of this country so
interfered sei.th, and having such numerous restric-
tions placed on it, as this manufacture, which was
identified with. our own soil, and constituted the
national beverage of the people. He would shortly
state to the House what the process of malting was.
The process was a very simple one. The barley was
wetted till sprouting took place, which vegetation
was subsequently checked by heat from a kiln. The
sprouting produced a saccharine matter, and that
was the whole process of malting. Would the
House believe that, till the other day, there were
40 long and complex Acts of Parliament regulating
this simple process ? These 40 Acts were now,
he was aware, reduced into one—reduced, did he
say ? He ought to have said expanded into one,
with additional restrictions. The Honourable Mem-
ber here described the various regulations to
which the maltster was obliged to submit with re-
spect to the size of the cistern for wetting malt, and
with respect to the notices he was forced to give be-
fore he could perform the smallest portion of his
work. After the malt was taken out of the cistern,
it must be laid on couches, as they were called, and
the grain must not he rugged in the edges, under a
penalty of 2001. The maltster was obliged to keep
a registry of the name of each person who sold him
barley, and who bought of him malt; and to sign a
certificate, which must correspond with the entries
made in the register, and his premises were liable to
be entered night or day by the excise officer. This
course of proceeding was very harassing to the malt-
ster, and he was confident that a remedy might be
applied without diminishing the revenue of Govern-
ment. He next came to the overwhelming duties
with which the manufacture of malt was loaded, and
which amounted to no less than 3,800,000/. per an-
num. This tax, too, was not levied at all in an
equable manner from the different counties. Norfolk
paid three times mere than Devonshire, though
Devonshire was five times larger, and paid a higher
rental than Norfolk. Suffolk paid three times the
amount of Devonshire. Hampshire three times
more than Herefordshire, and Bedfordshire three
times more than Cheshire. Bedford paid five times
more tax than Durham. This tax alone, in 38
years, from 1791 to 1828, had raised, from the con-
sumers of malt liquor in England and Wales, above
133,700,000/. sterling. The malt-tax, however im-
politic, is borne by all consumers, but the beer-tax
was borne by the consumers of malt liquor sold. All
those who were rich enough to brew their liquor at
home were exempt from the tax, but the working man,
who was too poor to do so, was obliged to pay the tax.
Nearly four-fifths of all beer brewed paid the tax,
the average of which, for 1823, 1824, 1825, and
1826, amounted to 3,300,000/., and in 38 years,
namely, 1791 to 1828, the amount raised by this
poor consumer's tax was no less than 106,000,000/.
While the quantity of malt had been declining since
1786, the number of barrels paying dirty had in-
creased, and the effect of these taxes and restrictions
would be to drive capital from the trade, and create
monopolies. He now came to the third cause of
the decline in the consumption of malt liquor, and
that was the restrictions which were placed in the
retail supply. It was at present quite optional with
the Magistrates to grant or refuse licences, and they
generally made it the rule to refuse licences, and the
exception to grant licences. He would wish to see
the contrary the case ; and that licences should be
given freely, on the parties applying entering into
recognizances to abide by certain regulations. He
would venture to say, that in consequence of the
monopoly in the malt trade, public-houses were
worth 201. per annum more rent than formerly,
which additional rent in 50,000 public• houses would
amount to a tax of 1,000,000/. charged on the con-
sumers of malt. It appeared that in 60 collections of
excise, into which England and Wales are divided
(including London), there are above 49,501) pub-
licans, of whom 23,000, being above half the coun-
try publicans, brewed their own beer, the rest being
served by the brewers. These are curiously distri-
buted round the country in three zones. The first
takes in London, in which there are 4,430 publicrins,
of whom 39 only brewed their own beer. The
second zone took in the couuties round Lon-
don, Kent, Surrey, Hants, Isle of Wight, Mid-
dlesex, Hertfordshire, Cambridgeshire, to Lynn,
and Norwich, .in Norfolk. This zone contain-
ed about ten thousand publicans, of whom eight hun-
dred and twenty brewed at home, being about 1-12th.
The third zone contained Northumberland, West-
moreland, Cumberland, and Durham, Whitby, Ha-
lifax, and to Hull, in Yorkshire, and across the king-
dom to Manchester and Liverpool. In this zone
there were 5,871 publicans, of whom 787 brewed at
home, being less than 1-7th. It appeared, there-
fore, that in the districts in which the brewers had
the monopoly of the public-houses, about 5,000,000
of the people were supplied by between 200 and 300
great firms. Having stated what was the effect in
the districts supplied by brewers, he would now
state the result in three districts where brewers had
no influence. (The Hon. Member then named the
counties comprised in these three districts, but with
such extreme rapidity that it was impossible to fol-
low him ; they were, however, principally northern
and north-western counties.) In those districts,he
said, six persons out of every seven brewed their
own beer, and the superior quality of the liquor,
compared with the brewers' manufacture, was evi-
dent. If a visit to that beautiful work of art, the
Menai-bridge, or any other cause, should take the
Right Hon. Gentleman into :hat part of the country,
he begged him to taste the malt liquor between
Wolverhampton and ShrewSbury, and he would at
once be convinced of its superiority. With respect
to the metropolis, 1,200,000 persons were supplied
by only three or four great firms. The malt-tax
was a duty which fell upon all consumers of beer,
but the beer tax was an additional duty on all those
who were not rich enough to brew at home. The
monopoly of the public-houses by the brewers was
an additional tax also on those who were neither
rich enough tobrew at home norbuy their beer whole-
sale. He would briefly state the amount of revenue
derived from the duties imposed on the manufacture of
beer. The malt-tat produced 3,800,000/.; the beer.
tax 3,300,000/.; the hop-duty, in 1827, 400,0001.;
the maltsters' licences 20,000/.; the brewers' li-
cences 53,7001.; the public-house licences 164,0004;
besides this, he estimated the additional rent of
public-houses, occasioned by the monopoly of
1,000,0001., making a total of 8,737,000/. per an-
num. This immense dory was not levied equally
upon all classes of the community, but fell almost
exclusively on the poor and industrious portion.
Four-fifths of the malt consumed in England and
Wales were used by public brewers, the remaining
fifth by private brewers. The annulil consumption
of malt was about '21,000,000 of bushels, each
bushel paying a duty of Ss. Taking the average
price of barley to be 45., the duty amounted to no
less than 200 per cent. en the value of the raw ma-
terial. He asked the landed gentlemen of the coun-
try, who were interested in the improvement of
agriculture, whether they should not whisper in
the ear of the 4ight Hop. Gentleman that he should
grant A Committee to ipvestipte this uhjeCt?
What other wanufactnre in the country was treated
in the same way ? If a duty amounting to 200 per
cent. on the value of the raw material were imposed
upon any other branch of manufacture, how would
the manufacturers pour out of their hives and buzz
in Ministers' ears ? What an outcry would they
raise against so onerous a regulation. The Right
Hon. Gentleman might employ all his eloquence to
induce the people of England
(Mr.to scioairitesyum),e‘ithitehphrois-
Barleyeorn in
'lrdi'lit;iu:snictrbsigiebotfPlic')anvhdei,r;w.;•oirubltd4ceh4rida'inlyir lie°alltnliirri out or the
40. The number of spirit licences throughout the
country had increased amazingly since 1800, whilst
the number of ale licences had remained stationary.
In 1800 the number of spirit licences was 31,097 ;
end in 1827 it was 42,5901 being an increase of
11,000 in twenty-seven years. The increase in the
number of ale licences, during the same period, was
only 300. How cautious was the House of entrast-
ing magistrates with power to grant ale licences,

Mr. HUSKISSON, in reply, said that the Hon.
Chairman thought that tea could be had better and
cheaper here than in foreign countries, would he
only be so kind as to grant a licence to his (Mr.
Huskisson's) constituents, and he (Mr. Huskisson)
would engage that they would bring a great quan-
tity of tea into the English market from the Con-
tinent, and bear with all the disadvantages of the
etifferenee of price and quality.—(Hear, hear, and
laughter.)—For his own part, he knew nothing of
this subject further than what he had heard from
persons every way competent to form a correct
judgment upon it. When he found, for instance,
that tea was only half the price in New York that
it was in London, he felt satisfied, that it must be
infinitely cheaper in foreign countries than in Eng-
land. By u certain regulation, the East India Com-
pany had pledged themselves not to put tea up to
sale till after it had been two years in their ware-
houses.—(Cries of " No, no, from Mr. Astell.)—
He understood the fact to be so, and the reason
alleged was tile necessity of keeping up the stock.
But what was the consequence to the public ?
Why, that the quality of the article became de-
teriorated, and the price increased. Again, he
would ask if the Hon. Chairman was disposed to
grant him the licence to import tea from the Con-
tinent.—(A laugh.)
Sir GEORGE PHILLIPS said, that the people
of this country paid 2,000,0001. annually to
support the monopoly of the East India Company
in the article of tea.

whilst they suffered them to issue licences for. the
selling of poison almost without limitation. It Weaof
rather curious that the increase in the nunibuar
spirit licences which he had pointed out had u",.14
place exclusively in the country. London, it "-in
appear, was saturated before. The total increasS,'
the number of ale licences during the last WOW-
seven years was, as he had already stated, only, ono,
but the average upon the last seven years was 4,'":0,
In the same period, however, there had been 1011.0
crease in the number of wine and spirit licence° to
six times that amount. In 1829 the nunibrffo.
wine licences was 9,900, and in 1827 it was 10,0‘,Ni‘
In 1820 the number of spirit licences was 36Puv;;
and in 1827 it was 42,000. He would now sty
what had been the increase in the consumptionbe°
spiritsdur
consumptioni ng
wastlie 12,000,0001asen years.gdio gallons;
;In i :812440nt iot
was 13,800,000 gallons ; in 1825 it was 17,7uv!""
gallons; in 1826 it was 22,900,000 gall°/11'
in 1827 and 1828 it was 24,500,000 gall°.
acfo creased
oisneecadrch eacsoenyseionamr. In
cprti
consumption of
f wsconnectionpaisri
t nsott
htwohraietth
}gad
i s
bee
stance which called for the serious consideration
that House ? Did it not behove them to take some
,pi ts;
measures for decreasing the consumpticn of
and increasing that of the native beverage ? The 11'c f
was, that malt liquor was undersold in every Part, ;
the country, and spirit shops were set up in Pa"
where they never had been before, and persons
had no more idea of drinking gin than poison has
now become regular consumers of it. He had
stated the vexatious regulations affecting the Me-
ing trade, and he thought that under the circa!):
stances there ought to be a committee, if it had a.
other object than to inquire if it might not be pract.l;
cable to put those regulations on a better system. le
was the opinion of all the maltsters with whom 11;
had had the opportunity of communicating, that dy
system of certificates would, if properly modifie.'
answer instead of the numerous regulations now 1.11
operation. The Hon. Member then briefly rear
rcatiriocuonloi
tulated the chief objects of his motion, and c°,ll;
eluded by expressing a hope that the result Is a
committee would be to give to the Exchequer d
better revenue, to the poor a better beverage, sfl
to the landed interest a better return for their pal"
duce. He then moved that a select committee be
appointed to inquire into the restrictions in the
manufacture of malt, with a view to ascertain how

they affected the middle and poorer classes. firn
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQ:
assured the House, that there was no part of his
duty more painful than that which obliged liia°t°
refuse motions, which though ostensibly for incitorY!..
must substantively lead to the reduction of taxation.
If the object of the Hon. Member was to call WI.
him to inquire into the several branches of this trade'
with the view to remove or remodel such regulation!
as might be found oppressive to those engaged °d
it, he assured him he would be disposed to lel.,
his best attention to the subject, and would eau
give his assistance in removing any restriction
which were not essential to the collection tb:
duty, or the protection of the honest trader; bui
the Hon. Member, though he had shown great
knowledge of all the details of this subject,
consider that many of those regulations to which;ed
objected were not merely fiscal, but were sugge
by a large portion of those engaged in the 08,16
with the view of protecting the honest trader 00,1.1)11-
the introduction into the market of malt, on leo
duty might be evaded, by the want of them.
should also consider, that since there had bens
any revenue derived from malt, these regutott:,.
had been in existence. It was not quite 'o.4'
then, to attribute the decrease in the consll,',:t
tion of malt to the operation of such causes.
in other respects, the Honourable Member wits
mistaken, in ascribing the fact, that the e 0:,
sumption of malt had not increased in proportionti!.
the increase of population—to the increase of the te/4
on that article. He would readily. idgliC to
the
Hon. Member, that the taxing of any article of eon-
sumption to mote than it could bear, tended to de-,
crease the. consumption of that article. Thin,W.,ll ,9
an evil of taxation which could not be preventeo
but while he admitted this, he must remind the
Hon. Member that there' were other causes 'to which
the non-increase of consumption of malt in proP°P
tion to the increase of population must be attributed.
The Hon. Member would find, if he looked to other
ch
articles of consumption, the use of many of whi'
had been exchanged for that of malt, that its in-
crease bore a proportion to the increase of poptili',
tion. Tea, for instance, the consuMpt;on of whim,
in the year to which the Hon. Member referre,
(1787) was 6,233,000 pounds, while in 1823 (the.;
last return that he had seen) it was 28,000,000 9.1..
pounds. The Right Hon. Gentleman then wer,!,
on to shew that to the increased consiimption'oA
tea, coffee, and wine, each, which was, to a certain
_
extent, and amongst certain classes, made a substitut7l!
for malt liquor, the non-increase of the consurnPt.,iee
of the latter must be attributed. Much of this ebale
of the article of consumption depended oPcin fai
and fashion, the result of which could not be gust the
against. As to the Hon. Member's objeetibPs Troalt.
condensation of the forty Acts on the subject o
into one, lie thought that so far from censure,
Right Honourable Friend the Master of the MS'
(Mr. Herries) was entitled to much piaise for hairl.",,7
taken the pains to reduce that ill-digested mass
regulation into one intelligible Act. The o°,l
Member had adverted to the tax on beer, 'ills
wished for its reduction. Now any reduction
that article which would have the effect of gill,
any sensible relief to the consumer, would bestif;--,
a loss of revenue as the country was not in a coon,
tion to afford. The small reduction of one fal3tl.'ll 1n
a pot of porter would not be any relief vioiia"
i
naming to any class, and yet even that small. serit
would create a diminution of revenue to the alfi'sin'a
`e.
of 600,000/. a year. As to the question of duty ,
licences, it was more a matter of police than of rit
venue, and was a point on which he did not en,
necessary to touch. The motion of the Hon• ive-bi
htoerkel. would lup dg oto the reduction of a duty the 10g0..-ki.
a large portion of the revenue, which was neees.-t
credit,thepublicit. and he therefore 71
„ 60'
Mr. MONCK said that the beer trade, 25
himself bound to oppose
regulated, was certainly a most extraordinary 1;ot
maly. There were three classes of brewers, e'en' pti
which was obliged to use distinct apparatO:
We!at°
class brewed strong beer, hnt h; sy4io riot allo.o:
brew "interinediate,i or small beer. The bre74
of the intermediate was not allowed to brews tcfrolai
beer, and the small beer brewer was prevented 17 he
brewing either of the two other sorts.
asked, should this absurdity be allewed to contiged
and why not end them all at once, by putting a
duty on the malt, and then let every one brew fa'the
pleased? He would entreat the attention 0'
country gentlemen to this subject.
Mr. W. SMITH said, that if the result of the
Committee had no other effect than loy encolo4,lof.
the consumption of malt liquors to decrease ths"o4
well worth the attention of Government. spirits in London, it would be most important; Isl.'
Sir 4. )vR9ITgsi.,PY .edn(ielireti that the rot
rnoviirof tie present regulated duty
at the least its alteration, would be productive °fa.,
equivalent advantage to the revenue by the prop of
inducement held out to the manufacture he
malt to increase the quantity of barley malted. .I,t,
regulations were now inadequate to their okle-te
The duty operated also so as to prevent the P!'ivg,i..
manufacturer making the most of his skill and se'eli,lo
The mode of proceeding by the Excise for the
pose of recovering penalties had given gr9ql,,,a
general dissatisfaction, and n..;thing in his ""ifi
wonld • e more di)j.e'ctidriable' than the man°er d ,
which the offiCers of the Excise were apporti6no,
Ot‘t'i barleY,
se:
their rev/ ,rd on convictions under the Lxcise la 01,
He would'suggest the propriety of a substitution .e
a handsome salary instead of those objectionable
wards on conviction.—(Hear.)
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQ-Ho,
said, the change now suggested had been cora
plated by Government for some time. It had bi,yrCi,
intended to appoint a barrister, with a
.goOd nill%;
to the superintendence of this department Of the e

else, in the same way as it had been determined to
act with respect to the corresponding officer in the
department of the customs. Rewards as respected
these high officers were to be dispensed with.
Mr. EDWARD DAVENPORT regretted the
Mail brewers were liable to such severe penalties
under the existing excise laws. This required exa-
n'instion and revision, for they were, as a body,
enainently conducive to the convenience of the public.
Lord MILTON had reason to be convinced that
the effect of the restrictions imposed by recent Acts
of Parliament on maltsters, was to induce them to
o" uPs at least since the Act of 1827, the trade
manufacture of malt.
Mr. SLANEY, in reply, insisted strongly on the
necessity of adopting the suggestions which he had
submitted to the House, more particularly as the
duties affected barleys of different growths, and as
respected the permission to sprinkle malt. By the
Present regulation as to sprinkling, it was proved
that one-fifth of the saccharine matter was lost in
the process prior to and during the brewing. After,
ho.wever, the pledge which had been given by the
Right Hon. Gentleman opposite, to direct his at-
tention to the minutiae of the subject, he should
content himself with the benefit the public was
likely to receive from the circumstance of this pledge
being extracted from the Right Hon. Gentleman to
onsult its interests, and he should therefore de-
clineo press the subject further, and beg leave to
wthdraw his motion.
The motion was accordingly withdrawn.
MANUMISSION OF SLAVES.
Mr. WILMOT HORTON begged to know
whether there had been any recent order issued
from the Colonial-office, relative to the manumission
of slaves in the colonies' of Berbice and Demerara;
and also to ask whether, If there were any such or-
derissued, the Right Hon. Secretary for the Colo-
.ies would have any objection to accede to the mo-
tion he was about to make for its production. I
to th
Sir G. MURRAY should make no opposition
his he production of such a document if it were in
production
tMr. WILMOT HORTON said his object was
o bring the subject of the manumission of slaves in
W the West Indies before the House, in a manner which
ould enable it to decide on the propriety of its in-
terference with the executive on so important an
°hject. The Right Hon. Member then moved for
It
c°l3y of the Order in Council respecting the ma-
mission of slaves in Demerara and Berbice, which
l'ad been issued since the examination of evidence
tlPon that subject before the Privy Council.
ECCLESIASTICAL COURTS.
Sir J. NICHOLL moved for leave to bring in
a till to regulate the duties, salaries, and emolu-
Ments of officers in certain Ecclesiastical Courts in
England.
f Mr, PEEL was glad that one so enabled by pro-
e'''°nal experience and ability as his Right Hon.
and Learned Friend, had taken up the subject of the
duties and remuneration of the officers in the Eccle-
siastical Courts.
After a few words from Dr. PHILLIMORE, leave
was then given to bring in the Bill.
BULL-BAITING.
bi4r. C. PALLMER moved for leave to bring in
Mr. to prohibit the practice of bull-baiting.
GORDON objected to the Bill.
'r.. W. SMITH supported the Bill.
Mr. C. PALLMER was sorry that he was in-
audible when stating the ground on which he was
ticluced to bring forward the present measure. In
!822, an Act was passed against cruelty to animals
's which the. " bull" was strangely omitted. The
consequence of this omission was, that a person
lailty of cruelty to that particular animal could not
e punished• till the omission was remedied, arid that
*lts the object of his present Bill.
LMr. PEEL thought the Hon. Member for Surrey
better, if he meant to remedy the defects of the
tzilting law; have brought forward a more general
Iden tittsure. There were many animals to protect as
as bulls,—there were bears also—(a n
laugh)lh—
were made the subject of cruel pastime. Why
t,ian did not the lion. Gentleman extend his Bill
acts of cruelty against bears and badgers ?—(A
ls
ugo.)--Ile
„was perfectly serious, and did not in-
'entimsily provoke laughter. Why not prevent
cruelty to those animals as well as to bulls. Why not,
anthe same principle, punishthe equally cruel and cold-
blooded amusement of pigeon-shooting ?—(Hear,
hear.)--Why notrotect lions ? Were not the
P
feelings of the
public as much offended by a
baiting of lions as they were by bull-baiting ? recent
(Hear.)..--In a word, should riot the measure be
general, impartial, and consistent,—or the means of
checking all be equally left to the improved habits
sod opinions of the people ? There ought to be
tome principle laid down for legislation : otherwise,
Cession aftei session, the House might be called
tpon to entertain similar measures.
Upon the question that leave be given to bring in
the Bill, the House divided—
Ayes ................. 28 I Noes 73
Majority against the introduction of the Bill, 45.
BUCKINGHAM PALACE.
Lord LOWTHER moved the committal of the
(land Revenue Bill.
On the House resolving itself into a Committee,
Lord ALTHORP inquired whether there was
4hy estimate of the expences which would be in-
curred in the repairs of Buckingham-house ?
Lord LOWTHER replied that the last estimate
teas before the House.
, J. WOOD called the attention of the House
‘0 the clause in the Bill, for if it passed in its pre-
tlstit state it Would lead to an unlimited expenditure.
1e:25
was ue to
, when it was proposed to apply the surplus
.
tthheatrebuilding of Buckingham-house, it
stand'stite'd a part of the old materials would
ceand an estimate was given in of a sum riot ex-
the Ing 252,6904 as sufficient for the purpose. In
f recourse of last year a Committee had been called
b°ol(titi consequence of the unsightly appearance of the
rev ng; and an advance was made from the land
rilorenue in order to allow the building to proceed
it a:raPidly. From the report of that Committee
,4 ,ePeared that there was no security against the
tq tuba._
jb te, being exceeded to an unlimited extent, for
tt nine last year, the architect stated that the sum
slioe4„ded amounted to 432,9261.—(Hear.)—He
seaiii-iited. that so far from the old materials being
sf o' n'they
e, had produced only the paltry sum
on He (Mr. Wood) wished to see the
fri egrsitTl.l* suitably lodged ; but he complained of
been°ntr° it n.
money in this manner, without
o"f9liairliamelit, especially when, it had
4tr ',lavished on what was a monument of bad taste.
the wash stated that 50,000/. had been expended on
that which had proved useless. He also stated,
its ~,4'to respect to the dome,
. for want of a model,
teas tillable to judge of its probable effect, and
The'n,''Prised at it when he saw it.—(A laugh.)—
isact of 6th Geo. IV. was, in his opinion a
wtbei/e4o4°sfecoxnitranct
"the
between the Crown and
Crown lands were given up
,131y4t1Leecota'it:'rieeventuee was allotted to the Sovereign.
Peration of that Act,. the whole surplus
o'n_ the tolue of the Crown might be be swallowed up
should the case
lfioUspeal'l.tiee7di(rere'nt from tiTt of
inie 112°r Castle ? In the latter case Commissioners.
Pell NI appointed, under whose controul and re
buskkiihility the money was expended; while, on
been 1164PQ-house, half a mill* of money had
theess/Peoded before the House knew. any thing
les h•uatter, and the present expense might not be
Ought
700,0001. to 800,0004 The House
t° have an explanation of this profligate waste
the teto
P°l'lie money atperiod such a of distress;
to use yould otherwise grossly desert its duty
Th4l. a starving people.—(hear.) admitCHANCELLOR; of the EXCHEQUER
soy,s;;eu that that the estimates had been con-
-01
ass u
y exceeded, which had arisen partly from
of th
Ha: of form, and not from any wish on the part
eststesset Who had the management
.. of the Crown
° deceive. The alteration in respect to the
Pga had
that taken place from its being deemed betterh
buii inleY should stand at a distance. How
.fraert
trsi• g Would eventually satisfy the 401uni " intecture he could not tell ; different individuals

entertained different opinions. There were few
persons who did not admire the buildings in Regent-
street ; yet durn,g the progress of the work, not a
month passed bout some witty and poignant re-
marks on those buildings.—(Hear.)—All he asked
was, that persons would not be too hasty in judg-
ing what the general appearance of the building
would be.

Mr. BANKES lamented the haste with which
the work had been begun, which prevented the dis-
covery that the project *of altering the old building
was hopeless, until considerable progress had been
made. A splendid palace might have been built in
a better situation, at less expense than had been in-
curred. Take the building on either side, take it in
front, flank, or rear, the spectator could get no po-
sition in which the view could gratify him.—(Hear.)
Mr. KEMP expressed himself not unwilling to
grant a farther advance of money, though it was im-
possible not to find fault with some part of the
work.

Mr. A. BARING objected very much to the
manner in which Parliament had been treated through-
out this transaction. In the first place, it had been
discovered, by the merest accident, that 250,000/.
which had been placed in the hands of commissioners,
under the French treaty, for the most sacred purpose,
that of liquidating claims which British subjects had
upon France,—had been handed over to the Com-
missioners of Woods and Forests, to be applied to a
very different purpose. A more discreditable transac-
tion was never known or heard of. (Hear.) That cir-
cumstance was kept concealed from the sight of Par-
liament for nearly two years, and then chance
brought it to light. What, he would ask, was the
cane in the present instance ? Why they had now
discovered, and again by the merest accident, that
the Noble Lord, in a ~Bill for consolidating the laws
relative to the revenue derivable from his Majesty's
woods and forests, had introduced a clause authoriz-
ing the expenditure of an immense sum of money,
the produce of those lands, on the same object which
had already swallowed up the 250,000/. which had
been given up by the Commissioners for the adjust-
ment of claims on France.—(Hear, hear.)—That
Bill might have passed without observation, and no
person have known that 440,0001. or 450,0001. ad-
ditional (for such was the sum stated by the Noble
Lord), taken from these revenues, had been applied
to the building of Buckingham-palace. He should
like to know from the Noble Lord, whether that sum
of 450,000/. would be sufficient. [Lord Lowther
intimated that he had not stated that the sum of
450,0001. which might be derived from the woods
and forests, after other charges were met, must
necessarily be applied to the purpose alluded to.]
Well, then, would the Noble Lord be good enough
to state what sum it would be necessary to raise
for finishing this palace ? Was it meant to return
the 250,0001. that had been advanced by the Com-
missioners under the treaty with France ? and what
further sum would be requisite for completing this
project ?
Lord LOWTHER said, the Hon. Member was
not correct when he stated that a new clause, a
clause unknown before, had been introduced secretly
into this Bill, for the purpose of raising money for
finishing Buckingham-house. The Bill only con-
tained a clause which was contained in an Act
passed some years ago, and which, amongst other
matters, provided for the appropriation of the sur-
plus of the land revenues towards the expenses in-
curred in erecting the new palace. He utterly de-
nied that the clause was secretly introduced. There
was nothing whatever surreptitious in the proceed-
ing. The Act to which be alluded was passed in
the year 1825, and the present clause was intended
to sanction the principle recognized in it, by which
the surplus derived from the land revenues was
made applicable to the payment of expenses incur-
red by the building of the new palate. He was
asked, what money had been expended :on Buck-
ingham-house, and what the total expense was likely
to be ? Up to the 14th of February, he believed
the expense had been 346,000/., and the last esti-
mate given in by the Building Committee was
432,000/., as the sum which would complete the
edifice. The Commissioners of Woods and Fo-
rests, he might be allowed to observe, had no con-
trol over this expenditure. The accounts were
sent in by the Board of Works, and the Commis-
iioners of Woods and Forests paid them.
Lord MILTON said, it appeared, from what he
could understand, that there was no control what-
ever. The charges came from the Board of Works,
and the Commissioners of Woods and Forests were
bound to pay them ; and in a report made to the
House on the 3d of April, 1828, it was thus stated,
" Your committee understand that the Board of
Works have no control over this expenditure."
Lord LOWTHER—The Board of Works have
no control over the designs, but it is their duty to
measure what is done, and to see that the charge is
correct.

Mr. A. BARING was not aware that a clause of
the nature of that on which he had animadverted
had been inserted in a pre-existing Act of Parlia-
ment.

Mr. D. W. HARVEY observed, that this pro-
perty was treated as if it were exclusively the pro-
perty of the Crown ; but arrangements had been
made, confirmed by Acts of Parliament, which made
it as much the property of the public its any other
fund at the disposal of that House. They ought,
therefore, to bear in mind that this was part of the
Ways and Means of the country, and was perfectly
applicable to the exigencies of the State.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
said, the money given up by the French Commis-
sioners to the Woods and Forests was secured on
the revenue of the Crown. It was to be repaid
with interest, whenever the claims were proved.
That was the condition on which it was lent. The
land revenue, he admitted, had by an agreement
entered into with the Crown, become public pro-
perty—(hear, hear)—and it never was the object or
intention of Ministers to raise a palace for his Ma-
jesty at the expense of the private funds of the
Crown. But seeing that it was necessary to build
a palace for the King, they had made application to
that particular fund to which the present Bill referred.
Sir B. H. INGLIS inquired, whether it was in-
tended to throw a bridge over the canal in St.
James's Park. Gentlemen going to that House had
formerly found the bridge, which had been erected
there, extremely convenient.
Mr. PROTHEROE was of opinion that a car-
riage-road should be opened from Storey's-gate to
Buckingham-gate.
Mr. P. THOMSON complained that there was
no controul whatever over the expenditure in the
building of this palace. With respect to the
250,0001. borrowed, as they were informed, from
the Commissioners appointed to settle the claims on
France, lie had always thought, and he still thought
that it was one of the most unjust acts ever com-
mitted by any Government.
Mr. J. WOOD said, if his Majesty's Govern-
ment would give him an assurance that the sum of
432,0001. would cover all the expellees of the pa-
lace, then he would withdraw his opposition—a sum
which exceeded by 180,0001. the estimate of 1825 ;
if they 'would rick, then' he would take the sense of
the Louse pig the ClpSe altogether,
Lord MILTON ipluired,, whether it was in-,.
tended to open a carriage way from Storey's-gate
to Buckingham-gate.
Lord LOWTHER said, that according to the
plan, it was intended that buildings should extend
from Storey's-gate to Buckingham-gate; but that
project had not been yet commenced.
Lord MlLTON—Although those houses are not
yet in the progress of being built, that is no reason
for not throwing the gate open.
The nulPillYwas'ffroCeeding to read the Bill,
paragraph by paragraph, when
Mr. J. WOOD intimated, that his objection was
directed solely against the clause contained in page
56, which related to the appropriation of the sur-
plus funds to the expense of building Buckingham-
palace, and requested him to proceed to that clause.
The CHAIRMAN having read the clause,
Mr. WOOD said'he- was willing 'riot to confine
Ministers to the sum of even 432,000/.; and if, in-

stead of 432,0001. they would pledge themselvi
that the whole sum from first to last to be taken
from the annual land revenues, to defray the ex-
penses of the palace, including furniture and every
other item, should not exceed half a million of
money, he would agree to it, and withdraw his op-
position —olear, was giving them
68,0001. above the last estimate, and 250,0001.
above the estiinn'e of 1825.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
could give no pledge as to the furniture, since it
had never come under official consideration. He
-had no objection, however, to place a limit on the
expenses of the building.—(Hear.)
Lord A LTHORP conceived, that since the Right
Hon. Gentleman had assented to the principle of
placing a limit on the expense, there could be no ob-
jection to allow him time to ascertain what that ex-
pense might amount to. He wished to know, with
respect to the Bird-cage-walk, why that was not
made an open road, as Parliament and the public
had been led to expect ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
had never given any pledge to that effect, nor was
he aware that any had been given.
Mr. KEITH DOUGLAS said, the opening of
the Bird-cage walk would be productive of great
convenience to the public.
Mr. J. WOOD said, that on the understanding
given by the Chancellor of
_the Exchequer, that he
would take an opportunity to ascertain the amount
of the estimate required for the finishing of the
palace, he (Mr. Wood) would withdraw his amend-
ment.

Mr. MABERLY contended that a pledge had
been given that the Bird-cage walk would have
been made an open carriage-way, and it wai not
acting fair towards the public not to redeem that
pledge.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
repeated that he had given no such pledge.
Mr. MABERLY said, such a pledge had been
given to Parliament by the predecessor of the Right
Hon. Gentleman.

Mr. BARING argued that the Government were
bound to redeem the pledge which had been con-
fessedly made to Parliament, respecting the opening
of the Bird-cage-walk.
Sir R. INGLIS argued to the same effect.

Sir R• WILSON adverted to the narrowness of
the carriage way in Stratford-place, and imme-
diately adjoining Buckingham-gate. It was such
that persons were in danger of being run over, and
it should be remedied.

Mr. M. A. TAYLOR said, when they went to
build a palace for the Sovereign, they ought to have
erected one worthy of the Sovereign, and in a situa-
tion where he could reside. Now Buckingham-
palace was surrounded by a crowd of houses. The
Sovereign could not reside there without being, on
the one hand, annoyed by the smoke of • brewery;
and the could not walk out in his garden, particu-
larly in a white coat or small-clothes, without being
blackened by the smoke of the neighbouring houses.
—(A laugh.)—The palace ought to have been
made what it ought to be, even if it had cost mints
of money. He had brought forward a motion last
Session respecting the 250,0001. appropriated out
of the French claims. He now undertook, on the
part of the public, that he would see that sum either
restored to the public or the French claimants,
After a few words from Mr. FYLER, Lord Low-
THER, Sir R. INGLIS, and the CHANCELLOR of the
EXCHEQUER, the House resumed, the chairman re-
ported progress, and obtained leave to sit again on
Monday next.
JUVENILE OFFENDERS' BILL.

On the motion of Mr. E. DAVENPORT, tile House
went into a committee on this Bill.

Mr. CRIPPS said that many parts of the Bill
were objectionable.
Mr. DAVENPORT merely wished the Bill to
pass through this stage pro forma.
Mr. PEEL had no objection to see the Bill in its
most amended state, and therefore he did not wish
to oppose this course.

Sir E. CARRINGTON thought that every
clause of the Bill involved some difficulty.

Mr. NIONCK admitted that the clauses of the
Bill were liable to objections, but fully concurred in
the principle on which it was founded.
Mr. WESTERN (as we understood) supported
the measure.

Mr. FERGUSSON thought the object of the
Bill good, and was inclined to give the Hon. Mem-
ber every credit for his praiseworthy intentions. At
the same time it was necessary that the Bill should
be materially altered in its details.
Mr. SYKES supported the measure, and said
that the only alterations necessary would be very
easily made.
After a few words from Mr. E. DAVENPORT, the
House resumed.—Report on Monday.
On the motion of M. G. DAWSON, the Life An-
nuities Bill was read a third time, and passed.
Mr. BYNG moved that the County Bridges Bill
be now read a second time.

Mr. JONES expressed his decided opposition to
the Bill.

Mr. BANKES said, that if no other person would
propose the necessary alterations in this Bill, he
would.

Mr. F. LEWIS was so strongly convinced that it
was impossible, by any alteration, to make this bad
bill a good one, that he should at once propose that
the Bill he read a second time this da) six months.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, when
the numbers were—

For the Bill 5
Against it. 37
. _ Majority

- -
The other Orders of the Day were then disposed
of, and the House adjourned at Half-past One.

rf OF THE MINOI
[OTION FOR A BILL TO
BAITINC,
Astell, W. Forbes, Sir Charles
Baring, F. Guise, Sir W.
Buxton, T. F. Grant, H.
Blake, Sir F. Hay, Adam
Cooper, B. B. Hulse, Sir C.
Crompton, S. Inglis, Sir B. H.
Calthorpe, Hon. F. Knox, Hon. T.
Dickinson, W. Lumley, J. S.
Ducane, Peter Marryat, J.
Fremantle, Sir T. Martin, J.

ON MR. PALLMER'S

PUT A STOP TO BULL-

Protheroe, Ed.
Rice, T. S.
Smith, W.
Strutt, J. H.
Sykes, D.
Talmash, Hon. F.
Van Homrigh, P.

TELLERS.
PaHiner, C. N.
Downie, R.

The Princess LIEVEN was at the Duke of
DEvoNsuntes soiree on Monday evening, but went away
before the arrival of the Duke of WELLINGTON. It is
now understood that the LIEVENG are to continue in Eng-
land. The gallant Premier entered the room, leading in
Lady CONYNCHAM on his arm.

We understand a deputation, consisting of
Mr. WARD, M.P., Mr. PowLEs, Sir ROBERT WILSON,
M.P., and four other Members of Parliament, waited
yesterday upon Lord ABERDEEN, for the purpose of en-
deavouring to show the propriety of the Government using
their best offices with the Court of Madrid, to induce it to
acknowledge the independence of Mexico and the new
South American States. It was stated, on the part o'4
the deputation, that the present policy of Spain had the
effect of keeping the new Republics in a constant state of
alarm End turmoil ; and thus preventing them from settling
down into any thing like regular Governments. It was
alsti added that there was reason to believe that VERDI
NAND was about to send an expedition against Mexico. Ta
these observations his Lordship replied, that the beat Offices
of the 6overiament had been already employed with the
Court of Madrid in favour of the new States, but without
effect; and that the Government thought no good could
arise from any further interference. As for the reported
expedition, his Lordship observed that he had no intima-
tion of it ; and, if there had been any truth in it, ha
thought that such would not have been the case. Sir
ROBERT WILSON then called his Lordship's attentian to
clause in the different Trea‘lep, recognisiug the tintlelient
deuce of the. South American States,. bv' which it was
stipulateld that the flew RePnblica ol'pod "Bat atteutpt any
thing against the islands of Cuba and Porto Rico, Sir
ROBERT said that he had received communications from
BOLIVAR, intimating that that clause could not be any
longer acted upon, providing Spain pursued her presp;
course of policy. This communication Lodi AtiERDEiN
was understood to say, -tots tileseryirig 6e'c ohsidektiotf '0
Government. he deputation was 'r eeeived by hiall,,or+
ship with the greatest ehurtesy. If is slid that
the' Continental GOvrr{~nreyltg
F*,,apitLaND to acknowledge upon lel=pe4rtiCgleneeVt

CIIRRENT VALUE OF GOVERNMENT SECURITIES.
BUY. CALCUTTA. Jan. 8. SELL.
Rs. As. Rs. As.
Prem. 24 8 Remittable Loan. 6 per Cent. 2B 8 Prem.
Disct. 2 0 Old 5 per Cent Loan 2 8 Disct
Prem. 1 6 New ditto ditto 1 14 Disct.
rItICES OP BULLION.
Spanish Dollars
Doubloons 3O r 1 a 31 S each
Joes, or Peazas
Dutch Ducats 4 4 a 412 ...
Leuis d'Ors S 0 a 8 8 .
Silver 5 Franc Pieces
Star Pagodas 2 61 a 3 71 each
Sovereigns
Bask of England Notes