Star.
London, England, 1809-03-01 00:00:00

tbeeibt the contributions of Marine Ofwers to Gt eat-
liOlgo
wick . 'sal had nothing to clo with the Widows'
Funch Isli the money paid to Gfeenwich was at the
,
-,disposar o that Corporation, and subject to no inter-
feitnee.from the Board of Admiralty.
Leave was given to bring in the bill. . .
NEW DOCKS AT PURFI,ELT.
A Member tnovedlor leave to bring in Bills to confirm an
agreement between Govirnment nod Simnel Whitbread, Esq.
for certain lands purchased of hits at Purfleet ; and also to make
compensadon for certain other lands and hereditaments, purcha-
sed In tke same plow for the purpose of having Docks there.—
Leave given.

• CALL OF THE HOUSE.
Lord FOLKESTONE, pursuant to his notice of
yesterday, rose tulnove that the House be called over
on Wednesday the Bth of March. The question to
come before the House that day was of the utmost
importancei and therefore he conceived that the
fullest possible attendance of Members was necessary:
With that view, and with that only, it was, that he
should now move for a call of the House on that day.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
said, that he should not have thought it necessary to
make such a motion, when he considered the tranaer
in which the House hid been attended during the
whole of the time when the important subject alluded
to by the Noble Lord was under investigation ; and
therefofe he had no doubt of a full attendance on the
day appointed for that most important subject
again *ran question, as the Noble
Lord had justly observed, was of the utmost impor-
tance, and it was his own wish that in all its parts it
shOuld meet the most 'grave and solemn considera-
tion before the fullest possible attendance cl Mem-
bers. He therefore abstained from any resistance to
the motion, feeling as he did, that however unneces-
sary he might conceive it to be, yet any opposition
to it on his part would be subject to animadversions
not of the most liberal nature. But in giving his
assent to the motion, he trusted that the question of
that day would not be further delayed. The Mo-
tion might have the effect of securing the attendance
of all Members in town or within a short distance.
But it could not be expected, that in so short a notice
as eight or ten days, any thing like an effectual call
of .the House could be had. But it was not because
the call could not operate to its fullest extent that it
was not therefore to be adopted.
Lord FOLKESTONE assured the Right Ho-
nourable Gentleman, that he had no intention of
further postponing the business, neither was any such
intention entertained by his Honourable friend (Mr.
Wardle).-
Mr. BRAGGE BATHURST thought the call
of the House equally unnecessary and improper.—
He should, think it quite impossible that in so short_
a period as eight days, it would have any effect in
bringing Gentlemen from the remotest corners of the
United Kingdom. It would be merely a call in
name, and not in effect. From the full attendance
of Members during the whole of the inviry, there
could be no doubt of a full attendance on the nig_ht
of discussion ; and althoUgh a tolerable opinion of a
subject might be formed on written evidence, yet per-
haps it was going too far to call on Members com-
ing from a distance, who would not have time to ex-
amine and consider the printed evidence, after their
arrival in town, in order to form their opinions to de-
cide upon so solemn a subject, perhaps, the day after.
M. CHARLES ADAMS approved the motion
for a call of the House, and thought, that although
it could not be expected to procure the attendance of
Members from Scotland and Ireland, yet if it only ob-
tained that of half a dozen additional Members,
upon such an occasion, even that would be of some
importance.
General GASCOIGNE also thought the call could I
not be effectual. It appeared to him that to attempt
enforcing this call at so short a notice, -.vould be an
abuse of the power of the House, and tend to defeat
its authority on future occasions. Members at a dis- ;
tance would suppose it a serious call, and no doubt
expect that they would.be allowed a subsequent day
/ to offer their excuses ; so that the object of the pre-
a sent call would be defeated.
Lord FOLKESTONE said he felt the call could
not be so effective as was desirable, upon so short a
notice ; and was' himself-very sorry it had not oc-
curred to him to move for it at an earlier day. He
hoped, however, e.....: House, in justice to its authority,
would enforce the call for the Bth of March ; for how-
e'. er it might be afterwards disposed to excuse thOse
Members who could shew reasonable cause, for their
non-attendance then, he could hardly suppose that
some question would not arise out of the proceedings
of that day of the utmost moment, which would, at
i an early subsequent day, call for solemn decision, and
I consequently render necessary the fullest possible at-
tendance of Wcinbers.
t Mr. BANKES opposed the motion. He thought
that a_call of the House, on so short a notice, was
. unprecedented. It was something. so pre,:osterous,
that when he heard of the Noble Lord's avowed in-
tention, he thought it quite impossible that he could
ibe serious. The attendance of the House already
upon this subject had been remarkably full ; they had
! divided more than a majority of the whole House,
and he did not think that at the present season, and
I at so short a notice, there was any chance of a fur-
lther attendance. Besides, he would ask was it a de-
sirable thing that Members who had never heard a
word of the evidence in this case, should be called
on to decide upon the question, who perhaps would
not arrive till the day before; and could not have time
Ito read or consider the written evidence ? There
I were many Members who did not wislrto interfere on
this question. Was it.desirable to bring such men
: from the remotest corners of Ireland or Scotland ?
' And, besides, though the House had authority t '
I enforce their attendance at a call on that day, it had
O.
no authority afterwards to prevent their going out
again, or to fe-te them to vote. He. was decidedly
opposed to the call, and should take the sense of the
House upon it. . !me
Sir JOHN NEWPORT said, that the Honourable
Member who ha.: all of a sudden shewn so much ten-
derness towards the Members from Ireland, and re-
luctance toinconveoicuce them, had asserted, that a
call .at so short a notice was unprecedented. He
would beg lekve, however, to refer him to the Jour-
'mils so recently as the 11th of last February, where
there was an order that the House be called over on
the following .day. . .
Mr. BANKES answered, that this was in the case
of a Bilge &elm tlectiori Committee, who're' the cill
was pending de die in i4ein,

Lord FOLKESTONE instanced *nether case ol
the Journals during die discpssicin of the SlaveTraii,
in 1791, where there was a call of the House 3,
.eight days. a
The question was now put on Lord Folkeston.:
motion, when the House divided :
Ayes 102—Noe; 15—Majority for the call 87.
ROMAN CATHOLICS.
On retadmissicat to the gallery we found
Sir G. F. HILL speaking in opposition to them.
tion of Mr. Montgomery for leave to bring in a B '
to quiet all doubts respecting the tenure of freehol(
property, by Roman Catholics in Ireland, on th,
ground that the Bill was unnecessary ; that it w
founded merely upon an objection made by one of
Counsel in the Donegal Election Committee, to
Vote of a particular Catholic Elector, which obi(
tion was unanimously overrAuled by that Committi
and consequently could not stand in proof of the 1
cessity of a. Bill which was only calaulated to ext
doubts where no doubts existed.
; ir A P THU R WELLESLEY could hate wisl
the Honouthle gentleman had submitted to hitn
objects of this Bill before he introduced it, in or,
that he might have had an opportunity, of consult
those Law Authorities in Ireland; from whom he
most likely to derive the best information on its
ture and 'propriety.
Sir J. NEWPORT decidedly protested against
doctrine jiast.stiggested by the Right Honourable
eretafy, that any Member of that House, before
ventured to propose a Bill to parliament, was bog
in the first instance, to submit his object to any
ficer Of-the Crown, however dignified in rank or
in power. If such, a doctrine were to be once
milted, there would he an end to the undoubted
vileges of every Munber of that House, ai
:the deliberative functions of Parliament. He
well aware that 'the Law Officers of the Crown
1 Ireland, and particularly the Judges, afflicted a
of jealousy (which the Judges of- this country
had thought proper to evince), when any Bill t(
ing the jurisdiction of the Courts where they pre,
was introduced into Parliament without being
viously submitted to their perusal, .or their opt
consulted. • He knew they wished to initiate the
ceedings in such cases ; but he denied all such cis
He wished certainly, that the fullest time shout
allowed for deliberation in such cases, and th
Bills should be . printed for the perusal ol
Judges, as well as of every other class of sul
before they passed into law ; but he denied any
like an exclusive or peculiar judicial privilei
such cases.
Sir ARTHUR WELLESLEY explained,
said, he thought consultation with the high Lav
thorities in Ireland necessary on a Bill which r
change the law of the land as it was Opp*
exist, affecting a great extent of property.
Mr. CROKER opposed the Bill as unnn,
upon the same ground with Sir George Hill.
Mr. MONTGOMERY' said, it was the opt
many eminent. lawyers in Ireland that the lii:
necessary, and amongst others, of his Majesty
torney-General.
Mr. O'HAIt.A explained, that some'. doubt
arisen about the legal tenures of freeholds, by '
Catholic Freeholders, who have neglected to
before they came to the possessiqn of such fret
as by law required ; this Bill, therefore, was
move all doubts, and quiet all 'apprehensions
the legality of such tenures, by allowing the
further time to qualify.—The question was th
and leave given to bring in the bill.
DUKE OF YORK'S LETTER.
Mr. WYNNE stated, that in consequence
passed in the House 'on Friday last, he thou;
subject which had been then alluded to was ol
turelthat required that Parliament-should expi
opinion upon it. He rather wished That the I
should have been taken up by some man of
experience. He, however, felt so strongly col
of the necessity cf some resolution, that he
without losing any time, give notice, that it
intention to move a resolution, ~ that it was
tent with the duty and privileges of that IL
come to a determination on 'evidence exam
their bar, without submitting 'the case to ar
tribunal." Although this question had no nt
bearing upon the subject which was 'to be di
next week, yet as it might have a collateral ai
rect bearing, he wished to defer moving that
tion, until the House should come to a decisia
question. He hoped the great importanct
subject would excuse li'm to the House, foi
this notice in a more detailed form than was
The SPEAKER asked the Honourable
what day he chose the notice to stand for ?
Mr. WYNNE replied for Monday se'nnigl
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHF
thought, that it would be a fairer way to
resolution brought forward before the discu
order that the matter might be put at rest,
there might not be a- suspicion suspended
head of his Royal Highness thAt, in writing
ter, he had acted contrary to the privilege!
House. . Although he did not wish to mull
cussions upon this subject, yet he was persui
this was a. matter which could be easily exp
Mr. BATHURST agreed perfectly with
fallen from the Chancellor of the Exchen,
these had been any violation of the privilege!
House, the common course was, that comp)
breach of privilege took precedence of all
cussions. When the consideration and ram
party accused were taken into the account, he
' heweyer a great 'deal of latitude and in,
should •be allowed. For these reasons, at
those which had been stated by the Chancel
Exchequer-
The SPEAKER here interfered, and sun
I it was contrary to the usage of the House
into any discussion on notices given. There
haps, some little irregularity in introducing
with observations,,but there never could be (
upon a mere notice of a motion to be made
ture day.
The motion was then fixed for Monday se
MALT DISTILLERY.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHI
after several preliminary observations, mow
Committee should be appointed to inquire
regulations by which the drawbacks and (
%tailing duties on exportation of spirits betweei
Britain and Ireland were regulated; as also
out what alterations wet..., necessary in the int