Star.
London, England, 1825-02-25 00:00:00

_N

•
the war. As to Newspapers there were none which in
State matters could be relied on, since the deportation
of Mn. 'Buckingham. They knew no mire of what was
passing iq India than in Japan, and he (Mr. Hume) had
In his possession two letters to the Editois of Papers
whet e, cautioning them to take no notice of the removal
of Mr. Buckingham. People who were guilty of crimes
in India, had been sent from allow solelyacasaireasisem
from the punishment wiOlp, the. law woul4-11tive
awarded. One of the most Mischievous 'results of the
law was, that it prevented the colonizatiosa Itoortal-
men there, which could gni kfiikto,he productive of the
most beneficial results. They ought,alieselore, to have
not only an account of the iturtilier banished, hut alai of
those..whO 'had' been• threAtinid`rwith' the Vate's when
threatened, as thus only could they-gain artiperk ideate( Ate-nada
to which oppression was carried in India.
Mr. WYNN observed, that the question of coloni-
zation in India was of too extensive and important a
character to be.met by a partial motion like the pre-
sent ; he should therefore seserve any opinion he might
have on the subject, till some more proper opportu-
nity occurred for discussing it. With respect to -the
motion before the House, the Acts of 1793 and 1813
authorised Goveinors, etc. to send out of India all un-
licensed persons, and requiring them to assign reasons
far their conduct only when they permitted such un-
licensed persons to remain in India. Those Acts like.
wise made it an offence, punishable with fine and
imprisonment, to be in India without a license. In
the granting of licences, he firmly believed there was
not the least reason to complain of undue s iictnesa.—
Out of 963 ap, lications made to the East India Direc-
tor, since 1814, for permission to go To Indi'a, only 179
had been negatived. He had nos objection to give the
substance of the info' motion •-ked tor, but to parts of
the.motion he could not :4: ree. For instance, it required
returns .1 those who had left India, on urimation being
given to them that they perhaps might not be suffered
to remain. If• they had complied e ito the warning,
what advapaage would be gained by making the names
of those persons public? Ile moved, as an amendment
to the original motion, for ~,return• of the number of all
unlicensed persons sent from India since 17.84 ; and, secondly, of
all licensed persons wit" had been sent from India, or whose li-
censes had been revoked. Su."
Mr. HUME
,acquiesced in the amendment, and it
was then agreed to.
CRUELTY TO ANIMALS.
Mr. MARTIN rose, to introduce a Bill for the pre-
venting of beAr-baiting, and other cruel, spurts. He
stated, that he had taken the opinion of all he Magis-
trates of London, and of most of the counties of Eng-
land, and that they were unanimous in saying that
they ought to be suppressed, as they were the ptincipal
means of educating thieves and murderer, and con-
tributed more than any other matter to the wet ease of
clime; but that such scenes were beyond. their teach,
as the exhibitors dictno. t take moi.ey fa their sights.—
The objection to his Bill was, that it tended to limit the
recreation of thelower classes; but he contended that
they were supported principally by the Nobility. Pla-
cards were posted about the town,, stating that the
savage sports of Billy, the rat-killer, anti other such
barbarous amusementi, wet e* es by the ezpressinvitation
of several Noblemen and Gentlemen of distinction 'r."—
The Mary-la-benne Act 'prohibited bear-bAi.ing and
cock-fighting in that parish, and he saw no reason why
other parishes should not be exempted. !'here was_u
Frenchman of the name of Machin who intended
shortly to exhibit in this town experiments on a grimy?
hound, by nailing his paws and ears. to the gtotitid, far
the purpose of dissecting his nerves while alive, and he
did think that in a civilised country such exhibitions
ought tot to be tolerated. He should, therefore, move
for leave to bring in a Bill for the prevention of bear-baiting, and
other cruel "tuts.
Sir M. W. RIDLEY opposed the motion, as the
offences against which the Honourable Member pro-
posed to legislate were already within the cognizance
of the law. He did not think that the time of the Legislautte
ought to be consumed in discussing such matters.
Mr. MARTIN said a few words in explanation.
Mr. GORDON thought it a system of petty legislation, and as
such it ought to be discountenanced ; if any gross cases al cruelty
happened they were punishable by the Common Law.
Mr. F. BUXTON supported the motion, and bore testimony to
the great benefits that the Honourable Member for Galway had
already conferred on the community by the suppreision of the cruel-
ties that had been practised on the cattle in Smithfield.
After a few words, from Mr. Alderman Eames and Mr.
Borranwoses, the House divided, and the numbers were—
For the Bill, 41 I Against it, 29 I Majority, IS.
ORDERS 01 THE DAY.
On the motion of Mr. Gagman, the Report of the Irish Un-
lawful Association Bill was brought up, read a second time, its
clauses agreed to, and ordered to be reads third dime to-morrow.
SUIPPLY....NAVY. •
The House took into its further consideration the
Report of the Committee of Supply on the Navy
'Estimates. On the motion for agreeing to that part of
the Report which recommends the grant of 54,8861.
for the salaries of the Admiralty;
Sir J. YORKE should like to ask them, why thosa
lary of the Private Secretary to the First Lord of the
Treasury had been increased front 3001. to 5001, per
annum ? He saw no reason for this, when it had been
found prudent to reduce the number of .Lords of the
Admiralty. He was surprised, that, in this great and
powetful country, he could only fad a reduction, on all
the Boards, of three thousand five hundred pounds
' Vicar .particularly from the Secretary and Lordiaf
the Admiralty. Would his Hon. Friends say that one
Commissioner of the Victualling Board, of the Navy:
Board, or one Lord of then Treasury had been reduced?.
No; the whole reduction was one Post Master.and two
Lords of the Admiralty. He thought, if the Hon:
Baronet who had brought fot ward the motion for the.
reduction of the Lords of Admiralty were to reconsiaek
the matter, be- would be disposed to vote for their.
being re-appointed. lie wished to see an additional
20001. added to this pact of the estimates, to restore the
two Lords, as without that they were not fairly dealt bye'
On the motion for agreeing to that part of the Report which re-
commends granting the suns of £553,:106 for the Dock-yards, ice.
Mr. HUME said, it was not proper for the House
to pass such estimates, year after year. For the years
1823, 1824, and 1825, the amount had been the same
as 1817.: The expense of buildings in the Dock-yards;
Bcc. ought to be checked. Since 1811, wehad expended.
on the Dock-yards a sum of 4,853,0001. and for works

• We subjoin the " athche" to which the lion.klember
" By the express invitation of several Noblemeta and Gentlemen of
distinction, Billy, the phenomenon of the can*, xsee. tOtt superior:
vet min-killer of his day, having killed nearly 4,000 rats ha ..bunt
seven hours, will once more go through .his wouderfal Career. of .
destroying a proportionate number thereof, in teisminutes, at the
Westminster Pit, on Tueiday, March 1, 1114.5. The: receipts of
the Pit of that evening to be presented tu the diiiiessed widow of
the late C. Dew, who was the owner of this matdsless canine per-
former. After which, a dug-tight, sCiunt-loose match with two
dogs and two fresh badgers, a drawing match, and sever .1 bull-
dogs to be tried at the bear, before their departure for foreign
climes. Billy can be matched to Oil 100 Tau against soy
too Ats
in England, for 100 sovereigns. Doocs oarn at seven, con= ice
.• I ef-past. lidmi:tancie, 3a. each."