Star.
London, England, 1822-03-23 00:00:00

PARLIAMENTARY PAPERS.

It appears from the last annual register of crimes and offences,
that, -:omparing the list of last year with those of the four pre-
ceding years, the number of persons committed has been on
the decrease ; and that, last year, there were not so many
committed as in the year preceding by 595. In the year 1820,
were committed, 11,595 males, and 2,115 females; in 1821,1
11,173 m des, and 1,912 females.
Of the 13,11.5 committed in the year 1821, 1,134 were sen-
tenced to death ' • of whom 114 were executed, 155 transported
for life, 272 for fourteen years, 1 for ten years, 1,675 for seven
years, and 5,864 imprisoned for various periods. The total
number convicted in 1821 was 8,788; 2,501 were mcquitted, and
against 1,826 either no Bills were found, of they were not
prosecutes.
From the Report of the Committee of the General Peniten-
tiary at blillbank, just printed, it appears that " the number of
'prisoners for whom provision has been made in the Penitentiary,
rather exceeds the intended number of 1000 (600 males and 400
females) than falls short of it. Them were within its walls, on
the 31st December last,_ 708 convicts. The present number is
725 ; viz. 399 males and 324 females."--It appears further, that
the total earnings for the year ending the 51st December, 1821,
amounted to £6051. Bs. 6d. of which three-fourths, or £4538.
1 is. Id. remained to the Establi.hment ' • that the expense
amounted to £27,279. 12s. 21. and, after deducting stores on
braid, to £20,679. 3s. Id. and the net expense, after deducting
the prisoners' earnings, to £16,140. 18s. 9d.
lu the year 1821, about 620 hundred weight of tallow was
imported into Great Britain from various parts of the world.—
In the year 1818, only 384 hundred weight was imported ; the
present 13w price of 1821, in comparison with 1818, *therefore
easily accounted for. •
In the pear 1721, about 33,000,000 of pounds weight of can-
dles paid duty; but in the year 1821, about 87,000,000 pounds
paid duty.
In the year 1818 about 370 cwt. of hemp was imported into
Great Britain; and in the year 1321 there was only 243 cwt.
imported. A rise in the price of hemp may be therefore ex-
pected to take place.
In the year 1816 there was about 213 cwt. of flax imported
into Great Britain ; but in the year 1321 there was 497 cwt.
imported. The present low price, therefore, iu comparison, is
accounted for.
The quantity of tin exported from Great Britain in the year
1821 was about 29,000 cwt. and the quantity imported from
Gibraltar and Peru amounted to about 1,000 cwt.

Such has been the SIICCC4II of the Volume, called the 'bind de
Library, the contents of which fully justify its title, that.t.o
than 1500 Copies were kohl within tett clays attir its publit.,-
dun. Of the Y5OO Anecilt.o:s which it contains, no Its!, then 500
are Original, and relate to muderu topics and living characters.

Lord STEWAIIT and the Archbishop of Dustin took the oaths
and their seats.

Mr. Parscorr, from the Exchequer, presented Accounts of
the Income and Charges of the Consolidated Fund, for the year
ending the sth of January last.
The Malt Duty Repeal Bill was read a second time.
The Town of Bradford Gas Light Bill was read a third time,
and passed.
The Norfolk Jail 13111, and the Town of Wakefield Gas Light
Bill, wire reported without any amendment.
The Marquis of LANSDOWN said, that about a fortnight
ago, be had moved for a copy of the instructions that had been
given to the Conunissioners of Excise, relative to the seizure of
roasted wheat. These papers had not yet been laid before the
House, he now therefore moved that the Return be made forth-
with.—Ordered.—The House then adjourned to Monday neat.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
A Person from the Directors of the Fast India Company
presented papers Hating to the Military in Intlia.
A Gentleman front the Exchequer Office presented a Return,
shewing the progress made in the Redemption of the Public
Debt.—Laid on the table.
On the motion of Mr. F. rams the House resolved itself into
a Committee on the Turnpike laws Amendment BBL—The
Bill having passed the Committee, the House resumed, and the
Report was then received, and the Bill ordered to be re-
committed.

.......
Lord JOHN RUSSELL presented a Petition from the
Owners and Occupiers of Land in the Hundred of Norman-
Cross, in Bedford hire. With respect to the boon proposed for
the relief of the Agriculturists, the Petitioners viewed with re-
gret the propued remedy, and thought it insufficient. They
prayed the House to take the subject into consideration, and to
afford some effectual relief.—Ordeied to be printed.
Mr. BENNET said, that on the 21st of February he had
moved for a Return of the Report of the Audit Office, as to the
state of Mr. Theodore hook's Accounts, and no Return having
been made, he should now move that the said Return be nude
forthwith.—Ordered. _ _ _

The LORD ADVOCATE moved that the second reading
of the Royal Burghs Accounts Bill be postponed to Thurs-
day next.
Lord A. HAMILTON wished that before the discussion on
this Bill took place, time would be given to ascertain the public
feeling in Scotland on the subject.
The LORD ADVOCATE said, that it was his intention to
have it read the second time and printed, after which it would
be distributed in Scotland.
Mr. KENNEDY complaired that the most interested in the
Bill, namely, the popular part of the Burgesses, did not receive
any intimation of the measure.
Lord NUGENT moved for a Return of the names of the
persons now holding the offices of Governor and Lieutenant-
Governor of the Caribbec Islands, with an account of their
salaries and emoluments. Also, an account of the Offices, whit
the amount of salaries and emoluments, in the appointment of
the Assemblies of the Islands. Also, a return of the names of
the persons holding the offices of Chief Justice, Attorney-Gene-
ral, and Solicitor-General.--Ordered.
hlr. ELLICE moved for similar Returns for all the West
India Islands.—Ordered.
Mr. BRIGHT presented a Petition ftom the Dean and Chap-
ter of Bristol, against the Bristol Port Bill.—Laid on the table.
MR. HENRY HUNT AND REFORM.
Mr. L AMBTON said, that he held in his hand a
Petition, which bad been sent to him for presentation.
The Petition was signed by no less than four thou-
sand eight hungred and twenty of the inhabitants of
Newcastle-upon-Tyne, and prayed the House to in-
terest itself in procuring a remission of Mr. Hunt's
punishment. The Hon. Member observed, that he
was informed the Petition lay only three days for
signatures, and had in that time obtained the number
which he stated, and would have received the signa-
tures of twice the number, if it bad been suffered to
remain a few days longer. Those persons, however,
who had the management of the Petition, thought no
time should be lost, in order that it :night be pre-
sented before the motion relative to Nir. Hunt, of
which notice had been given by his Hon. Friend, the
Member for Westminster, was brought on. With
regard to the object of the Petition, without any re-
ference to the private or political views of Mr. Bunt,
whom he did not know in any manner, he (Mr. Lamb-
ton) entirely agreed with, the Petitioners, that this
punishment was unjust—( Hear, hear). The original
punishment inflicted by the Court was severe enough
in itself, without being aggravated by the conduct of
die jailer, the permission of which, under the eyes of
the Magistrates, was not very creditable to their ju-
dicial character. The Petitioners viewed with alarm
ana regret the corruptions which had crept into that
House, and prayed for Parliamentary Reform. They,
in conclusion, expressed their disapprobation of the
evil councillors who advised his Majesty to give his
approbation to the authors of the massacre of Man-
chester. The Hon. Member then moved for leave to
bring up the Petition.
Sir M. W. RIDLEY said, that he had only to
observe that the Petition had not been agreed to at
any Public Meeting. He would always object to any
Petition drawn up in that manner, when it was.di-
rected against the Government. A Petition of that
kind could not be said to represent the sentiments of
all the inhabitants, hut of those only who had signed
it. A copy of the Petition had not been sent to him,
although he Was more immediately connected with
the place than his Hon. Friend who presented it. Ile
was, however, desired to state to the House that it
was the Petition of those whose signatures appeared
to it—(Fleur, hear)—and not of the inhabitants at
large. He should not then discuss the subject of the
Petition, as he would have an opportunity for doing
that when the specific motion on that subject came
before the Ilouse.
Mr. DICKINSON objected to the hard terms
which the Hon. Member (Mr. Lambton) made use
of with respect to the conduct of the Sotnersetshire
Magistrates.
The Petition was then brought up and read.—On
the motion that it he laid on the table,
Mr. FREMANTLE said, that after hearing the

Petition' read, be be4ieved the House would agree
with him that it was impossible for them to receive it.
He thought the charges made on that Horse by the
Petitioners were too-insulting to suffer them to lie on
their table. He particularly objected to two para-
graphs in the Petition. One stated, that " the Peti-
tioners viewed with alarm and regret the corruptions
which had crept into that Hon. House." It was mot
possible to receive the Petition without sanctioning
the charge of corruption made by the Pritioners.—
The other paragraph to which he objected, was. that
in which the Petitioners observed on" the evil deeds,"
as they called them, " perpetrated at Manchester,"
and expressed. their " disapprobation of the evil coun-
cillors who advised his Majesty to give his approba-
tion to the authors of those deeds." Those were para-
graphs which, in his opinion, could not be received.
Mr. LUSHINGTON begged to observe that there
was another paragraph which was equally objection-
able. It was that which stated that the loss of pro.
petty sustained by Mr. Hunt was sufficient punish-
ment for endeavouring to shew how that House
might be reformed.
Sir ROBERT WILSON said, that he was sur-
prised at, the objections stated against the Petition.
No one had stood up 'to make those objections when,
on a former occasion, an Hon. Baronet on the other
side (Sir James Graham) had risen in his place to
justify the corruption of that House—( (fear). On a
late occasion, even a Noble Lord (Londonderry) had
observed, that in order to balance five or six seats,
which the Noble Lord stated were kept up at that (the
Opposition) side of the House, t was necessary to
have seats given aw..y on the other side as '. bid not
all these prove the corrupt practices of the House ?
Were not the Hon. Gentlemen aware of the dismis-
sal from a high situation of a Noble Earl last Session,
for having the firmness to vote on a question before
the House in accordance with his conscience, but in
opposition to the Government? Was it not known
and avowed in that House that Lord Fife was dis-
missed from office because he voted against the Go-
vernment ? The People had, thetefore, just cause to
complain of the corruption of that House. They had
a right to suspect some parts of that House of re-
ceiving stipendiary payments. Those persons who
were the most guilty of those corrupt practices were
likely to be most affected by the terms applied by the
Petitioners. With respect to the complaint in the
Petition of no inquiry into the transactions at Man-
chester, there was room given for that complaint. No
sympathy was shewn by that House with the misfor-
tunes of those who suffered at Manchester.
Mr. J AMES expresi•ed his astonishment at the ob-
jections raised against the Petition, when it was re-
collected that the predecessor of the Speaker in the
Chair had stated, that the corruption in that House
was as notorious "as the sun at noon day r _ Re-
collecting these expressions, he was surprized how the
Hon. Member could object to the Petition.
Mr. WYNN ,aid, that he believed there never was
a grosser misrepieseniation of anything said in that
Howe than that just made by the Hon. Member for
Carlisle. Was it possible that the predeces,or of the
Speaker in that Chair could so far depart from his
duty as to say that open corruption prevailed in that
House? He would appeal to the recollection of the
House, if what the Speaker said did not bear a quite
contrary meaning. On the suilject of the motion of
the Hon. Member for Durham (Mr. Lambton), he
(Mr. Vynn) could have no hesitation in saying that
the Petition ought not to be suffered to lie on their
table. The object of the Petitioners clearly was to
disgrace not only that House, but also the administra-
tion of justice. If even there was no other to join
him, he should object to the reception of the Petition
while it contained the words, " disgraceful ond vin-
dictive prosecution of Henry Hunt, Es 0,. now suffer-
ing punishment in Ilchester jail, for having endea-
voured to make that House more honourable." He
denied that there was any vindictive prosecution of
Mr. Hunt. The Courts of Jastice and the civil insti-
tutions of the country could not stand unless they
were respected. But the question whether the Pe-
tition should or should not be received, did not de-
pend on any pnrticular expressions in the Petition,
but on its whole tenouy and character. Could any Ho-
nourable Member lay his hand on his heart and say,
upon his honour, the Petition was presented with any
other view than that of vilifying the House ? Those
who could say that the Petition was i resented with
any other view might vote for its reception ; but those
who were of opinion that it was presented with a view
to vilify that House (which he really believed to be
the object) should vote against it.
Mr. BENNET said, that he would admit that the
words used by the predecessor of the Speaker were
not correctly stated by the lion. Member for Car-
lisle, but the Right lion. Gentleman (Mr. Wynn) had
not fairly stated the history of the matter. The words
of the Speaker on that occasion were, " that such
practices as he had alluded to, would make their an-
cestors startle with indignation." It was not the
Speaker, but Mr. Ponsonby (who endeavoured to
palliate; not to justify the practice), who said that
the purchase of seats in that House was as plain as
the sun at noon-day. Such, he believed, was the
true history of a transaction which was familiarly
known to most persons. Had he the framing of the
Petition, he perhaps should not have :elected pre-
cisely the expressions which had been used in some
parts of the Petition. However, he was far from
saying, at the same time, that there were any terms
in the Petition on account of which it ought to be re-
jected. Ile had, during the period he had the ho-
nour of a seat in that House, seen a variety of Peti-
tions laid on the table containinjelanguage infinitely
sdtlreopngeetirtioonn tlbreefsoaremtehseubjm.ectif tphaetn.taiouLto be
weiefneuotild inper-
mitted to impugn the conduct of Courts of Law, or
of the Administration of the country, there was no
necessity for
.petitioning at all. Ail l'etitions in that
case must be congratulatory Petitions, or Peorionq
of condolence, but never of the accitiatery or corn-