Star.
London, England, 1824-06-16 00:00:00

EQVITABLE LOAN BILL.

The Earl of HARDWICK E moved to discharge an order for
hearing Counsel at the bar on the second reading of this Bill, in or-
der to oppose the principle of the measure.
The lt:arl of LAUDERDALE opposed the motion.—The Bill
was one, in his opinion, of the most objectionabl" character. The
first provision of it was repulsive to every principle' of sound leftit-
lation, inasmuch as it called upon Parliament to make an exception
in their favour, by releasing this Company from the effect of the
Usury Laws. Ile was sure not one of the Peers in that House
would allow any Company to be exempt from the Usury Laws.—
The Bill was opposed by Petitions from persons who said it would
be their ruin, and they requested to be heard by Counsel at the se•
cum] reading of the BilL If their Lordships should resist that re-'
quest, and proceed to the second reading, he was prepared with a
Petition from the parties, praying to be heard before the Committee
against the clauses of the Bill.
The Karl of LIVERPOOL could not support the motion for
hearing Counsel on the second reading. He agreed there was no
pretence for exemption of the parties from the operation of the
Usury Laws, but the Bill was brought in for a public object of
material importance. Whether it would appear in the Committee
what it purported to he was another question. He wished to go
ta Committee upon the measure, and Counsel might be heard in
that stage. lie thlught the House ought to agree to discharge
the order for hearing Counsel then, and see what could be done
in the Committee. _ _

The Earl of LAUDERDALE said, it was dangerous to decide
that Petitioners could not he heard against the principle of a Bill.
The LORD CII A NCELLOR considered it a private Bill.
If it was not a public measure, the Petitioners ought to be beard
at the Bar.

The House then divided on the question, whether the Order for
hearing Counsel should he discharged. The question was carried in
the affirmative, and consequently Counsel were not beard.
'Me Earl of LAU DELI D:1 LE rose on the Order for the second
reading of the 13111, repeated his objection, and opposed it.
The LOUD CH ANCELLOR considered it one of the most
objectionable Bilk ever brought into that House. It was an appli-
cation to alter the law for the benefit of one Company and the injury
of many. If it came out of the Committee without amendment, there
was lordly a sentence in the clause he should not move to reject.
Lord Iib:DE:MA LE said, the Pawnbrokers were answer-
able to the law, and yet the house was called upon to say, a large
Stock Company wiy.ht evade the law, and do what they might
think proper. The Pawnbroker might be punished criminally
for breach of the law, but how were they to punish a Company?
If stolen goods were received, Pawnbrokers might be punished, but
how could a Company he punished ? If Parliament should agree to
the establi4iment of this vast Company upon such principles, the
effect would he most injurious to the public interest. Ile called
upon the Noble Earl to consider how far such a measure might af-
fect the principles of the Constitution? He wished the landed in-
terest to consider how far they might be injured. They might be
trampled under feet, and become as nothing.
'rite Earl of WESTMORELAND considered the creation of
this great Company extremely dangerous. It would be the esta-
blishinent of a monopoly destructive to trade. It appeared to him'
quite impossible that any private individual could contend against
such a Company. He should negative the second reading of the Bill.
The House again divided on the second reading—
Ayes 26
Noes 17

Majority for the second reading - --9
The Bill was accordingly read the second time, and ordered to
be committed on Friday.—The House adjourned.