Star.
London, England, 1822-07-05 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

A new Writ was ordered to elect a Knight of the Shire for
the County of Wigton, to serve in the present Parliament, in
the room of Mr. Hunter Blair, deceased.
Sir E. KNATCH BULL presented a Petition from certain.
Freeholders in the County of Kent, expressing their dissent
from a Petition recently presented as that of the Freeholders of
Kent, complaining of Agricultural Distress, calling for Parlia-
mentary Reform, and praying the House after reforming itself,
to effect a just and equitable reduction of the National Debt.'
The present Petitioners dissented from the opinions to which
they had alluded, and though they felt the pressure of the times
severely, they prayed the House to continue to uphold the ars%
tern under which the nation had flourished, and they in the 1
strongest terms enforced the necessity of sustaining public credit,
which they regarded as having saved the country, by faithfully
fulfilling the contract entered into with the public creditor.—
The Petition was ordered to be printed.
Colonel SKEFFINGTON presented a Petition front Walter
Bourne, a Clerk of the Crown in Ireland, against the Bill now
in the liouse for regulating the office of Clerk of the Crown.
After a few words from Mr. Dawsots and Sir J. Newroar,
who defended the Bill, and censured the attempt on the part of
certain, individuals to establish a vested right in the offices which
they held, and the fees which they had been accustomed to re-'
ceive, the Petition was ordered to be printed.
Colonel SKEFFINGTON presented a similar Petition from
John Johnson, Clerk of the Crown at Ulster.—Ordered to be
printed.
Mr. GRATTAN moved that Accounts of all sums advanced
to the Corporation of Derry by the Government since the
Union, specifying the manner in which the lime had been dis-
posed of, with copies of all correspondence that had passed on
the subject, should be laid before the House.—Ordered.
Mr. BENNET presented a Petition from Efiezer le Mercier,
of the Island of Guernsey, complaining of the state of the admi-
nistration of justice in that island. The Honourable Gentleman
commented at some length on the circumstances complained of
by the Petitioner, and hoped to hear that a remedy had been
devised to meet them.
Mr. BATHURS'f, in reply tithe remarks of the Hon. Gen-
tleman, described the steps which had been taken to ascertain
the real Lets of the case, and stated the reports received on the
subject to have been laid before the Law Officers of the Crown.
—The Petition was ordered to lie on the table.
Sir JOHN NEWPORT presented a Petition from the
Householders of the Parish of St. Nicholas Without, in the City
of Dublin, praying that the Assessed Taxes in Ireland may be
forthwith and immediately repeated.
Mr. C. H. HUTCHINSON supported the Petition, and
maintained that Ireland at the time of the Union was taxed be-
yond her means, and this had led to the rapid increase of her
debt.—The Petition was ordered to be printed.
Mr. RICARDO moved 'that there should be laid before the
House accounts of the quantity of Wood imported into Great
Britain, from Norway, Sweden, Russia, and the other American
Colonies, in 1821.—Ordered.
Mr. WODEHOUSE brought in a BM to repeal so much of
the Act for regulating Excise Licenses, as regarded carrying on
trade in more than one place.—Read a first, and ordered to'bo
read a second time to-morrow.
A Message from the Lords announced their Lordships! con-
currence with the Marriage Ott Amendment silt, and other
Bills. The amendments made in the Marriage Act Amend-
ment Bill were ordered to be taken into consideration on
Friday se'nnight.
Mr. BROUGHAM said, when his Hon. Friend the Member
for Shrewsbury introduced his Bill for regulating Alehouse Li-
censes, he bad given notice that he proposed to found a measure
on it respecting the sale of Malt Liquor. He now moved for
leave to bring in a Bill to amend the law touching the retailing
of Beer and Ale.—Le.te. was given to bring in the Bill.—He
then brought in the Bill, which was read a first, and ordered to
be read a second time on Monday, and to be printed.
CASS OF THE CNIEI *ARON IN iItZLAND.
The. Marquis of LONDOSDEItRY, seejng an Ho.
nourable Member in his place who had given notice
of a motion respecting the Chief Baron in Ireland,
said, that had the House met yesterday for business,
it was his intention to ask him if he would object to
postpone his ti etion till e' very earlt petioct of the

_ .
next Session? He was induced to ask this as, under
the present pressure of business, taking all the cir- I
cumstances into consideration, he thought such a
course would best satisfy the ends of justice, and
enable the Hon. Gentleman to acquit himself-of his
task in a manner most satisfactory to himself and to
the other party.. He made this application with a
strong feeling that the subject, having been brought
before the House, must now be disposed of in one
y or another, and it was due both to the House
d to the Chief Baron to proceed with the question ,
is soon as possible. But it appeared to him that,'considering the present advanced stage of the Session,
land the business now on their hands, they would have
!t
let° fitting opportunity for entertaining it before the
,House separated. It would be remembered, that at
Use end of last Session the charge preferied by the
inonourable Gentleman, with the answer of the Chief
Baron, was referred to a Committee. The Commit-

',tee reported that there were several circumStances
'which called for explanation, which were not to be
:found in the answer of the Chief Baron. A further
inquiry Subsequently took place, the report of which,
:he believed, did not reach the Row-till about a
month from the time at which he Was speaking. It
(was necessary that'this second Report should' be laid
lbefore the Chief Baron for his consideration and re-

- - ------- - -
yiew. It had been forwarded to him. He had read

and commented on it; but his letter on the subject
bad not been received till within the last ten days.
it had been printed for the use of the House, but had
not been in- the hands of the Members more than

seven or eight deys. He did not mean to say, that
bad this question been the only one which demanded
their attention, they might not have been fully pre-
pared- -ts enter upon it at that moment; but he did
not hesitate to avow, that, under the pressure of the
business in that'll's:Be and out of it, which had fallen

on his Majesty's servants, he, though he had looked
at that:document, had not been able to consider it so

as to be prepared to eve a decisive opinion. So far
as his intercourse with individual Members extended,

he found them in the same situation. He thought it
best, therefore, to throw himself on the indulgence of
the Hon. Gentleman for further time. As to what-

ever issue the inquiry should lead—whether it termi-
nated in disproving the charges, or whether the re-
sult should be of a more painful nature, leading to
an inquiry of a judicial character, it was quite clear
that nothing could be concluded in the course of the
'present Session. He. was, therefore, of opinion that
the ends of substantial justice would best be an-
swered by postponing the motion for the present. It
was painful to interpose any-delay at all, but it would
be better to stop where they now were than at any
intermediate stage. He therefore submitted to the
Hon. Member, whether it would not be desirable that
the subject should stand over till the earliest period
at which it could be taken up in the ensuing Session?
Mr. S. RICE was anxious to take, in the first in-
stance, whatever step might best promote the ends of
justice; and in the next, whatever might be most
consistent with the dignity and convenience of that
House. It was true, that if the business were now
hurried on, there would be much difficulty in getting
through an inquiry of one sort or of another ; and
much inconvenience would arise from commencing
proceedings before they were prepared to carry them
to a conclusion. But there was another inconve-
nience, that of keeping a charge pending over the
head of an individual, without bringing the case for-
ward. Tor doing this he hoped he should not be held
responsible. He did not mean to say that any blame
attached to the Noble Lord opposite, as, upon the
whole, he considered the course which he had sug-
gested to be the best that could be taken. There
was, however, another consideration of some import-
' ance. It was proper to consider how far an indivi-
dual could with propriety continue in the Adminis-
tration of Justice against wheal such a charge had
been preferred. If any means could be devised to
prevent this, so that the party might remain prepared
to meet thh accusation directed against him,-without
in the meantime acting as a Judge, he thought it
would be very desirable that such an arrangement
shoold be made. The Noble Marquis had admitted the
importance of the charge to be such, that some issue
must be had upon it, tending, as he (Mr. S. Rice)
had more reason than the Noble Marquis to say he
hoped would be the case, to the exoneration of the
Chief Baron, or leading to a judicial inquiry. Such
being the admitted importance of the case, he thought
the Government would not be justified if they did not
now look into it. An opportunity would be afforded
them by the postponement of examining the volumi-
nous papers containing the details, and they would
fail in their duty if they did not speedily decide on it
as a Government, and make up their mind to the
course which they would take on this subject. He
consented to give way on the present occasion. In
another Session he would not abandon the situation
in which he now stood; but it was the duty of the
Government to act such a part as to prove they had
it at heart to secure the purity of the administration
of Justice in Ireland.
fhe Marquis, of LONDONDERRY said the pre-
sent was not the time for stating what would be the
future conduct of the Government.
PETITION ON TUZ CALCUTTA RANKIRS.

Mr. BROUGHAM said, that in opening the case
of the Petitioners, he should be saved the trouble of I
narrating the circumstances of their Petition in detail
to the House, by the statement which he had made
regarding it on a former evening. The claim of the
Petitioners arose out of a loan made by them to the
Government in India, on the security of the tern- j
tortes of Oude. The money so advanced was bor- j
rowed to pay certain subsidies to the East India Com-
pany, and. being so paid came into its coffers. The
territory upon which the money was advanced had
since been partitioned, and half of it had come into
the hands of the East India Company. Though the
revenue of the territory thus acquired by the East
Ipd;a Company amounted to three sterling,

• - •
. .
they refused to pay the debt claimed by the Peti-
tioners. As the Petitioners were thus defrauded of
all means of redress and repayment, and as they
could obtain no relief from the Courts In India or in
this country, owing to the sovereignty of the_East
India Company, they were f.bliged to seek fin. justia
in the power and wisdom of Poliarnent. To skew
the justice of the claim made by the Petitioners, Mr.
Brougham read extracts from the di•patehet of se-
' venal of the Governors-General of India, and parti-
cularly relied upon a letter from the Marquis Wel-
, lesly. After several observations upon them, he con-
' eluded by moving— •
" That a Committee be appointed to inquire into the jostled
of the claim of the Petitioners, and to report their observation"
thereon to the House."
Mr. ROBINSON opposed the motion. He said
that the money had been lent at a most extravagant
and usurious rate, and deprecated the interference of
Parliament to compel the payment of It:
Mr. WETHERELL supported the motion, and
contended that the loan had not ban contracted
upon ustvlons terms.
Mr. HUME dissented altogether from the view
which his Hon. and Learned Friend (Mr. Brougham)
had taken of this case. Instead of looking upon it as
a matter fit for public inquiry, he thinight it, both ac-
cording to principle, precedent, and practice, a pri.
vate subject, and to be settled between the individuals
who were affected by the claim, and the party against
whom it was made. Lord Cornwallis had long since
declared that the Government ought not to interfere
with matters of private debt in India ; and had the
MarquisWeilesley (as was insinuated by the releience
to his private letter) considered the present subject fit
for public interference, he had had abundant oppor-
tunities, while Governor-General of India, of pro-
nusting inquiry into the transaction. The Honourable
Member then adverted to the manner in which the
private affairs and transactions of the native Princes
in India had been conducted, and explained the man-
ner in which business was conducted among them
and 'said, that if the House tolerated an inquiry intd
this case, they would next Session have no time, even
if they sat through the whole of the ensaing year, for
anything else than considering applications of a Simi-
lar nature respecting matters of private account id
India. He should, therefore, most decidedly oppose
the motion—(Hear, hear).
Mr. PRENDERGAST said, that in the pecuniary
transactions in which he was engaged in India, and
to which allusion had been made, instead of being
remunerated for his losses, he was left a severe suf.!.
fearer. For his own part, he had been obliged, on the
principle that half a loaf is better than none, to accept
one half of his claim in lieu of the si hole. He wai
, compelled to abandon the other moiety, to which he'
[was equally well entitled on every principle of equity
[ and right, to the Vizier. From this statement, the
House might judge of the fairness and correctness
with which an Hon. Member (Mr. Hume) had stated
that he (Mr. Prendergast) was the only claimant who
had received full compensation. Before this discus-
sion terminated, he would take the liberty of moving
that the papers connected with his own cane be laid
before the House.

Mr. GEORGE SMITH felt it his duty to bear his
testimony to what he believed to be the just claim
of his Hon. Fiiend who had last addressed the
House. His case, he thought, that Hon. Gentleman
had 'clearly established._

Mr. ASTELL thought that no statement had been,
made by or on behalf of the East India Company,
with regard to the subject now under consideration,
which was not amply borne out by the official docu-
ments before the House. If the House consented to
entertain this Petition, there would be no end to Pe-
titions of a similar nature from the representatives of
those who might formerly have supposed themselves
to possess claims of this nature, which they had.
since abandoned.
Mr. PLUNKETT begged leave to say, that he had
as yet formed no opinion upon the particular merits
of the case t but, undoubtedly, a prima facie case of
inquiry .was laid in the Petition. Among other mat-
ters, tending to found such a case, the Petitioners re-
lied on this—that from the year 1787 to 1793 the in-
terest upon their debt had been regularly paid. That
circumstance alone afforded some, though perhaps
not an unanswerable, presumption, that theirs was in
fact an equitable claim. There were three classes of
creditors of the Vizier—European creditors, of course
subject to our Government; Hindoo creditors, sub-
jects of the Vizier ; and Hindoo creditors, subjects of
our Government. The latter felt that though they
were not Christians, yet, as being subjects within the
territories of the East India Company, they had as
much tight to demand justice at the hands of this
Government, as if they were British•born subjects,
(Hear)—and nothing was more important in thecase
than this circumstance; for the foundation of the
Company's power, and. of their influence over the
natives of India, was the equal administration of jus-
tice between all the various classes of their subjects
(Cheers) The security of their dominions, and their
own character, alike required that. such an admini-
stration ofjustie should be ever carefully maintained:
The East India Company, on this occasion, were cer-
tainly placed in no ordinary situation. These sums of
money were advanced on what was said to. be due
from the Vizier to the Company. That was one of
the allegations advanced on the one hand, apd denied
on the other, When this Vizier died, the House wete
told the India Company appointed his successor -
in consideration of investing him with the tei
which had been governed by his predecessor,.
pony entered into an agreement with him, by
he took upon himself the payment of the debt
from the forme' 'Vizier, although lie could not
wise-- have been his iepresentative in this maul
In another contract, M 1798, she Company took
their own dominion one hale of the Vizier's tett'
at an acquittance for this debt. Now,• on thii
ment of the question, it would seem that thd•
pail could nut be justifies in refusing to r

7

riot ; add
Lei ri [oriel{
the Coin=
by which
debt duo
iot othdr.
wk multi
etritoriim
:hi's state:
hi!' Cobs:
meet tDt
•

1.

claims of the Petitioners; for, in the case of a private
person accepting the assignment of an estate as the
consideration for monies by him advanced, it would
not be competent to him to refuse discharging the
incumbtances taken with the estate; but, on the con.
trary, such an assignment would stand good in any
Court of .Equity. Sill, .however, he (Mr. Plunkett)
begged to be understood as not yet having formed
any opinion on the merits of this case. Ile was merely
• &hewing that something like a primafacie ground was
laid for the application. He was bound to vote for
the Committee, because, this being a claim of so pe-
culiar a nature,.there was no other way in. which the
Petitioners could apply for redress but through this
House—( Hear).
Mr. W. WIGRAM defended the conduct of the
East India Company. The Company ought not to
be called en in this matter. It was nothing more
than an account between the Vizier and the parties
vho had been thus concerned with him. The Vizier
alone, or his representative, could be answerable for it.
Mr. P. MOORE was astouished that the Hon.
Gentleman, who was the professed agent for the Pe-
titioners, could for a moment have been induced so
far to sanction their Petition as to bring it forward.
The Hon. Gentleman proceeded shortly to state what
he considered to he the facts of the case. In conclu-
sion, he timtight that the House had no judicial au-
thority, and therefore voted against the Committee.
Lord ARCHIBALD HAMILTON did not mean
to say that the Company ought to pay the debt; but
he thin; tt that there were parts of it to which they
might he liable. What part they ou2,lit to bear, and
what part they ought not, he hoped to learn from
the Report of the Committee.
Mr. W. WYNN thought there was such a prima
fade case made out as justified. the House in going
into a Committee. The claim, it should be recol-
lected, was not for services performed, but for money
actually lent.
Captain MABERLY thought the claim could not
be supported.
M. MON BY was most anxious that justice should
be done; but on looking at the papers already before
the House, he thought the main allegations of the
Petition were disproved.
Dr. PHILLIMORE would have voted against the
Committee, it he could have seen that the statements
of the Petition stood disproved ; but after looking at-
tentively at_the documents before the House, he did
not feel competent to determine whether the claim
ieas or was not eqablished ; and therefore he should
vote for fat titer inquiry.
Mr. G EORGE SMITH was against the Committee.
Mr. RICARDO thought that the Right Hon. Pre-
sident of the Board Of Controul could not have suffi-
ciently attended to the papers.bafore the House. In
his opinion it would be impolitic to grant a Committee.
Mr. W. WYNN, Dr. PUILLIMORE, and Mr.WionAm,
explained.
Mr. T. P. COURTENAY said, this was a claim,
best of liberality, but of right, and there was no jsicli-
cial tribunal either ui this country or in India by
which it could he decided. The Board of Controul
might, undoubteJly, have sent their mandate to the
Court of Directors, ordering them to send a dispatch
to ludia, commanding the payment of the debt
claimed, which was about £150,000: but they did
not like to adopt such a proceeding, as they under-
s'ood that the whole 24 Directors were opposed to
the claim. It therefore appeared to them far more
eligible that it should be investigated before a Com-
mittee of that House, by whom evidence might be
beard, and the whole of the facts inquired into.
Mr. BROUGHAM bikfly replied. A very un-
candid and inaccurate attempt had been made by his
Ilon. Friends the Member for Aberdeen (Mr. Hume),
and the Member for Coventry (Mr. Moore), to make
it appear that the lion. Member ander the gallery
opposite (Mr. Prendergast) was a party interested in
this case. This was done with a view to gain certain
votes ; but he begged to state that it was totally un-
founded. lie was merely the Attorney—the person
that arranged the case in this country for the benefit
of the real parties interested. These parties were un-
der British dominion, and therefore when they ap-
pealed to the British Parliament were entitled to a
full mea:.ure of justice.
Mr.Hus,e and Mr. BROUGHAM mutually explained.
The House then divided—
Fur the Motion
Against it
Majority in favour
The Committee was accordingly nominated.
Mr. HUME complained that there were no Mem-
bers of the East India Company to be found in the
nomination of this Committee.
Mr. W INN observed that in a case of a claim upon
the East India Company, it was a question whether
the votes of the Members of that Company would
be allowed?
After a few words from Mr. R. SMITH, Mr. PREN-
DERGAST, and Mr. BROUGHAM, it was agreed tO in-
clude Colonel BAILEY, wito had been a British resi-
dent in India, Mr. A/11.m., Mr. WIGRAM, and Mr.
Hume in the Committee, which was empowered to
meet tomorrow.
• THE IRISH INSURRECTION ACT.

39
39
_43

Mr. GOULBURN rose to move the second reading.
Sir ROBERT WILSON hoped that a subject so
important would not be entered into at this late hour.
lle was willing that the 13i11 should pass through one
stage, but hcped that the debate would be taken at a
future period.
Mr. GOULBURN expressed his readiness to tin.
dertake that this should be the first subject nn Monday.
The Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be
committed on Monday.
The lieuse went into a Committee on the Small Notes
and, after some conversation between the CHANCELLOR of the
Exturovitn, Mr. Ricesno, and Mr. lIUME, the former agreed
to withdraw, for the present at least, the clause empowering
Country Bankers to pay their notes either in gold or in Dotes of
the Bank of England.— Report on onday.
The other Orders of the Day hiving been disposed of, the
. House adjourned at Lialf-past Twelve &Clock.

• isrsotv'errrs.--Yrom Returns to Parliament, we find that tke
debts of air thousand and ninety petitioning and discharged debtors
amnanted to upwards or fl attains and a half, while thewtmount '
of property received by the as"ig.nci:s was one thausandfrur hun•
dyed and ninety•nime pounds / This was somewhat more.than,
Ass "shillings tram each debtor's estate to clear upwards of we
millions and a half of debts ! There is a Bill now in Parlia-
swot for erecting a new Insolvent Court near Lincoln's bony
which economicifly provides teat aU unclaimed monies o( re-
•-• keyed debtors shall be applied " towards defraying the expenses
of the said Court."

MMilmi...,