Star.
London, England, 1815-02-16 00:00:00

Yl L!'l'lA.

Earl Frrz WILLI AM— He had lapped' that such
steps would have been taken by the Executive Go-
vernment, alter the production of the pipers fix
which he had moved last Session, as would have re.
lieved him from the pitiful necessity of again eallmg
their Lordships' attention to this subject. He 'was,
however, again compelled to advett to the subject.
The government had kept the militia embodied when
•there was no law to authorise it. No minister or man
'would ray that there was any insurrection or rebellion
or invasion, or any imminent danger of invasive.
'According to the system now pursued, government
was making an inroad 'on the constitution, for the
militia would be .converted into a permanent stand-
ing army in time of peace. Certain Learned Gen-
tlemen had given it as their opinion, that the militia
might be kept embodied during the war with France;
but now we were at peace with France, and the glen
circumstance of being at war with any other SWIM
did not justify this practice. for this country bad el ten
been at war without callmg out the letittill.
Was uniting about wet in she SOO. The only canna

h

.~ }, ..

of keeping the militia embodied were insurrection,
rebellion, invasion, or imminent danger of invasion.
His Lordship then alluded to certain statements of
grievances relative • to the militia service which' had
reached hi,n ,• he had, however, omitted to bring the
document. He deprecated the idea of a standing
-army thus endeavoured to be introduced, and con-
- eluded by moving an address to the. Prince Regent
for the immediate disembodying of the militia.
• Lord Vireoent SIDMOUTH remarked upon the
• • time which had elapsed since this subj-ct was first
mentioned by the Noble Earl, and that it was now
brought forward at a time when the disembodying
of the rfanaining regiments of militia was actually
in progress. He thought it extraordinary that the
Noble Earl, with his view of the importance of the
subject, should have thus delayed bringing it forward.
Since the pet iod when the Noble Earl first mentioned
this subject, the Crown Lawyers nad delivered their
opinion that it was perfectly competent to the Crown
to keep
.the Militia embodied, notwithstanding the
termination of the war, so long as circumstances
rendered it necessary, the Ministers acting in such
case upon their responsibility. That such was the
law with regard to the Militia he had no doubt. The
Noble Earl had shewn, by quoting the Acts of Par-
liament, that to keep the Militia, or any part of them
embodied, notwithstanding the termination of the
war. was no: contrary to the letter of the law, and
he (Lord Sidmou:lij vas decidedly of opinion, that
neither was such a measure at all at variance with
the spirit of the law. In all the Acts regarding the
Militia, were to be found, consistently with a due
constitutional jealousy of the Crown, the circum.
stances strictly defined under which alone the Militia
shield be called out; but in none of them was it
stated under what circumstances the Militia should
be disembodied. It certainly never had been in the
contemplation of Parliament that the services of the
Militia should cease with the cessation of those
causes, which had, limier the authority of the law,
led to their being called out ; and there were nume-
rous instances in which the Militia had been kept em-
bodied long after the reasons ft•r calling them out had
ceased to exist. His Lordship referred to some of
the instances he had quoted on a former occasion,
and mentioned the case of the seven years war, the
year 1759, when the Militia were called out and kept
on foot in 1760 and 1761, notwithstanding all danger
of invasion, had then ceased. In 179'2, when a Noble
Lord opposite was then in Administration, the Militia
WAS wisely called out by, perhaps, what might be
deemed a strained construciion of the law, but which
was a highly judicious measure. In 1E405 the
Militia were kept embodied, when the situation
• of affairs that had required their being called out
no ',lnger existed ; to come still neater, when the
French army was totally ruined on the Beresioa,
what danger of invasion any longer existed ?
How then did the reasoning of the NAile Earl apply ?
The cause for calling out the Militia had in many of
these instances altogether ceased, butt yet Parliament
had by its votes sanctioned their being embodied,
thus shewing their sense of its weessity, under the
circumstances of each case. Thus in the list war,
subsequently to the Peace of Paris, the House of
Commons had voted the pay and clothing of the Mi-
litia till Christmas last, and the vote had been into,-
duced into the Appropriation Act, thus proving the
construction which Perliament gave to the Militia
Laws, as to the Militia remaining embodied when
circumstances required it, although the CAUSES of their
being otiginally called out had altogether ceased. It
was only, indeed, in consequence of the Militia re-
imaining embodied at that period, and being thus ap.
plicable to the domestic military service, that the army
at Bourdeaux could be allowed to embark to support
the cause of the conntry in another hemisphere.—
Against this measure no one had attempted to raise
his voice, and he was confident that any one who had
done so, would have been overwhelmed with public
'indignation. Thus, therefore, Parliament had recog-
nised, in repeated instances, the expediency of keep.
ing the Militia embodied, alter all the causes for call-
ing them out had wholly ceased; and it evidently bad
never been the intention of the Legislature to prescribe
a period when the disembodying should take place.
in the Local Militia Acts, it WAS expressly hated at
what period that force, when embodied, should be
disemhediEd ; but although the Regular Militia esta-
blishment had been repeatedly before Parliament, no
provision WilatrV.T had been made as to the period
of its being disembodied when once called out. He
was therefore justified in concluding, that Parliament
had not thought it fit to legislate upon this point,
leaving it to the discretion of the G.,vernment to keep
the Militia embodied so long as circumstances ren-
dered it necessary ; Parliament itself having the con-
trout over the conduct °few Government, by holding
the purse of the nation, and by the annual Mutiny Bill,
He admitted that it was burdensome to that part of
the Militia kept embodied, and he should be doing
great injustice to that force if he did not ackitcne.
ledge, in the highest terms, their zeal and loyalty '
but it would have been little flattering to them to
have been dismissed when the country so essentially
required their services for domestic military purposes,
in order to enable the regular troops to support the
cause of the country against its enemies. He teas,
therefore, perfectly satisfied as to the legality at
keeping the Militia embodied, and fully convinced
of its expediency, under the circumstances which
had existed. lt, however, the House thought with
the Noble Earl, that such practice was contrary to
law, they would, of course, decide in favour of the
motion, whatever might be the consequences. If, on
the contrary, they thought that it was perfectly legal,
and that expediency required, under • tbe circum-
stances stated, its ad, ptiun, they would with him give
the motion a decided negative.
Lord GRENVILLE answered at considerable
length. • He was peculiarly 'surprised at the paper
which bad been laid on the table. It contained the
opinion of the Law Officers of the Crown -on the
Act. But he recAlected a period when the Judges
had been called on for extra judicial opinions, and
they recommended the raising of ship-money, if it
pleased the Crown. The Crown Law Officers had
given Crown Law of this nature within his own
memory, but it could not stand a moment in the
Calms. As to the commission in the Act coin-
mending the King to disband the Militia, he could
find no statute which made arty thing imperative an
the -King, th`ough it might command his Ministers.
bet in 1'79+2 &ere seas dingek ill but actual rebel.

lion. He wished tallow, whether in future the con-
venience or his Majesty's Government wap to be the
standard of keeping up the Militia in the realm ?
Set this monstrous pmposition was the argument of
the paper and the Noble Lord.
The LORD CHANCELLOR considered the In-
terpretation of the Noble Lord (Grenville) as un-
sound. In the first place, there were statutes impe-
rative on the King. In this very 42d of the present
reign, it was enacted, that the King, on calling out
the Militia, may and shall communicate the same
to Parliament, or assemble it for the purpose, within
fourteen days. lint in no part of the Act which
thus guardod against the Royal authority in calling
our, was there a word as to disembodying. It was
impossible to presume that this material point should
have escaped all the framers of the successive Militia
Acts ; they of course left it to the wisdom of the
crneNency. He should put the case of the Dundee
insurrection in 1792, when he was fighting by the
side of the N ible Lord (Grenville).
The Marquis of BUC)CINGHAM considered the
gre..t qnestion to be, whether a standing army was
to be maintained in time of peace ? The embodying
of the Militia was to regulated by statute law, and
not by the impressions which Ministers might at-
tempt on Parliament. The period of 1778, alluded
to by the Noble Viscount, when the Speaker congra-
tulated the King on being enabled to dispose of the
regular forces, was rather unfortunate, as we were
then just on the eve of a war; but now all war bad
ceased.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH said this was not
exactly a question of a standing army, nor was the
present strictly a time of peace. He thought it his
conscientious duty to vote against the proposed Ad-
dress. It the Statutes were silent on the subject of
disembodying the Militia, what was undefined cer-
tainly left to t'le Crown a power to exercise its discre-
tion, which wos to be exercised is ith an anxious re-
gard to in oper feelings knd to public justice. Where
was it t,l be found Low the King was to be limited in
such cases, otherwise than by exercising a sound and
wholesome discretion, according to the nature of
the particular occasion ? Cases of this sort were not
always so clear in the original exercise as in the con-
tinuation. What were the circumstances in 1792,
when the Noble Baron bo:e a great part? The
nister of that day was very able to construe an Act of
Parliament; but two things were desirable, the as-
sembly of the Legislature, and the collection of an
armed public force ; and the Noble Lord believed
he wilbntly stretched, or, pet haps, made the law on
the subject, for which he did not blame him, on ac.
count of the pressure of circumstances. It would be
ridiculous ti say that insurrection was then the cause;
On the 13114 f November, some boys had met at
Dundee, ;tang the bells, and burned about 100 oil
and rorrer casks; but before the post came away with
the imelbgence, he believed all those insurgents were
in their beds. Ti.e Proclamation stated, that tumults
had manifested themselves in acts of riot and insur-
rection ; the militia wire called out, and Parliament
assembled. There was also a kind of p.readu
mnt held in Scotland. The assembling of Parlia-
ment was necvssary, as the word " shall" in an Act
was imperative, whereas that of 44 may" was only
enabling. Certainly the times were very anxious,
but there seemed no particular danger till after the
murder of the King of France. He should be sorry
it any thing.that was said should lead the Militia to
oppose that the Mtitiny.Law was of no autnoiity.
!Lion forbid such (loci: hies should go forth ; and it
was in that view he was chiefly induced to express
himself.

Lord GRENVILLE wished to say a few words.
His Noble and Learned Friend could not suppose
Jim capable of intending any unlawful discontent in
any portion of his Majesty's subjects, least of all the
armed portion of them. But if the Noble Lord had
entertained the same opinions with himself, would he
not have thought it his duty not to sit silent in that
House, when law was grossly violated, and griev-
ous oppression inflicted ? Would he, on full consi-
deration of the subject, have forborne to stand for-
' ward in that House ? He (Lord Grenville) had no
title for legal opinions; but he endeavoured to under-
stand the laws of his country. Both the Learned
Lords stepped down from the heights of legal know.
ledge, and instead of telling how the prerogative
stood, had argued merely on examples. His Noble
and Learned Friend could not know what he did of
the affairs of 1792, and was. utterly mistaken in his
'assertions. On the 10th of August, the King of
France was taken to a prison, whence he went to his,
grave. In 1788, the Minister acted on the foresight II
Eof danger. Had our Channel fleet been defeated by''
the combined fleets which next year appeared to corer
an invasion of England, it was doubtful whether we
had the means of preventing the greatest injuries to
our resources. Ministers, in 1792, were anxious for
the authority of Parliament to force down insurrec-
tion, and call out the Militia.

The Earl of LIVERPOOL said, that after the
opinion which his Noble and Learned Friends had
delivered as to the legality of the proceedings of Mi.
nisters, it wool(' be presumption in him to occupy the
time of the House on that point. He would merely
observe, that the law had prescribed the time and
the occasion on which the Militia should be embOa,
died, hat bait' nothing about when it.was to be disc
embodied—thus leaving some discretion to the Mi.
nisttrs of the Crown, acting of course under respott:
sibihty to Parliament. In illustration of this, he re.
marked, that the Local Militia Act specified the pe.
nod of six weeks after the peace for their dissolution,
but with regard to the Regular Militia, the time ei
their being disembodied was rather a question of alai
cretion, though certainly it never could enter into the
heads of Ministers to retain them longer than an en-
larged view of existing circumstances seemed to re..
quire. On this ground then he rested their defence,
'that on the conclusion of peace with France we were
still at. war with America ; that a large British force
actually proceeded from the ports of Fiance to Ame-
rica ; and that though peace with France was signed,
a great variety of interests still remained to be ad. justed at the Congress, *which required the presence
of a livitish force on the Continent of Europe. Us*,
Oar all the circumstances, and with the utmost desire,
Ito disembody the Militia, Ministers had thought it
best to proceed 'by degrees. Accordingly, during
the recess, same additional, regiments were alissushisii
died, others were in 3 course of being disembodiedaeletit
all would actually be so, as circumstances permittedt
The House Quit divided, when there alipearcduit-i'

Ageing the Address, 27—Folic 12-46)orit7r Ui.
—Adjourned.
HOUSE OF COMMONS. • •
Petitions wae presened from Stafford, Loughborough, Chip-
' penham and Evesham, against the Property Taw.
Mr. PRI [-LIE presented a Petition front the County of Tip-
perary, raying for an Alteration In the Corn lows.
Mr.HORS I* moved for leave to bring in a MU to extend the
Act which allowed the Magittrates at the Quarter Sessions to
give an allowance not-exc. eding Fifty Pomade per Annum to
the Chaplains officiating at the County Gauls. This Act, limit-
log the allowance to £5O, was passed to long as forty-Wee
years ago; and since that time even £5 of that allowance had
been taken away from them in the shape of Property 'rat. He
therefore moved for leave to bring in a lOU to enable the Magis-
trates to increase the alltiwatice.
Mr. DAVIE:i GIDDY a.keil, whether this Bill was to be con-
fi to the County Gaols, ur whether it would extend to Houses
of Correction?
Mr. I witsT said that it was confined-to County Gaols.
Leave wets then given to bring in the Bill. it was afterwards
brought up and read a first time. Oidered to be read a second
time on Friday se/might.
Captain RENNET brought In his 13;11 for the abolition of Gaol
Fees, which was trail a first time.
After a few words from Sir Wm. Cu It rrs, It was ordered to
be read a second time on Wednesday next.
REMOVAL OF THE l'Or OFFICE.
The Sheriffs of the City of London brought up a
Petition from the Common Council, praying for leave
to present a Petition, (notwithstanding the regular
period for presenting private petitions was past,) for
the improvement of the great communication with
the North Road by St. Martin's le Grand, and by
the intended scite of the New Post Office. the Peti-
tion stated, that the cause of not applying earlier,
was, that it was only a few days ago that the Lords
of the Treasury had given their consent to those int•
provements.
On the question that this be agreed to,
The SPEAKER observed, that it involved a ques.
Lion of public money, and asked, whether it had the
consent of the Crown ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
rose to signify that assent ; at the same time, he must
vindicate himself from the reports that had been
spread, of his having threatened to remove' the Post
Office out of the City ; and by this means prevAiling
upon them to agree to its being placed in the situa-
tion which had been mentioned-, near St. Martin's le
Grand. The fact was, that from full investigation,
he was convinced that the business of the department
could ni t be carried on adequately in the present
Post Office, and it became necessary to build another.
Several other situationi in the City had been pointed
out, but all of them had been found more or less in-
convenient. The situation pointed out wi,s the most
convenient for a Post Office that could be found
within the City of London.
Mr. BARING thought, that, independent of the
accommodation to be given from the Post Office
being placed in one situation rather than another, the
House should take into its consideration the great
public expense. to be incurred by the proposed plan ;
they should also consider the operation that the Bill
sought for would have on private property, as it im.
mediately went to take down and destroy the pro-
perty of two or three hundred individuals. When
such interests were at stake, he did not see why the
City of London should be permitted to present its
petition alter the usual time for receiving titivate pe.
titions. He believed, that the excuse alleged in the
,petition was false, and that it was not within a feW
Clays only that they could get the consent of the
Lords of the Treasury. The City of London, when
left to iritelf, rejected this extravagant plan. Since
that time, however, a threat had been held out to
them, that if they did not sanction it, Government
would remove the Post Office to the West End of
the Town. He believed that the Post-masters, and
even Ministers, had been intriguing with the leading
men in the City to get their sanction to this measure.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer well knew the ob-
jections of the merchants of London to the proposed
removal of the Post Office. Independent, however,
of the accommodation, there was this great objection
to the new plan, that it would be Word to cost the
country no less than atBoo,ooo, which was an expen-
diture, that, in the present financial state of the coun-
try, he thought the House would not be disposed to
sanction.
Sir %V. CURTIS said, that if it was absolutely
necessary to have a new Post-office, he did not care
much whether it cost £BOO,OOO or sEsJo,ooo—(Hear,
hear, and a laugh from the opposition benches.)—As
to himself in particular, them were but sew men in
the City that would fuel more personal convenience
than himself in the Post-office remaining where it
.vas. . He should, however, support the proposed re-
moval, for the purpose of general accommodations
Mr. GRENFELL thought that the convenience
of other people should be attended to as well as the
convenience of those alio lived in the immediate
neighbourhood of Lombard-street. He believed that
a very great proportion of the merchants of London
lived west of Lombard street. The accommodation
of the tradesmen and of men who, like themselves,
lived at the west-end of the town, should also be
considered.
Mr. GORDON said that lie 'Ad heard no answer,
to the statement that the expence of this new Post-
office would be reBoo,ooo. He wished every possible
accommodation to the merchants, but be did not
think it reasonable that it should be purchased at that
price front the public purse.
Mr. PONSONBY. wished that there had been a
specific plan before the House with, an estimate of
the expence. He was persuaded that the finances of
the country would not afford an expenditure any
thing nearly so great as was proposed fur this build-
ing. He did not think that the public ought to pay
largely for the accommodation of any individuals
either at the east or west end of the town.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
thought the expence of building the new .Post-office
could not fairly be discussed now, when the only
question was about allowing the city of London to
present a petition. As to the plan that was proposed
he conceived it to be the most economical that could
be adopted, and that it would come cheaper than re.
bqilding the present Postaillice.
Mr. H. SUMNER was convinced, that at a much
less expence than was proposed for this new building,
the present Post-office might be made sufficient for
all purposes. It now stood on 32,(th) feet of ground,
but 16,000 more could be purchased immediately ad.
joining. The new scite that was spoken oh, ..ticr de-
ducting the space for the mail coaches, would be
only 53,000 feet, which would giVe an advantage of
Mil 41100 feei-in room to what *iikht be had to the
ite ese4t situation. Thv purchase stootid log

the new Piet-office would, according to the retetre
under the Property Tax, be 0280,000. But as those
returns were always fallacious, he might well add one-
half, and state the purchase of the ground to be four
hundred thousand pounds. To tlis was to be adde;
the purchase of what was called good will, which
occupiers of houses set what value they pleaszli,
ihd which juries of men -circumstanced in the sa.;.c
way always gave a very liberal aliuwance for, and
which often ainuistited to more than the property
itself. Now, reckoning in the same way from Om
rettuus under the Property 'fax, the purchase ia
what would be wanting in the immediate nelg! hour-
• hood of the present Post-olice, would be oa.y
05an1.). The slifference of cne hundred thouseej
guineas and four, in the purchase of the mere gretetd
for building, was a most serious object. In addi:iun
to that. any alterati.,ns in Lombard-street would pre.
bably be done with simpliciti; as they could not he
viewed !rem any distance. In the now projected
building, it would not be too much to compute, lila
thirty or forty thousand pounds would be spent 01
ornament. It was Said that a part of this erp.:..e
would be provided by the City, out of the Of
Fund; that WAS, in ether words, out of the ;ex upon
coals, which every one in the neighbourhood of the
metropolis must pay. ' He.thought it hard that the
expence of building this Post-office should be thrown
on the districts iinmediately adjoining the metropolis,
when those that were at a distance had full as much
benefit by the establishment.
Sir JAMES SHAW said, that the.city ofLoncion
had but a small interest in the question, t xcept t:: at
they naturally felt interested for the improvement of
their capital. Towards the expense of a new and
elegant street, communicating with the north road,
they offered to contribute one-third, which was a!Jout
£lOO,OOO. Although the expense might tome out
of the Orphans' Fund, yet, it should be recollected,
that the city of London paid .IC11,5(.1) annually out
of their kiosk to the Orphans' Fund.
Mr. SUMNER thought it right to apprize the
house of the origin of this Orphans' Fund. It was
when the city of London was indebted to the Or-
phan Establishment in the sum of re 750,000, and
declared itself utterly unable to pay, that they applied
to Parliament in the reign of King William, and in
order to pay the interest (the re-payment of the prin-
cipal being quite out of the question), it WAS settled
that they should give £11,500 cut of their yearly
funds, and that the tax upon coals should be applied
fur tlie remainder. Hettelleved that the House would
be absolutely ashamed of the ail-I:cation I f this Or-
phans' Fund, if their attention was ealhel seriousiy
the 'object.
.iii JAMES SHAW contended that Oleic nad keen
no abuse in the application of the Fund by the City
of London. He appealed to the report of the Com-
mittee of which that gentleman himself was Chairman.
Mr. SUMNER explained. He had not said that
the City of London had been guilty of abuse in the
Application of this money, but he had said that Par-
liament. would be ashamed of the application uf it, if
their attention was called to it. He believed that no
funds had been misapplied by the City from the time
that Parliament directed the application.
Mr. BANKS wit fsr receiving the petition, but
wished to guard himself hom being supposed to ap-
prove the 'plan. He thought that sufficient additions
might he made to the present Post-office.
The House then divided on the receiving the Peti-
thin—Ayes 71— Noes 24.—Majority 47.
The petition was then presented at the bar by Mr.
Sheriff Reay, and on the motion of Sir WILLIAM
CURTIS, read and referred to a Committee.
Some conversation then took place on the propriety
of producing not only the estimate and plans of he
new Post-Office, but likewise of the expense -attend-
ing the plan of rendering the present establishment
sufficiently commodious.
Mr. BARING suggested the propriety of procu.
ring a report from the Surveyor-General, rather than
the Surveyor of the Post-Office, who, he had some
reason to believe, was at the bottom of the whole job.
The brother of that gentleman was understood to pos-
sess a large property in the vicinity of the intended
solar of the new building.
Two papers were then presented at the bar, viz. a
return of the gross number and amount of charitable
donations made in the office of the Clerk of the Peace
for the county of Middlesex; and a return from the
Piothonotaries of the Court of Common Pleas, of
the number of processes of bail for debt under ar2o.
for the years 1812, IS, and 14, pursuant to the order
the House.