Star.
London, England, 1820-07-20 00:00:00

•
1110

PARLIAMENTARY PROCEEDINGS.
•
HOUSE OF LORDS, JULY 19.
Lord F.RSKINE.rose and said, that be had been entrusted:
with a Petition from the Lord Mayor, Aldermen, and Com-
mons, of the City of London, in Common Council assembled,
which complained of the mode of proceeding that had been
adopted against her Majesty. He presumed, that he had: been
requested to present this Petition on account of the part which
he had taken on this question, but be thought it due to him-
self to say, that there were parts of this Petition of which he
could not approve.—The Petition was then read.
The-LORD ('il ANCF.LLOR said, that there were allega-
tions in the Petition which, in his opinion, were disrespectful to
the House, and he would, therefore, put it to their Lordships,
whether they would receive such a Petition ?
Lord ER SKIN F. had only further to express his hope, that
he would not be considered as identified with any opinions in
the Petition, and that his opinions would be taken only from the
part which he acted in Parliament.
Alter a' few observations from the Loan Orals-mem and
I,nrd HOLLAND, it was agreed to defer the Petition until a later
hour in the evening, when the attendance of their Lordships
would he more numerous.
The Carl of DONOrG HMORE said, that he had in his
possession for some time Petitions from the City and County of
Waterford, signed by ifoman Catholics, and complaining of the
disabilities under which they laboured. He would have before
now presented them to their Lordships, but be had wished to
wit until the general l'etition of the Roman Catholics of Ire-
land was forwarded to him. From some circumstances, this
ieneral Petition was so long delayed, that it was not placed in
his heeds until a week. ago, when the Session was nearly at an
end, and when no rational man could think of laying on their
Lordships' table a Petition of so much importance—because it
was impossible to expect that the tune would admit of giving it
even a decent cOnsideratiun. Besides this, there was another
cause of deferring it, derived from the circumstance that another
subject of paramount importance engrossed the attention of
their Lordships, andtherefore rendered the present time utile-
arourubk to the consideration of any other matter. Upon com-
municating' on this subject with a respectable and highly-tae
lenteel individual (Mr. Plunket) he felt great satisfaction in Sude
big the opinion of that individual entirely coincide with his own;
and both agreed that it was better to reserve the Petitions with
which they were entrusted until next Session, when they would
take the earliest opportunity of 'calling the attention of Parlia-
ment to this subject, than which none other was of greater
Importance.

IMPROVED BANK NOTES.
Lord LAUDERDALE presented a Petition from
a person named John Lee Bradberry, complaining of
the injuries which he should suffer in case the Bill
now pending in their Lordships' House, for the im-
provement of Bank of England Notes should pass
into a law. The Petitioner prayed to be heard at
their Lordships' Bar by himself or Counsel against
the Bill. The Petition was read and laid on the table.
. The Earl of LIVERPOOL then moved the Order
of the Day for their Lordships going into a Com-
mittee on the New Bank Notes Bill, when
Lord LAUDERDALE expressed a hope that the
Petitioners against the Bill should be heard by them-
selves or Counsel, as prayed for.
The Earl of LIVERPOOL said, that if ever there
was a 'case before their Lordships where not even the
shadow of an excuse could be offered in behalf of the
petitioning side, this was certainly one. It had been
for some time strongly felt, that the crime of forgery,
he meant forgery of Bank of England Notes, had be-
come unhappily too common, and a wish was uni-
versally expressed that something should be done
which might tend to diminish the number of those
offences. The difficulties of the question were felt to
be great on both sides. If the offence was not pro-
perly checked, there was no security for property;
on the other hand, the facilities to the commission of
the-offence were so numerous, as to afford a kind of
temptation to crime. In this state of things, general
complaints were made against the Bank of England:
the subject was taken up in another place, and a
Committee was moved for in order to examine whe-
ther any means could be devised for making such an
improvement in the execution of the Notes, as to ren-
der the imitation of them impossible, or at least more
difficult than it then was. That motion had been
opposed by some of the Members of his Majesty 's
Government, not that they felt that such an inquiry
.was not called for, but becatne they objected to the
mode that was proposed. They offered an amend-
ment, which was ultimately carried, the object of
which was to present an Address to the Crown, re-
. questing that A Commission might be issued to ascer-
tain the possibility of the improvement so much de-
sired. In consequence of, that Address, a Commis-
sion was issued, and he needed only to state the
names of the individuals who were appointed mem-
bers of that Commission, to shew that not only no
political object was in view in forming it, but that
everything was done to render it as effectual as pos-,
sible. At the head of that Commission was the late
respectable and highly respected Sir Joseph Banks,
whose fitness for the task would be universally ac-
knowledged. Among the members were Mr. Davies
Gilbert, Dr. Woollaston, Mr. Hatchett, and Mr.
Harman, whose general acquaintance with the Arts
could not be disputed. There was Sir %Vm.Congreve,
one of the first mechanists in the country, and Mr.
Courtetray, the Master in Chancery, who was added,
• because it was deemed desirable than an individual
should be of the Commission, whose habits were
connected with legal pursuits. When the Commis-
sion was named, it met with universal approbation,
and it was admitted that no one Commission could
be more likely to succeed in its object. When they
were appointed, they devoted themselves incessantly
to the investigation of the subject. They had exa-
mined 170 plans, and at length gave their opinion
in favour of one plan. It certainly would not be un-
natural, that the remaining 169 individuals, whose
plans were rejected, should complain; but when
would their Lordships come to a conclusion if they,
were to hear theta all ? Besides, even if they should •
consent to hear them, did their Lordships think them-
selves competent to examine the subject? Undoubt-
edly the Petitioners had the right to complain if they
chose to exercise it. But did any man believe that
any good would arise out of such an inquiry ? They
said they were aggrieved—he denied the fact. What-
ever inventions they were the authors of, they would
have the full use of them in every other way, except
in making Notes for the Bank of England. But if
they did not conceive this a sufficient answer, if they
still that they were aggrieved, why did they not
to to the Courts. of Justice and claim redress ? The
supposition, however, which they entertained, was
no reason why the Bill beibre their Lordships should
be delayed. If the plan which it sanctioned should
proceed, that Bill would confer a mout important
benefit on the country. He did not pledge himself
to the success of the plan ; it was enough for him to
state that it mas considered the best plan that had
been proposed. All he asked of their Lordship was
to allow it to be tried—rto 'see how far it might suc-