Star.
London, England, 1826-05-09 00:00:00

" PS-- Ci.nt. • -
. .
_ r .
,4—.....,..... t . ~,...
~. -
tkv\,. -
f*:
t. var,„.... ...:.•,:y,
0i • .... k
„, "es lir
..
. 1...; ~. . • • ..,
,ci i ieilefir ..,,.. . . A.,/
... ..
. . . .
• . .
. . ---...,..........
• . . .•
v.,;10%)rif4r.., . •
1k1( 0 1
. .•--,
4cl' Rif, .
•
,---.6.- •
--••--..-- .
TUESDAY EVENING; MAY 9, 1826. [PRICE SEVENPENCL '
1
' 4
. $
J
,
1 .
L i
1.
. ,
,
; 1 .
)
; )i
1
1
~
• .
..- . t;
! t
i
;It
. i I
I/
4.
'4 : of
..;
t

The Hill for improving the
was read a second time.

the Honourable Lieutenant-Colonel Bird, who had
been Secretary to the Noble Lord, should be es-

mined, touching the subjects of complaint against,
the Noble Lord previously to his going out to the
Cape again. He should not enter into a recapitulation
of the detached subjects of complaint enumerated in
the former Petition of Mr. Burnet, presented on the
16th June, 1825. This Petition did not restate them,
but merely referred to them, more particularly to his
having been banished from the Colony for five years,.
for havii*, it was said, written a libel on the Govern-
ment. ibis libel was nothing more than a Petition to
the Governor himself, seeking redress of a previous
injury which the Petitioner had received. These were
facts which would authorise the impeachment of that
Noble Lord. He concluded by expressing a hope that
the Secrttary fc,r Colonial Affairs would not any longer
refrain from giving the Petitioner leave to return to the Cape
Colony, despite of his sentence not yet having expired, for the pur-
pose of obtaining, during his stay there, documentary and other
evidence to substantiate the charge he wished to prefer against the
Noble Lord, of having unjustly and arbitrarily exercised his autho-
rity with respect to himself personally.
Oa the Hon. Gentleman's motion, the Petition was read-

Mr. W. HORTON had not till now seen the Petition.
Nor was lie surprised the Petitioner should object to
leave his case to the Commissionets sent out by Go.
vernment to examine into these causes of complaint,
because he knew from the report those Commissioners
had sent home, which was very voluminous, that they
did nut feel favourably disposed towards him. This
Report and its Appendix was very voluminous, and
contained abundant information on the subjects com-
mitted to the Commissioners investigation. If the
House were in possession of it, then the Members would
be enable J to see whether those allegations and charges
by Bishop Burnet were not as the Commissioners stated

The SPEAKER here intimated to the House that he had dis-
covered in the Petition a phrase which it would be for them to

decide whether it did not reflect on the privilege of that House,
and hence render the Petition inadmissible in point of form. The
Petitioner stated, that in consequence of a pledge given by the Hon.
Under-Colonial Secretary that the Petitioner should be permitted
to return to the Colony. to effect his purpose and collect evidence,
the House had declined to give any reply to the request of the Peti-
tioner. Now in his vkw of it, this was an infereece the House

could not sulfur to be drawn u to the influence stated to be exercised .

Mr. Secretary CANNING, admitting the force of the Speaker's
decision on the point of form, said he, however, should not be

disposed to resist its being received mereiy on that account.
After a few words from Mr. Masson Guaitar, Mr. Baatosoar,
Mr. Hums, and Mr. W. Hamm, Mr. Ba.tuatostr withdrew the

Pedtia2 as informaL

In answer to a question from Mr. Pascoe GRIIMILL,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said be could
state from authority that the Bank of England had resolved on the

establishment of Brunch Banks, and that the Directors bad k now
in their contemplation what would be the best mode of their
effecting this impottant arrangement for the convenience and
secutitsof the public.
Mr. Secretary CANNING moved that the Report of the Can
Laws should be brunght up.
Mr. HEATHCOTE opposed the bringing up of the Report,
because he thought that the expedient of trying to protect the
English &rester by a duty of 12s. per quarter. or even less, would
only go into the pocket of the speculator, and not into that of
the consumer.

Mr. CALCRAFT said, that he had not all those ob.
jections to the present measure which he had to the
original Resolution, because prici and duty were left
out of the question, and that was a great point ; but he
still differed horn those who supposed that this was nn
prejudgment of the general question of the Corn Laws;
and he still objected to the principle which pervaded
the measure (unintentionally perhaps), that was, that it
held.up the Landed Interest to the eyes of the manu.
facturers as the bar between them and abundance. By
many accounts from the country, he had learned that
the Landed Proprietors already looked upon the gene-
ral quebticn as decided by this measure, and there was
an end altogether to all cert.tinty in bargaining for the
value of farms. He was not the advocate of the exist-
ing Corn Laws, but he thought a protecting duty neces.
sary—a full and fair duty, such as would be a real, and not a no-
minal, protection. From the day this Bill passed, Ministers would
have it in their power to regulate the price of corn to any standard
they pleased. As far as he was concerned, however. be should not
wish to oppose the measure in its first stage, as the Bill would be
more pet fectly understood on the second reading, when be should
feel himself as free to oppose it as if he had not acceded to it in Its
present stage.

exaggerated, and the Petitioner himself unworthy of
the special protection of the House. Part of the chaise
against the Noble Governor was, that the Colonists had
suffered much from the administration of justice too
closely after the Dutch law ; whatever charge this
might be against the law as it stood, it was none against
the Governor, and the Commissioners at the Cape st ere
endeavouring as fast as possible to assimilate the Co-
lonial law to our own code. The Commissioners' Report
would be found to contain, in his opinion, all the infor-
mation necessary for this case. It the House were of

opinion there was not information enough in the ♦olu-
minous Report of th• Commissioners, then, and not

till then, would it be expedient to require Lieut.. Colonel
Bird to delay his departure from this country for the
Cape. In tact, this Petitioner had been informed, that
if he could skew that his business At the Cape could not
be accomplished as well by the Colonial Office as by
his own presence there, the Col::nial Office would
consent to his return. This he could n)t do, but still
continued, through the daily Papers, to agitate the public mind by
gross exaggeration. After all, it' the House consented to wait for
the Report, it would not be bound in the least by that step to ac-
quiesce in the opinions of the Commissioners, but might then take
such measures respecting this person's case as it might think proper,
even before they came to enter into the grave and solemn cnnsidera-
, tion of that Noble Lord's general administration of the Cape.
Mr. HUME asked why it was the Noble Lord had
remained so lung abroad after his formal recall?—was
it not to avoid and evade the charges impending over
him ? He had heard that one or two ships had be, n
named in which he was to return, but there was no
chance of his appearing until after the breaking up of
Parliament. Whilst this delay took place, the Petitioner
was unable to proceed in the business. He complained
much of the Commissioners who had been so applauded
by the Hon. Under Secretary for their voluminous
report. -Three years had already been spent on that
enquiry, and he very much doubted their activity or
zeal. To refuse this man permission to return was a
groat hardship on him, and was also an act of unfairness to the
Noble Lord concerned, for which conduct he considered the Co-
lonial once highly censurable—(Hear). In justice to the individual
and the country, Col. Bird ought to be ordered to remain in this
country till after the trial.
Coionel DAVIES was of the same opinion.
lir. WILMOT-HORTON observed, that it had been an um

Mr. BANKES objected to the nseasure on the same prin-
ciple that he had done to the original Resolution.

Mr. LEYCESTER woed not feel unwilling to grant
such a power as that proposed to his Majesty's Minis-
ters, provided that a sufficient latitude might be al-
lowed in the exercise of it. H.! thought the opposition
to it was founded on a very erroneous distrust in the
Government. He beggid to observe, however, he had
put a question to the President of the Board of Trade,
to which he had answered—" that his Majesty's Minis-
ters had stated that no alteration of the Corn Laws would take
place this Seuion." Certainly, this answer was perfectly true;
hut as certainly it disclosta nothing; and he thought the pro-
found silence of Ministers on that subject was very unjustifiable,
considering the anxiety of the public to obtain some satisfactory in.
formation respecting it.
Lord BELGRAVE said he had tried every mode,
and ultimately found it impossible to assent to the pro-
posed rneasurei in any way. As to the liberation of
the bonded corn, lie thought it would be a perfect nul-
lity, so far as it was intended to afford relief to the
manufacturing classes of the community. To look at
it in the most favourable point of view, the entire quan-
tity would not furnish more than four or five days' con-
sumption, but it would not cause a reduction of the
price, for he was not of opinion that the price of the
article depended on its value. The one might amount
to 40s. of which Ws. frequently would be swallowed up
by the intermediate process of ssle between the wooer
and the consumer. As to the other branch of the pro-
position, he conceived it only a modification of the
measure proposed by the Hon. Member for Bridgnorth
(Mr. Whitmore.) A great fault which attached to the
measure was, that a remedy cf the kind recommended
encouraged au idea that the Corn Laws were the cause
of the misery which was endured. He did not like to
promote such a delusion. Besides, he had been informed that the
&shades of the question bad caused on the bonded corn an askant'
In price of cent. per cent. Hr was strongly opposed to a proposal
for investing Ministers with a power, for the exercise a which nut
the Government, but the Parliament, was to be responsible.
Sir JOHN BRYDGES was of opinion that it was a
fallacy to expect the distressed minufacturers would be
relieved by chtap bread, when they had not the money
tis buy it with. He would not oppose the bringing up

-

derstandiag on both sides of the Home when this subject was
agitated last Session, that nothing would House,
done in it until after the
return of the Noble Lord to this country from Ida Government.
Mr. F. PALMER said that as this Officer was a very important
witness in this caw, he ought not to be allowed to leave, or rather
be sent out of the country, lest the public should form their own
inference.
Lerd E. SOMERSET' said he had heard with surprise
the observations of the Hon. Members for N .Ith amber-
land and Reading, with respect to his Noble Relative.
Those statements were unfounded. The Governor had