Star.
London, England, 1821-03-06 00:00:00

RETURNS.

The Order of the Day for the House going into al
Committee of Supply having been read,
Mr. BENNETT rose, and complained that cub)/
Returns, stating the number of the Volunteess is Ai
Army, which he had moved for some days ago,vege
not yet laid on the table.

Mr. LUSHIIsiGTON said, he hoped the papen
would not be long delayed.
Mr. lIUME reminded the House that theme.
cellor of the Exchequer had, at the beginning of toe
Session, informed the I louse, that he expected tot*
able to spew a reduction in the establishment of de
Army to the amount of one million. Now he could
assure the House, that he had looked carefully its.
the Estimates, and could discover only a reduction
of about 1.:200,000. That reduction was only in com-
parison with the year 1820, when the !louse •dl
knew the establishment was larger than in 1819. He
conceived that the Return of the number of-Volta.
teets ought to have been on the table before now;-.
and, since it was not yet given in, he hoped that
few days longer would be allowed before the Army
Estimates were brought under the consideration of
the House.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER es.
pressed his hope that the papers alluded to would be
placed on the table before Wednesday next, whentlie
Army Estimates would be brought forward.
The question was then put, that the House do re.
solve itself into a Committee of Supply on Wedoes•
day nezt—(No, no !
,from several Members).
Strangers were ordered to withdraw, when
Mr. BENNETT rose, and said, he would not press
for a division now ; but he gave notice, that lithe
Returns for which he had moved were not laid on
the table before Wednesday, he for one would refuse
the Supplies—(Hear, bear).--.The question was then
agreed to without a division.

TRANSFER OF STOCK.

Mr. CURWEN said he had. never risen in this
House under feelings more painfol than those which
he now laboured under. He had been charged with
suggesting a measure which went to subvert every
principle of property recognized in the country. He
felt that he had not justly incurred such a bawl
charge as this: There was not a man in the Howe
who entertained a more sacred regard for theft%
of property than himself, and he was convinced**
if a breach of public faith was once made, if eta
prove equally destructive to every species af
perty. He proposed no such measure as thar.
conceived he had a fair and just reason for
for a Return of the amount of the Transfers orSt
made within a Certain period, and he openly and*
didly avowed, that his object in obtaini#g this retie
was to bring that species of property under the net
of the House, as an object of taxation. When Pe
liament had declared that transfers of stock ad
sl
transactions connected with public loans "Wadi
exempt from duty, it was his opinion that
meat had exceeded its just powers. He coal,
that the right and the foundation of all Governed'
was, that every man should pay for the peed!
of himself and property. This was the only gram
on which he could be taxed.' If that was the at'
he maintained that the ezetnption of any one teas'
or set of men, from the payment of taxes, vas
fraud on the community. It was not in the Pm!
of Parliament to grant such an.exemptioni uoleo
was for the public good, which it was obvious 011
not the case at present. The Hon. Member
stated the amount of the public debt at dela
periods, and said that, at present, it was of 06.1
magnitude as to be equal to nearly the whole dr!
real property of the United Empire. Was se.kj:
fund as that, he asked, to be exempted from OPT.
The 23d of Elizabeth exempted from the charley:
the poor such property as was not of a local -
visible character, and therefore the only obiectki
that could be made to the liability of funded.t'
petty to pay Poor Rates, was where it was not ton
and local. [Some impatience was here manifem,
by several Members, who coughed pretty audibly
The Hon. Member begged pardon of the Home
he had trespassed too much upon their time, butts
hoped that they would excuse him, for the sake "
his own honour, as he hied been accused of sufroi
ing a monstrous and untenable proposition-4
The taxes pressed on thi country to a degree bey':
its ability- to pay them. He hoped that no tome
.
would ever be called upon to pay more than hisita
proportion ; thitt just proportion was definabletnt
out any difficulty, and beyond that it would be
extreme of injustice to go; but so far every
• ouSht to go. He could not but tbink that this cif'

.fless, at this moment, in a situation very much
;,;esobling that of France immediately before the
josslution. Its finances were embarrassed, the peo-
_lr throughout the whole country were in a state of
were e• suffering, and many considered themselves as
shouted from that country, on account of the exemp-
tions from taxation which were enjoyed by a privi-
leged order. Under such circumstances he consi-
agred it equally just and expedient that the fund-
jeader should contribute to relieve the country. He
Atocluded with Moving for a Return of the amount
d 311. stock transferred in the Bank of. England for
oelsa ten years, ending 1820, excepting those trans-
fers which had been made in reference to the Public
pet, and distinguishitg. the sums for each year.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER as-
*red the Honourable Member that he was far from
Aiming him with any wish or intention to subvert
ihe Public Credit; but he must say that the measure
reillith he proposed deserved all the reprobation that
)eiej been bestowed upon it—(Hear, hear). Revert-
s., to the Honourable Member's proposition, he
;It observe, that if it was allowed to operate once,
then was no reason why it should not be afterwards
applied to the whole and every part of the system of
buying and selling—(Hear). It should also be re-
collected that property of the kind here contemplated
could be easily transferred to foreign funds—( Hear,
kar)—and if the Honourable Member's principle
were applied to it, he did not know what might be
the Teat. seeing that at present the only advantage
which the British fundholder possessed over every
other was the superior security which this country
enjoyed—(Hear hear, hear). That would be no
longer the cased the principle in question weresar-
intoeffect, and indeed before it could be brought
into operation, the general cry would be suave qui
rat—(Hear, bear). Thus, the capital which em-
oloyed the industry of the country would be reduced
to nothing, and it would soon be seen that any mea-
sure which' violated the good faith, would take away
also from the solid defence of the country—(Hear,
leer). On these principles, without going farther
Sao detail, he felt it his duty to oppose the motion.
Mr. JOHN MARTIN observed, that as the re-
striction on the Bank was not a permanent measure,
so it was known when the public contracted loans
that an alteration must take place at some time or
other in the value of the currency.
After a few words in explanation from the CHAN-
CILLOR of the ExcueQuEst, the motion was negatived.
MR. ELLIS.
Dr. LUSHINGTON said, as the motion which he
had to make directly affected an Honourable and
Learned Gentleman opposite to him, he should dis-
charge the task which was imposed on him with as
such brevity as possible. It was not necessary for
lim to state, that in Courts of Equity all the most
rariour and complicated questions of property were
aided—that where accounts were to be taken, where
tbeestates of bankrupts, or lunatics, or minors, were
isquestion, the Courts of Equity had an almost ex-
clusive jurisdiction. It was not to be concealed, that
though justice was ultimately done in these Courts,
verylseavy burthens were imposed on the suitors by
delay, and it was their duty to see that this great evil
was not still further augmented. The basis on which
be should found the motion he was about to submit
to the House was, that the Honourable Member for
Dtblin could not discharge the duties of Master in
Chancery in Ireland—that he must neglect either his
duties as Master or as Member of Parliament--and
that, therefore, as the house had a paramount and
compulsory claim on the service of all its Members.
the suitors in Chancery must be necessarily the suf-
faers. In stating to the Nouse what the duties of
the Honourable Gentleman as Master in Chancery
were, he had the very best evidence, that of a Com-
mission appointed by the Crown, an:l of the Honour-
able Member himself upon oath. The Honourable
Member, he should premise, had purchased the re-
signation of his predecessor, Mr. Walker, in 1807, in
pursuance of a long custom, with the evil of which
the Honourable Memberwaas not chargeable, though
the practice had generated a whole train of abuses in
the administration of justice in Ireland. No man
meld read the Report of the Commissioners of In-
quiry without perceiving that the administration of
Justice in Leland, for the last thirty years, had been
a system of corruption, and was disgraceful to those
by whom it was administered—(Hear, hear).—From
the Report of the Commissioners, it appeared that
me of the Six Clerks had charged 1,297 attendances
a single cause, without having attended even once!
s-{Hear, hear).—This was only one of the many
*uses which prevailed up to the present day, to the
great injury of the suitors in the different Courts.—
The Honourable and Learned Member (Mr. Ellis)
entered upon his office of Master in Chancery in the
Cear 180 G. When examined upon oath before the
ommissioners, he stated that the duties of his office
sere various and difficult—piers the Honourable
itemiser referred to the Report, in which it was stated
that the Master in Chancery had to attend to the
use of lunatics, taxing bills of costs, bankrupts' al:
fairs, and, in short, whatever it might please the Lord
Chancellor to refer to them]. Could any one doubt
that the absence of any Gentleman who had such va-
rious duties to attend to, must be productive of the
most serious injury to the suitors in the Irish Court
of Chancery?—(Hear, hear,)--The next question
pat to the Honourable and Learned Member by the
Commissioners was, as to the length cf time which
as necessary to the performance of those duties.—
tpon this point he had the most unanswerable evi-
f!ence—the evidence of the llonourable and Learned
Itemiser himself, which was corroborated by two
!her Masters in Chancery. The Honourable and
learned Member stated, that the duties of his office
tequired his personal attendance during ten months
tf the year that he attended in his office from eleven
till four every day in Term, and out of Term, more
M less, as business requited—and that he also at-
ded in his office in the evening, for the dispatch
various branches of business connected with Isis
How, then, could any Gentleman so oc-
upied attend to his Parliamentary duties without in-
Jary to the Public ? It was impossible that a man,
tinder such circumstances, could discharge his duty,
ell: ess hecould make forty-eight hours out of twenty.
mans In another part of the Report, the lion. and
Learned Member stated, that the duties of his office
tnuld not be discharged by deputy—(Hear).—He
busted,
•then, notwithstanding the-desperate situation
whichlide_..motions arising from his (Dr. Lushington's).
91 the House WIN genetally placed, that. the

•

• -
Members of the Sister Kingdom, at !bast, would get
rid of •party prejudices, and exert themselves in fa-
vour Of their country—that they would reflect upon
the situation in which recent circumstances had
placed that unhappy country, and endeavour to pre-
serve to the suitors in the Courts, at least, a wreck of
their fortunes. lie presumed that the Honourable
and Learned Member (Mr. Ellis), or his friends,
would say, that the moticn with which he was about
to conclude would operate as an ex post facto law,
and go on to argue that no such motion should be
made until all the mischief complained of was done.
If he knew anything of the nature of an ex pest judo
law, his motion would be totally different from it.—
He would allow the mischief to be done rather than
introduce an er post facto law to prevent it. The
fact, however, was this. The Honourable Member's
office was conferred during . pleasure. Now, if he
could shew that the holding of such an office was in-
compatible with the duties of a Member of Parlia-
ment, he trusted that he would establish his case.—
The Honourable Member wa's appointed to his office
in 1806, and he (Dr. Lushington) was happy to say,
that he was fully qualified for the duties imposed
upon him ; but this was an additional reason why he
objected to the absence of the Hon. and Learned
Gentleman from his office. Two or three Masters
in Chancery had been recently appointed, none of
whom could be supposed to possess the knowledge
and experience of the Honourable and Learned Mem-
ber. The fees of office were stated by the Honour-
able Member himself to amount to £3710 a-year.—
Ile meant no imputation upon the Honourable and
Learned Member, when he stated that those fees had
been principally created, within the last twenty•five
years, by the Masters themselves, for their own bene-
fit. In addition to the fees, the Honourable Mem-
ber had a salary of 1:400 a-year, which, with half the
fees of the Examining Clerk, made the situation
I.worth £1,400 a-year—a sum as large as the salary
of any Puisne Judge of this country. The Honour-
able Member in support of his argument, quoted the
cases of several Members who had been arrested. by
order of the House, though their excuse was having
gone to attend the duties of Public Offices in Ireland.
Suppose that a Call of the House were to take place,
would'it be a good answer on the part of the Ho-
nourable and Learned Member to say, that he was
engaged in inquiring into a complicated and difficult
question connected with his office? The Honour-
able Member, alluding to the previous discussions on
this question, observed, that the Noble Lord oppo-
site (Castlereagh) and a Right Honourable Fi iend of
his now abroad (Mr. Cannin, had declared, that in
the event of the Honourable Member's wishing to re-
tain bath his seat and his office, they had not the
slightest objection to au Address being moved to the
Crown, praying his removal from his situation of
Master in Chancery—(Hear, hear). This he had
heard from the Noble Lord, and he now called upon
him to make good his assertion. The Honourable
Member, after some further observations, concluded
by moving a series of Resolutions, the purport of
which was, that the situation of Master in Chancery
(Ireland) required the constant attendance of the per-
son filling that office ; and that Thomas Ellis, Esq.
Master in Chancery, who had been recently elected
Member of Parliament for the City of Dublin; was
'incapable of efficiently discharging both these du-
ties. The Honourable Member said, he meant to fol-
low this motion up by another, praying an Address
to the Clown for the dismissal of Thomas Ellis, Esq.
from his office of Master in Chancery in Ireland.
Mr. LENNARD, of Ipswich, seconded the mo-
tion.s He contended that it was utterly impossible
for the same person to discharge fairly and faith-
fully the duties of the two situations. His duties as
a Master in Chancery required his constant attend-
ance in Ireland ; whilst his duties as a Member of
Parliament, which must supersede all others, called
for his attendance in the House of Commons. The
old adage," that no man could serve GOD and Mam-
mon," was verified in this case ; for whilst Mr. Ellis
was attending his duties in Parliament, the interests
of the suitors in Chancery must be sacrificed.
A conversation then took place between the
SPEAKER and Mr. C. WYNN as to a point of order in
the proceedings ; namely, whether the Member for
Dublin should be heard before the question was put
or after? It was decided, however, that the Hon.
Member should be heard before the question was put.
Mr. ELLIS then rose and observed, that he should
now only state a few facts, and offer 4 few observa-
tions in explanation. Could he have doile it consistent
with his duty, lie would have withdrawn from this
contest ; but the misrepresentations which had gone
abroad day after day, and the consideration that it
was not a question relating to himself alone, but one
which concerned the Empire, and the future rights
of others, whether the Elected or the Electors, he felt
that he could not withdraw himself from the expla-
nation. Much had been said on the subject of his
answers to the questions put to hint when formerly
examined as to the duties of his office. It was true
he stated that he attended at his office daily to trans-
act the business which came before him for at least
ten months in the year ; but this was only an answer
as to his own habits and customs, and did not prove
that his attendance daily was necessary. His next
answer was, perhaps, more distinct—namely, that
there was daily business, more or less, for Masters in
Chancery. True, it was so ; but he was not so vain
as to presume that, with many other Masters in Chan-
cery much more able than himself, his absence could
be material. Indeed, he knew it was not ; he had an
unanswerable proof of it, for at the time lie left Dub-
lin, a fortnight ago, not a single paper *as left on
his desk undisposed of.—The Honourable Gentleman
then entered into an explanation of the course of
business, and the mode of doing it, in the Master's
Office in Ireland ; and contended that no inconveni-
ence or injury could arise to the suitors in Chancery
from his absence. If the House should determine
otherwise, he was free to confess, he must resign his
seat in Parliament, for he could not resign his office
' in Chancery. fie shoal,' now retire ; and if he
should never again enter the House, if his voice should
never again he beard within the walls, he should have !
the conscious satisf.ictien of knowing, that the last I
time he raised his voice there, it was in defence of his
own rights, and in defence of the rights and franchises
of his Constituents.—The Hon. Member then bowed
and retired. The question having been put,
Mr. PEEL said, he believed this was the tirst time
such a question as the present had .been agitated,
and that the House had beets called oq to approach

the Throne ''to pray the removal' of an individual
from office on a suspicion that there might be a neg-
lect of duty. At present there had been no neglect.
The House, it would be recollected, had the power
to enforce the attendance of its Members; but did
they always do so ? Was not the contrary the fact ?
He would ask how it was with Members holding rank
in the Army or Navy ? had not such Members been
absent during the war for a great length of time?
and more than this—that it should be recollected,
that many of these individuals had been appointed
to offices, removing them from their Parliamentary
duties after their elections, and that the removal was
not contemplated by their Constituents at the time
they selected them as their Representatives ; but in
the present case, the Electors tf Dublin selected Mr.
Ellis, well aware of the office he held, and the pro-
bability there was that he must, by his duties in
Chancery, be sometimes drawn from his attendance
in Parliament ; or, by his attendance in Parliament,
be obliged to neglect his duties as Master in Chan-
cery ; still they selected him as the object of their
choice. The Right Hon. Member then proceeded
to comment on the case of Mr. Culliford, quoted
by Dr. Lushington, and contended it had no bearing
on the present case. The House did not address for
the removal of Mr. Culliford because he held office,
but they complained of him for having refused to.at-
tend his duties in the House, when called on to do so
by the House. The Right Honourable Gentleman
then proceeded to comment on the hardship of the
present proceeding. The House, last Session, endea-
voured to get rid of Mr. Ellii by an ex post, facto law.
They failed in that point, and now they were endea-
vouring to carry to the Throne an es post facto Ad
dress. In 1801 a Statute was passed, in which it.was
stated what offices should constitute. ineligibility to
sit in Parliament. Master in Chancery was not in
that list. English Masters in Chancery were eligible.
Irish Masters had been, and by this Statute still were;
yet as soon as the people of Dublin, acting on this
principle, had elected a Master in Chancery to repre-
sent them, the House turned round on them, and said,
true, you have elected a person eligible by Statute,
but we will get rid of him, by addressing the King to
remove him from his office, if he does not resign his
seat. The Right Honourable Gentleman concluded.
by opposing the motion.
Mr. ABERCROMBIE supported the Resolution.
No injury could be done to Mr. Ellis by the adoption
of this motion; that Gentleman had accepted a seat
in Parliament, well knowing, at the time he did so,
that the duties attached to it were incompatible with
those of the situation of a Judge, which he held.—
Mr. Ellis had now an opportunity of sheaving his
attachment to the-people of Dublin, by sacrificing his
lucrative situation, and adopting that of their Repre-
sentative. Unless he did so, he trusted Mr. Ellis
would remain no longer a Member of that House.
Mr. BROWNLOW opposed the motion, as one of
the most cruel and unjust he had ever known.
Lord CASTLEREAGH said, he should divide the
subject into three heads—first, as to the general ex-
pediency of some regulation respecting the office of
Master in Chancery in Ireland ; secondly, as to the
particular case of Mr. Ellis ; and thirdly, as to the
situation in which the majority of the House stood,
who had voted last year for the Chancery Bill. With
regard to the last, he had expressed his concurrence
in the clause for excluding the individual from his
seat, but not from his office; but he had never con-
sidered that he was bound to pass by the House of
Lords after they had rejected it, and to do that by
Address which they had refused to do by legislation.
That, indeed, would be to place the House in such an
attitude, with respect to the Lords, as no prudent man
could desire. He was ready to admit the great incon-
gruity of any Irish judicial officer holding a seat in
that House; and such was his impression when
this case was before under the consideration of that
House ; but yet, since that period, he had found that
Mr. Ellis's situation formed a special case ; for at
that period he was not aware that this Gentleman
had bought his office, paying no less a sum than nine
or £10,000; that at the time he made this purchase,
he was not aware that his tenure of the office would
exclude him from a seat in Parliament ; nay, more,
that when elected by the citizens of Dublin, he had
no reason to think himself ineligible to that seat.—
Under these circumstances, and considering that there
was less pregnant public necessity for the exclusion
of the Hon. and Leatmed Gentleman than he had
contemplated upon the first view of the subject, he
could not accede to the motion, although he was
ready to agree to any measure for excluding Irish
Judicial Officers from that House in future, except-
ing the particular case of Mr. Ellis.
Mr. PLUNKETT felt all the respect which was
due to Mr. Ellis for his talents and general conduct;
at the same time he felt bound to say, that Masters
in Chancery ought not to have seats in Parliament.
The prospective regulation admitted by the Noble
Lord and the Right Hon. Gentleman, shewcd the in-
compatibility of the two situations. He concluded
with repeating his respect for the Learned Gentle-
man, whose ineligibility to sit in that House, he (Mr.
Plunkett) stated publicly at the hustings in Dublin,
before his election—adding, that he thought the
House itself likely to declare him ineligible, not
the-
cause be was in any respect incompetent to the duties
of a legislator, but because he could. not perform such
duties in conjunction with those of an Irish Master
in Chancery—because, in a word, the Learned Gen-
tleman could not do impossibilities—(Hear, hear).
Dr. LUSHINGTON, in his reply, stated, that he
took the words which he had imputed to the Noble
Secretary of State from the concur rent reports of all
the Journals he could find, with respect to what the
Noble Lord said when this question was before under
the consideration of that House, those reports too
being confirmed by the testimony of several Mem-
bers of that House. The Noble Lord had, however,
thought proper to deny those words; but hoar this
denisl and the Noble Lord's change of opinion, lie
must say, that he should never again allow himself
to be wedded to any confidence in the declared opi-
nion of the Noble Lord, considering the ingenuity
with which lie could change his opinion, and the man-
ner in which he could assert that new lights broke in
upon him to call for that change. He saw, however,
that those new lights broke in also upon several Gen-
tlemen, for they were all babes of grace! (Hear, h ea r).
But, notwithstanding the aberration of the Noble
Lord and his immediate adherents from.their former
professed sentiments upon this subject, he trusted
that the House would, in justice and humaniti, ac-,

• .
cede to
the Irish Court of Chancery, that attention which
they had a right to expect. At all events, he was
determined (however .the Noble bond might desert
his native land) to do all the justice In hispower to-
wards the very interesting and much-injured people
of that country.
The House then divided, and the numbers were_
For the Motion - - - - 52
Against it 119

Majority for the Minister - 0
Dr. LUSHINGTON give notice of a motion for Thursday
next, for leave to bring iu a Dill t.> declare persons holding cer_
taia high offices in Ireland ineligible to sit in that House. He
extended his notice beyond that point in which the Noble Lord
had declared his disposition -to acquiesce, in consequence of a
doubt expressed to him by the Solicitor-General with respect to
the eligibility of Irish Judges.