Star.
London, England, 1821-03-30 00:00:00

CORN'AVERAGES.

General GASCOYNE presented a Petition from a
number of Merchants in Liverpool, against any al-
teration in the mode of taking the Averages.
Mr. BIRCH supported the Petition, and contended
that the Bill now before the House, which admitted
the Irish prices to be included in the Averages, was
a violation of the pledge given to the Agriculturists
in the year 1815.
Mr. CUItWEN stated, that gross frauds had been
committed in the taking of the Averages, and that
those frauds were the cause of the ports having been
opened in August last—a circumstance that contri-
buted materially to the injury of the Agricultural
Interests. He would give his utmost support to the
Bill, the object of which was to correct such frauds.
Mr. SYKES was hostile to any change in the mode
of taking the Averages.
Mr. WESTERN contended, that it was necessary
to take some means of preventing the frauds which
were committed in taking the Averages.
Mr. CALCRAff reminded the Haus', that one
of the Resolutions upon which the Bill of 1815 was
founded, was, that the Averages slibuld continue to
be taken as they were before. It was a departure
from that Resolution to include the Irish corn in the
Averages. He would oppose the second reading of
the Bill now before the House, unless it was slrictly
confined to the prevention of such frauds as his Hon.
Friend had.alluded to.
Mr. BRIGHT said, that no frauds had been sub-
stantially proved; and contended that the nets hill
went entirely to alter the principle of the bill of
1815, and therefore he would oppose it.
The Petition was then read ; and after a few words
from General GASCOYNE, Mr.Wesrnrts, Mr. Lititilyr,
BIRCII, and Mr. BENNLTI,

Sir It. WILSON said he could not suffer this, the •
first opportunity he had had, of declaring his of.?.
nion of Bonaparte and his detention, to pass, withcut
protesting against it—(LauViler).—Gentlemen might
laugh, but he was certain he spoke the sentiments of
every just and generous individual in Europe—(Loud -
laughler).—He would repeat it, it was ungenerous
to keep a man thus shut up and separated from his
wife and Child ; a man, too, who might have escaped
to America, hut had preferred to surrender to thii
country, who had been guilty of a breach of faith in
thus treating him ; and he was convinced if France •
ever became a free Government, she would never
submit to have the Sovereign she had adopted
thus treated. He knew of his own knowledge that
Bonaparte might have got on board a vessel and
escaped to America, as that vessel arrived safely at
her destined port.
Mr.CII.OKEII defended Government for the count
they had adopted against Bonaparte. He repelled
with scorn the charge of breach of faith thrown out
by the gallant General against the Public of this
country. Bonaparte had not surrendered to us freely,
but bad been hunted most unwillingly into the toils.
It was true the vessel in which he proposed to go to.
America arrived there safe; but it only did so be-
cause our cruizers did not consider` it as containing
anything making it worth while to stop her; and it
was not until Bonaparte had ascertained that he could
not escape our cruizers that he resigned himself, and
his surrender was then received by our Commander,
subject to the determination of our Government as to„,
his future destiny
Mr. IIUME said, there Was a degree of rigotti.:l
adopted towards Bonaparte by those who had. lms
immediate custody, which met his (Mr. Hume's)
tided disapprobation, however the rigorous policy of
keeping him there might be imperative on the 4 `
verument under existing circumstances--(//ear),,...,
The Hon. Member then moved for
,a Trtstru: tit

%

the number of ships now stationed off the island of'
St- lam.—Agreed to. '
111r:GOULBIJRN said, he was quite ready to
Meet any charges which might be made against the
persons having the custody of Bonaparte.
Sir It. WILSON still persisted in maintaining his
opinion on this subject. No law of nations could
justify his son being withheld from him, if it were
only for the purposes of education. Bonaparte
might now well say what Mithridates did to the
Romans —« .\ on aunt rensissus sed reversus, si non
credis, dimitte me."
Mr. GOULBURN wished to correct the statement
of the gallant General. The case of Bonaparte did
not resemble that of Mithridates among the Romans,
he (Bonaparte) 14ving compared himself to Themis-
tocles seeking an asylum with the Athenians—( Hear,
hear, front Me Opposition benches).
Mr. C. H. HUTCHINSON said, the time was now
come when all men might speak out on the subject
of Napoleon Bonaparte. There was a period when
his detention might have been necessary, but no man
now could say the Government became the
:jailors
of the Holy Alliance, except for purposes which he
feared they would not explain. The foreign Courts
of Russia, Prussia, and Austria had slicwn the ty-
ranny they intended to practice—a tyranny more
little and more insulting than that ever practised by
'Bonaparte himself. None of These Powers performed
their promises% nor could it be believed that the Holy
Alliance forsooth, had the liberties of mankind at
heart in wishing England to keep Bonaparte a pri.
sorer. In the Congress at Vienna, in the Treaty of
Paris, the great and sacred principles of liberty were
completely forfeited. The whole of the proceedings
since the peace of Paris, was in direct opposition to
the objects for which the war was of iginally entered
into. Bonaparte had some excuse for the mode of
warfare he adopted, however objectionable he (Mr. I
Hurchinsen) as an individual considered it ; but there
was no excuse for the conduct now adopted by the
leagued despots of Europe. The conduct towards
Bonaparte was cruel to him, and unjust to the Eng-
lish nation. It was very well for Russia and Austria
to continue the persecution against Bonaparte; but
how would England's conduct look in the page of
history ? Could any man state, however prejudiced
he might be, that the necessity of the times required
England to be the perpetual jailor of that man? On
public principles the imprisonment of Bonaparte
could not be maintained, even if the mode of impri-
sonment were not as insulting as it was made. But
he had another ground of objection to his detention,
inasmuch as it cost the people of this country nearly
Half a Million of Money annually for his support!
He declared to Goo he knew not on what ground,
Bonaparte was kept a prisoner at St. Helena, except
it was to gratify those despots whose object had been
to curtail the blessings they promised their people—
(Hear, hear). —He challenged the Government of this
country to come forward and state their motives; if
they did not, the House, and the country, and the
world, would know the only construction which ought
to be put upon their silence—(Hear).
The question was then put and agreed to.
EAST INDIA 'COMPANY'S DEBT.

Mr HUME moved, that there be laid before the

Nouse a Return of the amount of the Debt due to
the East India Company from the Government. The
amount of that debt, in 1815, was C 1,300,000; in
1816 it amounted to £2,000,000; and in the year
1817 nearly a million was voted towards the balance.
In 1818 it amounted to £1,49,0006, and it now
amounted to nearly £2,000,000. His object then was
to shew the state of the account for each year, and
on what account it had been increased. He then
moved, that there be laid before the House an Ac-
count of the Debt due from the Government to the

East India Company, for Stores, Expeditions, &c.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said,
he had no objection to the motion ; but he would
subjoin to it a direction for a return of the payments
made to Paymasters-General, and all other payments
charged on the East India Company.—This being
added to the motion, it was agreed to.