Star.
London, England, 1827-06-13 00:00:00

No. 11.
THE QUERIES REFERRED TO IN No. I.

warrrss sr ens snse's sass.)
The following`Queries on the present attempt to abolish all dis-
thsetions is Religion in Ireland, with the intention of favouring the
Roman Catholics in that Kingdom, are stated from the desire of
learning whether this can be done. without &Reefing the Quintus.
don of this country? if not, there is no occasion to view whether
this measure in itself be not highly improper?
The only Laws which now affect the Papists In Ireland are the
Acts of Supremacy and Uniformity, the Test Act, and the BIU of
Rights. It seems to requite very serious Investigation how far the
King can give his assent to a Repeal of any one of those Acts.
without a breach of his Coronation Oath. and of the Articles of
Union with Scotland.

The construction put on the Coronation Oath by the Parliament
at the Revolution seems strongly marked in the Journals of the
House of Commons, whew the Clause was proposed by way of
Riderto the Rill (aith March, 1689, amtnoni Aturnabi) estab.
killing the Coronation Oath, declaring that nothing contained in it
should be construed to bind down the King and Queen, their Heirs
and Successors not to give the Roy,al Assent to any Bill for quail-
tying the Act of Uniformity so Car as to render it palatable to Pro-
testant Dissenters and the Clause was negatived upon a division.
This leads to the implicatiom that the Coronation Oath was under-
stood at the Revolution to bind the Crown not to assent to any
Repeal of any of the existing laws at the Revolution, or which were
tbeo enacted, for the maintenance sod defence of the Protestant
Religiose as by law established.
If the Oath was unthrstood to bind the Crown not to assent to
the repeal of the Act of Uniformity in favour of Protestant Dissen-
ters, it would seem to bind the Crown foil as strongly not to assent
to the repeal of the Act of Supremacy, or the Test Act, in favour
of Romam Catholics.

Another question arises from the provisions of the Act limiting
the Succession to the Crown, by which a forfeiture of the Crown
is expressly enacted, if the King upon the Throne should hold com-
munication with, or be reconciled ti the Church of Home. May
not the repeal of the Act of Supremacy, and the establishing he
Popish Religion In any of the Hereditary Dominions, be construed
as amoundng to a reconciliation with the Church of flame ?
Would not the. Ch►aeslior of England incur some risk in athsink
the Great Seal to a BM for giving the Pope a concurrent Eccle-
siastical Jurisdiction with the King?
By the Articles of Union with Scotland, it is declared to be an
essential and fundamental• Article, that the King of Great Britain
shall maintain the Church of England u by law establhhed in En.
gland, Ireland, and Berwick-upon-Tweed.
The bargain made by England in 1782 by Yelverton's Act gives
rise to the question, whether the repeal of any of the English

• The Extract from the Commons' Journals, alluded t• by his
Majesty. " Jovis, VI die Martii,l Willirlml et Maris." ( A.D. 16894

Coronation Oath.

The Bill for establishing the Coronation Oath was read the
third time.

A Proviso, ingrossed, was offered, as a Rider, to be made part
of the Bell, which was read the First time, and is as follows:
" Provided always, and be it hereby declared, that no Clause its
this Act shall be understood so to bind the Kings and Queens of
this Realm' as to prevent their giving their Royal Assent to any
Bill which shall, at any time, be offered by the Lords and Com-
mons assembled in Parliament, for the taking away or altering any
Form or Ceremony in the Established Chutch, so as the Doctrines
of she said Chords, a public Liturgy, and the Episcopal Government
of it.brpresetved."

„
A Debate arote thereopon.
'rite Debate upon the Proviso, offered to be made part of the
Bill for estahlishOs the Coronation Oath, was reunited.
And the qiestion being put, That the Proviso be rev' a second
time It pa.ted m the negathe.
Ite•olved, I' ma the bill do pass• and that tin title be, ” An Act
for e4abli,ht: the Catenation 06."

'The King is much pleased with the diligence skews by the Lilted
Kenyon In answering the questions proposed to bias; but as he
seems not fully apprised of the carver of the preemie applicatioo of
the Roman Catholics of Ireland, the King has thought it best to
enclose the Petition received yesterday, and the state of the ques-
tions. drawn op by a Right Rev. Prelate of that Kingdom on
which the King wishes to have the Lord Kosyen's further opinion
in writing. GEORG. R.
Queen's House, March 14, 1793.
No. Y.—Enclosed to No. IV.

It has been confidently reported in Ireland, that in compliance
with the unbounded retribition of the Roman Catholics, a Bill
had been prepared t °capacitate them to sit in Parliament without
making and subscribing the Declaration against Popery, or tailing
the Oath of Supremacy. This appears to be a direct violation of
the English ' Act of the Mb Charles IL statute 2, chap. I. ;
which enacts, that no person shall sit or vote in Parliament, until
he shall have taken the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy, and
made, and subscribed, and audibly repeated, the Declaration
against Pryer), therein contained. Which Act, as far as it relates
to the said Oaths and Declarations, was made the law of Ireland,
by the Irish Act of the gist and 22d of George 111. chap. Sg.
sect. 3.—lt also appears to be a repeal of the Declaration of the
Bill of Rights, which are expressly enacted and established, " to
stand and remain and be the Law of the Realm for ever."—lt
seems to be a repeal of the Act of Settlement, " Whereby ail the
laws and statutes of the realm for securing the Established Reli-
gion were ratified and confirmed." Among which statutes so
confirmed we most place the preceding Statutes of Charles 11.
and the Declaration of the Bill of itights.—lt appears also to be
a direct violation of the Act of Union (5 Anne, chap. 8.), by
which the inviolate maintenance and preset vation of the Rata
bushed Religion in Ireland is secured, by providing " that all and
singular die Acts of Parliament then in force for the establish-
ment and preservation of the Church, should remain and be in
full force for ever. And it is further therein enacted, that this Act,
and all and every the things therein contained, be and shall for ever
he holden to be a fundamental and essential part of the Union."
It seems also that an inviolable observation of all these Statutes is
made obligatory upon every King and Queen of the Realm by the
Coronation Oath.
Is it not advisable, therefore, to put an end at once to a claim
that is inconsistent and incompatible with the terms of the original
contrast between the King and the People, and subversive of that
part of the Constitution formed for the preservation of the
Protestant Religion, as established by Law? T'he same great fun-
damental Statutes, which secure the Rights and Liberties of the

• a Anne, e. e. s. 11. " And it is hereby farther enacted, that
the said Act passed in this present Session of Parliament, Intituled
An Act for securing the Church of England as by Law eetabashed,'
&c. and also the Act of Parliament of Scotland, intitukd . An Act
for securing the Protestant Religion and Presbyterian Church Go-
vernment; Sta be, and shall for ever be, held and adjudged to be
and observed as fundamental and essential conditions of the said
Union, &c. &c.; and the said Act passed in this present Session of
Parliament, &e. and also the said Act passed in the Parliament of
Scotland, Ste. are hereby enacted and ordained to be and continue
in all times coming the complete and entire Union of the two king-
dome of England and Scotland."
f S. O. " And be it further enacted, that for ever bereafterevery
King or Queen succeeding and coming to the Royal Government
of the Kingdom of Great Britain, at his or her Coronation, shall, in
the presence of all persons who shall be attending, Ste. take and sub.
seribean Oath to maintain and preserve inviolable the said Settle-
ment of the Church of Fmgland, and the Doctrine, Worship, Dis-
cipline and Government thereof, as by Law established within the
Kingdoms of England and lrelasid, the Dominion of Wales,and
Town of' Berwick upon Tweed, and the Territorities here-
unto belonging."
The Seventh Section recites part of the Act imitated U An Act
for securing the Chbrch of England, as by law established," of
which the following is an extract :--'• That an Act nude is the
13th year of the Reign of Queen Elisabeth of famous memory, inti-
ivied • An Act for the Ministers of the Church to be of sound tell-
giem and also another Act made in the 13th year of the late King
Charles 11. intituled • An Act for the uniformity of the Public
Prayers,' &c. and all and singular other Acts of Parliament now hi
toe cc, for the establishment and preservation of the Church of Rag-
land, and the doctrine, terot ship. discipline, and government there-
Arvraaatt and shall be,in full tutor fur ever."

Corooadua Owe WI&

Mr. Hampden, jun.—" The King swears positively to the true
profesdoii of the Gospel, that is, • the Christian Religion,' (op lad•
tude in dist); and then comes to the Christian Religion as it ie
against Popery; sod this is the stress of ail your Oath. Protestant
ie looked upon as a word honourable; and, not only the word, but
the thing, to the last drop of blood. It is every body's endeavour
to keep up the Reformation, and avoid returning into Popery."
Mr. Godolphin—A' All our securities rest upon the King's cm.
scientlotonem I would not put in the words (ts or shall be ens.
Wished by law) became I would not leave a doubt, if it is not the
intention of the House to alter the Religion lisiablished by Law."
Mr. Somers—" The question is, to add the words ' shall bents.
blisbed by law.' I desire the addition for great regard to the Le-
gislature. Is the former paragraph, it is ' statutes, and laws, mad
customs is being,' in the other establisbmest. He that gives his
coosent to take away, does nut maintain them."
Mr. Polksfen—" We frame an Oath, not for ourselves, but for
the King; and he ought is be satisfied t the King is tender of what
he promises—mach more of his Oath."
"Sir .Henry Capel—" It Ls a tender thing to make a Law but in
an Oath, for another person to take, it is always a tale to reprise
the thing plain.'
Sir Thomas Clargev.—" Whilst a sort of men, that professed the
Protestant Religion, joined with Popery lately in the Decimadoo,
and write and profess that the Penal Laws ought to be taketuvrags
now you are making an Oath honestly and plainly to explain it to
the world."

t Commonly called" The Act of Settlement" and Whaled" Aa
Act for the further Limitation of the Crown, and better mantis&
the Rights and Libertiesa of the Subject.
(Ts be concluded to-morrow.)

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, Jugs it.
The LORD CHM BARON, as Deputy Speaker, took kb NU on
the Woolsack at a quarter pair four o'clock.
Roacarson, from the 011 ice of the Coosinhsioners of Woods
and Forests, presented the Fourth Annual Report of the Oonanale.
*loners of the Helyrood-road.
_ _

Mr. Casa' presented a Copy of the Resolutions of the Rut
dia.Company with respect to Pensions, Salutes, and Gratuities.

.
Sir ALICIANDEL GIANT and others, from the Commons, brought
up the Penitentiary Regulation Ball, the Petty Session.' (Ireland)
Bill, and several Private Bills, which were read a first time.

The Loss CMANCALLOII hiving entered the House soon after
five o'clock,
The Archbishop of YORK presented a Peddon from York,
against Burning Hindoo Widows.
Viscount DUDLEY and WARD presented the Returns which
had bees moved for, respecting the Expenditure of the Foreign
Office Department.

•
•LOWIIIITILATION OF lIIMet IN scon.mtm
Earl GROSVENOR said he would have proposed to pot an
end to the office of Lord Justice General of Scotland, but that be
had been informed by a Noble Lord that there wete difficulties to
the way of the abolition ; be would, however, early In the next Ses-
sion, move for a Committee to enquire into the nature of these
Scuttles, with the view of retnoving them.
Lord MELVILLR said, that h was the intention of his Ma.
Jest y's Government to propose some regulations respecting the
Courts of Scutland,which would has the effect of abolishing the
salary of the office in qnestidn ; be therefore suggested to the
Noble Lord the expediency of leaving the matter in the hands
of Government.
Lord GODERICH corroborated the sectemeut of the Noble
Lord, and mid that it was the intention of she Vocalism*: ta

•
l,
... ,
.'• -',,A .:
eit4- cell: .
.. •
. .
"1 - , • 4
i 3 ft) ....,..* .i'' I.
s it •
Ps.
t •
ifiefoliot •.4c 14:0
.• , •
. ~.
•
'
. gtr,' ;that Alegi
10 'I 1
0•311,1V14"... •. r , . . .'
1
[PRICE SEVEMPENCE. I , 1
------
- ,
People, secure also the Paoracrairt RePoeram itationor, as by
Law establiabed ; and if that pan of them which secures nor Refl.' - •
Sion is to be repealed now, what security terhairts tor the peewees. j• ,
tion of our Civil Rights and Liberties? Is it OM therefore seces4 i
airy to extinguish such vim expectations by an explicit deektratios
i
—that they cannot be complied with?
No. Vt.
ANSWER TO NOS. 4 AND S.
' I
Lord Kenyon returns the Petition he was hoovered with, and
his sentiments on the state of the Question which accompanied it. I
I
Your Majesty's most grateful and dutiful Subject,KNYON.
(EYZLOSID nt so. 6.)
It is a general maxim that the Supreme Power of a State tappet
limit itself. 11
Either of the Houses of Parliament may, if they think Ironer,
I pass a Bill up to the extent of the most unreasonable requisition that
eau be made; and, provided sound policy sod a tense of the duty
they owe to the Established Religion of the country do not operate
on their minds so as to prevent their doing what is improper, there •
Is no Statute Law to prevent their entertaining and nssabill such i
Bill, to abolish the Supremacy and the whole of the government
and discipline of the Church of England, &snow by law established.
Our ancestor, did net suppose, at the time of the Revoitniowther
say danger was to be feared from these quarters. and therefor. the ,
Stump Book don not exact any prombeary Gash from the Members'
of the Houses of Parliament, binding them not to receive or peas
Bills hostile to the Reformed Relegiowas by law established. _Est
that is not the case of the King. Reetellt misconduct in the raped
King James IL had raised great jealousy; and therefore the Co,.e'
nation Oath exacts from the King an oath to maintain the laws elf
Goa, the true profession attire Gospel, and the Protestant Reformed • s
Religion established by law, line. (*) '
The state of the question with which I have been bon:stilted sups .
. poses that the requisition now made Is a direct violation of the.
Stature of 50 Car. IL It. 11.
it certainly is ioconsistent with that Law; and if it shall be .
yielded to, will, in effect, repeal it, though that law, *lien it was t
made, was looked upon by the 'Legislature as necessary for the
1 more effectual preserving the King's person and Government, by i
disabling Papists from sitting in either House of Porlianteet. Hon/
far that law still emulates a fence for the Church as by law eats. 41!
bllshed, must be judged of by those who are to act oatthe proposed
• • repeal, if such a measure should be brought forward. Those vbs. I
•
think It is an important and necessary part of the defence of the. O' ;s
• Established Church, may also tblak.rhst the Coronado° Outlaws, ii
meant to provide against the King's conserving to the repeal a foe • •
I though an Act for repealing the Statute of Charles 11. would not
i in itself break In upon the Established Church, yet it would Atilt. '
tate steps which might afterwards follow' for that purpose, as b y
• this means Papists might constitute a majority of each lime of
I Parliament.
•
• It cannot well pass observation, that the whole system of Laws, , • .
as to the purpose of the present inquiry, was to guard against the
t possible introduction of Popish Influence into any brooch of the
d.
e Legislature. As far as respects the Sovereign, it is guarded by
,
r the Oath be tahes; and with respect to the Houses of Parliatneot. V
s by the declaration in SO Car. 11. . i . 1
• lam not aware what Clauses in the Intl of Rights are sup.
poised to be broken in upon by what is suggested as likely to be
I pr?
I The Statute of IC and 13 W. e. 9. (t) shows •.the great anxiety
• the Legislature then had to gaud against Popery. But here again
I the question recurs,
_how is she supreme power of the Coywin
, boondl—The two Houses of Parliament are not under any pew.
missory oath—that obligation has been extended to the Kiev only.
i
t This statute of Minato 111. has done no more se far as respects : r
t the 'fascist question. than the former statutes bad done.
Iv Ts' Paper I before sent stated, I believe, What then occurred, •
r and an that at present occurs on the Statute of Union. .: 1
I Is short, the question resolves Itself to this:. Will the proposed . , ,
Act violate that Oath, which promises to maintain sod preserve is. ,
✓ violably the underarm attic Church of England, and the doctrine
!
0. worship, discipline. and govennsent thereof, as it was, at the time! L
a alb, Union, by law established within the kingdoms England 1,
1 end Ireland? 844.
The Petition expresses apprehension of proseripdest, peneendows
and oppression. AS grounds of wish apprehensions, if such thee 4I .;
d really are, may be safely removed, if the late benefits'
s which the
a Petition admits. have not removed them, without endatgesing the t 1
I Established Church, or violating the Cosonatton Oath.
o I will, out of anxiety, add our word more. It seems to me that •
1- the judgment of the person who takes the Coronation Oath mutt ,
il
is determine whether any particular Statute proposed does destroy . •
a the government of the Established Church? It seems that the Oath, 1
couched in the general terms in which it is found, does= preclude
the party sworn from exercising a judgment whether that which be
is bound to maintain will be essentially, or in any peat degree
a affected by the proposed measure.
II . . 1 1
tat• Extracts Irma the '+ Debate on the Coronation Oath" (Peri.
I
Hies. v. 5. p. 200):
.1 Sir. Hampden. iun.—" The Kint swears trashier-le to the true

transfer tha duties of the L/dfitisibil(akivulter offices, AM'
readable that dice and its saki Mary. It should at the
same time be remem . thiYfflt7bough it became desirable to
abolish a patent office tely, the existing holder of it had a
Vested tlifhidid it his e.
The tof ELDON said, that as the Other great gumbo,
4)4b 41W over to the next Session, this one might also
laugh).

COM LAWS.
Viscount OODERICH moved the Order of the Day for receiv-
ing the Report of their Lordships' Committee on the Corn Laws
Amendment Rill.
The Earl of 3ffervessuar hawk's brought up the Report with its
amendments printed,
Lord COLCHESTER said, that he objected to the
policy of the measure, and to its leading provisions. He
objected to its policy in po far that it tended to render
this country's political situation more dependant on that
of foreign countries—more dependant on other coun-
tries for the means of subsistence, means that might be
cut off at any time and by any unexpected crisis. He
objected to the policy of the Bill, in so far that it
lowered the agricultural interests, and thus reduced the
manufacturing interests of the country. It seemed to
bear upon two classes of impoverished population, the
starving labourer as well as the starving manufacturer
•--(Hear, hear, hear). He feared its effect also on Ire-
land. It seemed to him that the present tendency of
the Bill was to affect the growth of corn there; and in
so doing, to take awai the money which would other-
wise go to that country ; and he would rather see that
country subsist more on bread than on potatoes. If that
were so, and that country thereby more supported from
its own produce of corn than it at present was, the
poorer class would be more active, industrious, and
peaceful [ban they had hitherto been. With respect to
the provisions of the Bill, if it was meant that the prices
mentioned there should be the price of the corn, let it
be made so. Let them do what they profess to do. They
told the Aviculturists they would protect them—pro-
hibit, therefore, the importation of all foreign corn at a
lower price than they were entitled to. He would affirm
that no man would be able to, state the price or amount
of quautity that would be imported, when once the
market should be laid open to all the world. He
thought that, in the Amendments, a most valuable
principle had been suggested; and, if they meant to
give the people of England that which they ought to
have, let that Amendment be approved of. As to reci-
procity, it was pretended to give the agriculturists pro-
tection by letting those who import corn have our manu-
factures, that was—they were bartering the interests of
our agriculturists, which was a thing that ought never
to be done. As to the present proceedings with this
Bill before them, and sitting here to amend it, let them
do their duty honestly, and amend it in such a manner
as to make the measure the best to be adopted, else
why did they sit there? He was well aware that there
were technical difficulties elsewhere, and that those diffi-
culties were such as might not be got over. Now, they
had better come to a plain understanding on that. Every
one who was conversant with the history of Parliament,
and had lead the Parliamentary Journals, might find
that the House of Commons claimed rights which its
Members bad uniformly insisted upon for at least one
hundred and fifty years. One of their claims was against
that House passing any Bills imposing duties. The
H use of Lords had also claims distinct from those of
the House of Commons, with respect to attainder and
the stain of blood. Now the Commons bad recorded
that they claimed the sole and undoubted right of be-
ginning all grants of money, of levying all duties, and
of limiting, directing, and apeointing all the ends, pur-
poses, prohibitions, and qualifications of duties so im-
posed. Thus they stood then with respect to the House
Of Commons, and when they thought it their duty to
suggest certain amendments, they were told that it
would be useless. He was not quite sure of that. They
had declared that corn should not pay duty when im-
porteJ till it reached a certain point ; that was not all :1
there was another very important thing which respected
the average prices. The Commons bad said that the
average price. must be judged of every week; the Lords
wished to have it every six weeks, in order to have a
safer way of detecting fraud, and they had every reason
to believe that that amendment, which was very ins-
poi tant, would be adopted. They must go on and do
their duty. If they did so, and the House of Commons
understood what was a good legislation, they would
consider the amendments ; and if after consideration
they thought they should be adopted, acd yet would
not give up what they claimed as their privileges, they
bad another course to pursue. They might bring in a
new Bill, containing the substance of the old, with the
additional clauses. This would be the best course which
they could adopt, and by it they would give the country
a law really likely to prove useful. With this prospect
and with his sentiments respecting the provisions of the
Bill, he should vote for the several amendments if they
were pressed.
The Report was then brought up, and received. It was them
read, clause by clause, and several verbal alterations were agreed te.
Oa the questloa that the amendment be agreed to, which pre.
vided that no foreign Corn be admitted into the home market for
twine consumption, whilst the average price was less than 665.
Viscount GODERICH rose and said that be felt great
difficulty in proposing the reconsideration of that amend-
ment which had been proposed in the Committee. He
is sure that his Noble Friend (the Duke of Wellington)
rho proposed that amendment, and their Lordships
tenerally would do him the justice to think that he was
tt induced to call on them from any other motive
.ratever, than the most sincere conviction that the
amendment was not calculated to effect what his Noble
;lend anticipated from its adoption; but that it had a
tendency to aggravate the evils against which he in-
flded to provide. He assured their Lordships that
is was his only motive for calling on them to recon-
'der this amendment, and not to allow it to stand part
the Bill. But before he said any thing as to the
practical effects of the clause, he wished to make a few
preliminary observations, with a view of setting his,
Right Hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade
'id himself right with the House as to a misconception
ito which his Noble Friend had fallen. His Noble
riend had stated, in proposing his clause, that be did
with the concurrence of his Right Hon. Friend ; and,
undoubtedly, their Lordships must have been startled
hen they saw him (Viscount Goderich) objecting to a
lause sanctioned by his Right Hon. Friend the Presi-
or of the B hard of Trade. He had now on the part of
.is Right Hon. Friend, distinctly to assure the tin, that he
never intended to convey any acquiescence in that clause.
the first place he had never seen it—the statement
his Noble Friend was founded on an impression de.
rived from a sentence in a letter written by his Right
Hon. Friend to the Noble Duke. In that letter, his
Right Hon. Friend was supposed to sanction the prin.
'epic of the Amendment ; but when the Noble Lords
came to the consideration of that letter he had no doubt
‘f being able to convince them that his Right Hon.
riend never meant to convey any approbation what-.
.ver of it. Of this fact he could satisfy their Lordships,

AM well as from a conversation which had since ,
lbw* between bins and a Right Honourable Ftle
Brass from what had passed between his 'tight Honour ab.
Friend and the Noble Doke, The fast was that his
Node Frilled had written to the President bf the Board
of Trade to Ask his concurrence in a clause, which,
however, had not been proposed, as the Noble Duke
had been satisfied by the reasons urged against it. He
had, however, conceived, from the language of his
'Right Hon. Friend's letter, that he pointed out another
course which it was far from his intention to recom-
mend.-' That letter commenced by adverting to the
difficulty of introducing any amendments of that na-
tete, as he scarcely knew whether they could be adopt-
'ed by the other House. He (Viscount Goderich) merely'
mentioned this as the opinions of the individual, without
calling on their •Lordships to be influenced in the slight-
est degree by it. It was competent to their Lordships
to introduce any amendment they pleased into Bills sent
up from the Commons, and it was equally competent
to the other House to reject those amendments—(Hear,
hear.) If an amendment was made in this House, it
did not follow that the House of Commons should ac-
quiese in it, and his Noble Friend (Lord Colchester) was
not entitled to assume, as a matter of course, that the
Commons would agree to the amendments proposed,
and send them up in the shape of another Bill. Before
they did so they must agree to the spirit and effect of
the amendment ; and for his part he (Lord ,Goderich)
did not km)* upon what grounds, if competent,' beensuld
recommend the other House to assent
.to the amend-
ment—(Hear, hear.) As to the letter of his Right Hon.
Friend, the President of the Board of Trade, it set out
by stating that he would be willing to agree to,
reasonable amendments in the Upper House, vi6ith
would satisfy those Noble Lords who opposed the. Bill,
so that those amendments would not involve the exist-
ence of the measure on 'its return to the Lower House.
His Right Hon. Friend had no objection that no corn
should be admitted till the average price should reach
silty-six shillings, and that all corn to be bonded after-
wards should come under the regulation of the
He (Lord Goderich) could assign no other pouible
meaning to this declaration of his Right Hon. Friend's
opinion, than that the restriction sin uld only be 'tem-
porary instead of permanent, as the amendment of
the Noble Duke had made it, so as to insure that no,
quantity beyond that in bond should be thrown upon the
public unless corn attained a price which shewed that a
foreign supply was wanted. He could nit give any other
construction to the words of his Right Hun. Friend than
that he contemplated a restriction merely pea leac vice,
till the bonded corn should have been got rid of.—
At the end of his letter, his Right Hon. Ftiepd
again adverted to those technical difficul.ies to Which
it was very fair that he should advert, as the duty of
recommending any amendment which might be intro-
duced, and of which he might Approve, would devolve
upon him in the other House. Alluding to those, his
Right Hon: Friend bad said, that " he was afraid that
even such an amendment must prove fatal to the Bill.*
It appeared, therefore, that his Right Hon. Faced had
expressed his readiness to acquiesce in something which
was not what the Noble Duke had proposed, and that
he had not even concealed from him that such a course
might be fatal to the Bill. The day before the Com-
mittee on the Bill, he (Lord Goderich) had accidentally
heard that his Noble Friend intended to propose a clause
sanctioned by the President of the Board of Trade.
Not having heard of any such sanctioa being given, he
had applied to his Right Hon. Friend to know the
meaning of that report. His Right Hon. Friend
immediately wrote that the report must have arisen
from a communication in which the Noble Duke had
submitted a proposition to him, which he had succeeded
in convincing him was inexpedient. He (Lord G.) had
then seen his Right Hon. Friend, and they had discussed
together the possibility of introducing any Amendment
of that kind. His Right Honourable Friend had no
copy of his letter to the Noble Duke ; but he explained
the sense of it in the manner which he (Lord Goderich)
had just done to their Lordships, and they had tried to
frame a clause which would pro hac vice produce a qua-
lified admission of fo:eign corn. When in the Committee.
the Noble Duke had communicated to him (Lord G.)
both his clause and the letter of his Right Hon. Friend.
Not having seen either before, it was not in his power
at such a time to give a very close attention to the
wording of the clause, but it appeared to him that it
tended to provide a permanent restriction on ware-
housing, to which he could not consent, and he believed
he had expressed himself to that effect to his Noble
Friend. He thought he had now defended his Right
Hon. Friend from the charge of being willing at one
time to agree to an amendme ,t, against which he had
afterwards objected. He hoped he had also cleared
himself from the imputation that from caprice, or any
other motive but an adherence to the principles of the
Bill he had opposed an amendment, which must be
fatal to it. It was now his duty to state the grounds
on which he did not think that the amendment would be
for the good of those in whose behalf it had been intro-
duced. In the first instance, the change produced by the
amendment was contrary to the principle on which the
Bill was founded ; but he did not oppose it solely on
this ground, it might be an exception to the principle,
and still good in itself, but be contended it was intrin-
sically bad. His Noble Friend said, that when he bad
a seat in his Majesty's Councils he had agreed to the
principle of the Bill, but was not answerable for its de-
tails, never, in fact, having seen it till it came into their.
Lordships' House. He (Lord Goderich) would not in-
quire why his Noble Friend had not seen the Bill, as it'
had been printed, and its details had been discussed by
his Majetty's servants, before his Noble Friend withdrew
from the Cabinet—(Hear, hear It Several clauses were
proposed, to which he was sure he could draw his
Noble Friend's recollection.—Diere the Duke of Wel-
lington was understood to give a sign of assentl.
There was the reciprocity clause, which originally
did not form pelt of the Bill, but had been in-
troduced into it in consequence of a discussion amongst
his Majesty's Servants. He should also call to the
recollection of the Noble Duke the resolutions on
which the Bill was founded. The amendment was
a direct departure from the first of those resolutions.
For it was- to this effect :—" That any sort of corn,
grain, meal, or fl )ur shall at all times be admissible for
home use on payment of certain duties." The resolation
said that they should be admitted at all times, whereas
his Noble Friend's amendment denied admission alto-
gether, until a special contingency had taken place.—
The intent of the resolution in fact was, to abolish pro-
hibition entirely, and that of the amendment was to re-
vtablish it. This also explained why the words" at all
times" had been deemed so portentous, and why there
had been a wish that they should be expunged. The
object of the amendment, he understood, was to guard
against two evils. It was to prevent the warehousing

system from giving facilities to fraud in the averages,
and if frauds were effected, to diminish their mit.
ichievous effects, by preventing a glut of Corn on its
first importation. Now as to the first, he was at a loss to
conceive how dealing with Corn in Bond could have any
effect on the averages. For the averages were not made
up by sales of corn in bond. They never came into the
averages at all; and if they could possibly come there,
the only way in which they could tell would be to lower
the price, and therefore to raise the duty, and increase
the protection to agriculturists. It was, consequently,
impossible that the holders of corn in bend should com-
mit frauds in the averages, with the view of lowering
the duty. But if the clauses of the Noble Duke were
adopted, it would become the interest of every indivi-
dual holder to strain every nerve, and to make every
sacrifice, to affect the averages, in order to release the
corn in bond—(Hear, hear.) One million of quarters
might hate accumulated in the warehouses, and if those
persons whose interest it was succeeded in throning 1
them open, all that flood would be poured at once un-
controuled upon the home market at a duty of only
ten shillings, and would produce that very. evil which
the clause was intended to prevent. Nothing was
more likely than that the holders of bonded corn
should endeavour, by an expenditure of several thou-
sand pounds in purchasing British corn, to raiseits price,
so as to release their own, for it would be better for
them to sacrifice part of their profit than to lose the
whole. Another evil effect likely to be produced by
the clause, would be to put an end to the warehousing
system altogether—(Cheers from.the Opposition). He,
did not wonder that those who wished to abolish the,
warehousing system should be disposed to vote-for the
Amendment; but. if he should be able to satisfy the
House that such would be the effect, the clause, his
Noble Friend could not consistently vote for ir, though
his own, for he had declared that he did not wish the
destruction of that system. Suppose that clause to re-
main part of the 13.11, and that at certain periods of the
year there should be indications of a rise in prices, ill
would operate as a great bonus or stimulus to the
owners of corn.on the other side of the water to bring,
in their corn srs'ils to keep the corn in bond out of the
market by lowering the price. But what would the
owners of bonded corn do? They would re-export
their corn to Antwerp or to Holland and bring it
back in a day or two, preferring incurring that ex-
pense to utter ruin. But could it be expected that they
would be such fools as ever to bond their corn? No;
and the system *could be extinguished. He had the
authority of his Noble Friend, he had that of the Earl
of Liverpool and of the most experienced men in favour
of that system. It had been declared essential to the
interest of the country by the law of 1773, and again in
1791. It was not therefore one of the innovations with
which they were charged. In many cases the people
might be exposed to starvation if it were not for that
system. He knew that many Noble Friends of his on
the other side of the House would, with the greatest
pleasure, give up the very name of warehouses, but
they ought to consider whether a measure which would
shut out a resource in time of scarcity could be calcu-
lated to promote the interests of the country. Those
who contended that agriculture was hurt by that sys-
tem were deeply mistaken. Its abolition would force
the owners of corn on the other side of the water to
send it at all times to this country, and how would
it come? Not in British, but in Dutch or Flemish
vessels, for there would be no time to send a ship
from England to bring corn over, and they would
take good care to have vessels prepared. He was
in fact convinced that if the present clause were main-
tained, and the warehousing system abolished, not
one quarter of foreign corn would in future be imported
into this country in a British ship. He knew n had been
told that he had given a party air to the question;
when he had originally proposed it, he had done every
thing in his power to prevent the expression of any
party feeling, and in the whole discussion he trusted
that he had not manifested a feeling of that kind—
(Hear, hear.) He expressed what he felt in the plainest
way that he could. He had for many years been
concerned in matters which had brought the subject.is
question under his cognizance, and be would not b
slow in applying the little experience which he had to
the consideration of the question. He had done so,
and if he could believe that the amendment could have
any other but a pernicious effect, no consideration
personal to himself, no fear of being twitted for incon-
sistency, or of raising a storm against him, should
induce him to withhold his assent from the clause. As
he did not think it beneficial, he should oppose it.
The Duke of WELLINGTON was far from wishing
to blame his Noble Friend, or his Right Hon. Friend,
for not agreeing to the amendment which, he had
proposed. He admitted that it was founded on a mis-
apprehension of the meaning of the letter of the Presi-
dent of the Board of Trade, upon which he had not en-
tered into aby verbal criticitm. Considering himself a
party to the measure, he bsd thought proper to propose
an amendment to his Right Hon. Friend, who had ob-
jected to it, and as he (the Noble Duke) understood, had
suggested another. In proposing the clause which bad
been adopted, he conceived that he had carried into
effect the intentions of his Right Honourable Friend.
-All he could say was, that he was much concerned that
be had misunderstood his Right Hon. Friend. The
error was in misunderstanding, and not from any desire

on his pan to propose any thing contrary to the views of
the authors of the measure. He understood from the
letter of his Right Honourable Friend, that there was
Only a chance, and an apprehension that the measure
might be lost. His Noble Friend (Viscount Goderich)
bad on the night of the Committee stated to him, that
he thought he had misunderstood the intentions of his
Right Honourable Friend respecting bonded corn. He
(the Noble Duke) had entreated his Noble Friend (Go-
derich) to read the letter of the President of the Board
of Trade attentively, and his Noble Friend having re-
turned it without making any additional observat•ops,'
he (the Noble Duke) conceived that his Noble Friend
had been convinced, and that in proposing his clause
he was only carrying into effect the views of his Ma.,
jesty's Ministers; the contrary becoming obvious only
when he found himself opposed by those with whom he
had been in the habit of acting in concert. The main
object of his clause was to place a check on the ware-
housing system, and to prevent the operation of
fraud committed in the averages. The only means
to commit fraud in the averages was by laying out
capital in the purchase of British corn to raise the
average, and then come to the warehouses and get
all that should be wanted. This was the principle on
which he had proposed his clause. His Grace here re-
ferred to the state of the law since the year 1791. The
Act of that year established that the duty up to a certain
price should be 24 shillings; that up to another certain
price the duty should be half a crown; and then that in,

-Main circumstances it should be only sixpence. Bit
by this Act wheat in warehouse and under bond, whether
subject to the highest duty, to the middle duty, or to
the duty of sixpence, was, when withdrawn From bond
and introduced into consumption, chargeable with an
additional duty of half a crown. This law remained in
force till the year 1815, and thus constantly added to the
heavy charges of warehousing an additional half crown
of duty. Laying an additional duty upon watehnnsed
corn was perhaps the most effectual methodof prevent-
h. He never
had
this v. He had iliglietbut w med now,thin h
something
most
necessity
gone
esiit be done with
through the
princainpyaldtesopireicstoofdtebeeaNt
the le
Bills
spee
if th ee Noblebod
ill, and
would pledge himself to effect something upon ihe ptio•
ciple of the former Act, he would not be indisposed to
withdraw his amendment. His Grace concluded by
again disclaiming any intention to obstruct the passing
of the Act.

Lord HOLLAND considered the amendment sn
consistent with the whole principle of the measure, that
he should, have thought it impossible for a Committee
of the same House which sanctioned the Bill to have
agreed to it. It was an amendment which had it pro.
ceeded from any other gust ter he should have believed
to proceed from an intention to defeat the measure.--
lint the Noble Duke professed to be friendly to the
principle of the Bill, and he was quite disposed to give
him credit. It was, however, he (Lord Holland) thought
by aome scholastic distinction only that he could satisfy
himself of the consistency of bis amendment with the
feeling he professed. The amendment in fact separated
the watt frost the body of the Bill, and reminded hiss of
a couplet which be had heard applied to the metaphysical
disputations respecting matter and spirit—

" Tbose distinctions so nice can be scarce understood,
They who wish to divide as can mean as no good."

The Noble Duke, with all his attachment to the
must be startled when he saw the Noble and Learned
the
e expulsion of allth
the of wasß valuableisopsfrom in
Lord who had so manfully opposed it, who rieised it
sandas the dreadful spectre of free trade, and who expected
oir.nritlsntrastitiuntionthe overthrow
that House; he must have been startled when he founi
that Noble and Learned Lord hail this amendment
upon a Bill to which he was irreconcileably opposed....
upon a Bill, the offspring of an Administration of which
the Noble Duke was himself a Member, as a great ad-
vantage. And in the same manner the support of the
Noble Lord in the Green Ribbon, who had met the
Bill with nntompromising hostility, must have greatly
startled him ; and then the shisut of triumph which.
unusual and almost unprecedented as it was in that
House, had proceeded from the opponents of the
Bill, when the Noble Duke had prevailed upon the
Committee to adopt his amendment. If the Noble
Duke construed these circumstances as he did, they
would induce him as a friend to the measure to withdrew
his amendment. He now begged leave to refer to the
Resolutions upon which the Bill was founded (it was
observed here by some Noble Lord that these were not
Resolutions off-that House) ;he knew that they weenie,
but the Noble Lord had referred to them, and had said
that he was responsible for them, it could not therefore
be irregular for him to notice them. They purported
that the different kinds of grain and flour should at all
times be admitted for consumption. Now, the amend-
ment said that they should not at all timer be Es ad-
mitted. Could anything be more contradictory ?
The amendment was at variance *ith the letter of
the Resolutions, and it was equally subverive of the
principle of the Bill ; that principle he understood
to be the substitution of a graduated scale of duty is
lieu of prohibition. Now, what was the object of
the amendment ?—it was pro Moto adverse to this
principle of the Bill, for it was to bring back all
the corn in bond or hereafter to be bonded, under
the operation of the former principle. This amend-
ment they were therefore bound, with regard to the con•
sistency of their votes, to rescind. The Noble Lord
proceeded to enforce his opinion, that the Amendment
must have the effect either of destroying the ware•
housing system altogether, or that of increasing the
quantity of corn in warehouse, and thus increasing the
danger of a sudden and excessive influx of corn. if it
was intended to put down the warehousing system, he
would resist it, because it was unjust, impolitic, and
disingenuous. The Noble Lord then proceeded to
illustrate these charges against the measure by a variety
of arguments. But the Noble Lord' said that it wu
not intended to destroy the warehousing system. Then,
he should say, why alter it ? This was to produce the
certainty of frequent scarcities and gluts, by keeping the
warehouses alternately open and shot. If he were into.
cal to the measure, and desired to get rid of it by aside•
wind, he did not say that he should have so much rime
as to resist the amendment. If the Noble Duke would
walk down the benches and condescend to consult those
who had voted on the last evening for his amendment,
he would find that they were all enemies to the Bill. fie
deprecated the protraction of the measure to which chi
amendment was likely to lead, as without meaning to
appeal to popular clamour, he thought the present pe-
riod of tranquillity exceedingly propitious to the final
settlement of the question. At a more anxious and go.
settled period no Bill equally favourable to the landed
interest could be introduced. -It would be wise on their
part, therefore,to take the present offer as more favourable
than any which was likely to be made to them hereafter.
Lord BATHURST asserted his right to consider any
amendment which might be proposed, and he did nqt
see in that case under the consideration of the House
any thing so inimical to the principle of the measure as
to preclude him from exercising that privilege. The
only .difference between the proposition of the Right
Hon. the President of the Board of Trade, and that of the
Noble Duke, was, that the former was temporary, and
the latter permanent. Therefore all the objections which
could be urged against the amendment applied with
equal force to the proposition of that Right Honourable
Gentleman so long as it remained in force. Was it ob-
jected that the amendment preserved the principle of
prohibition ? The same objection applied to the pro-
position of the President of the Board of Trade.
as
it objected to the amendment that it militated aeo'n''
the warehousing system ?—Again, the same *Armen
applied to the proposition of the President of the Board
of Trade; and if it was objected that the amendment
fixed the price at which foreign corn might be with-
drawn from the warehouses too high, the same objec:
non would be found equally applicable to the propon-
tion of the Right Honourable Gentleman. If the &cm.
panty between the resolution and the amendment were
insisted, inasmuch as the resolutions said that corn might
at all times be taken out of warehouse—the same in-
consistency would be found in the proposition of the
Right Hon. the President of the Board of Trade. The,
what was the proposition of the Right Hon. Gentleman•
It was that corn should not be taken out of warehouse

i 1 boa
duff
neei
• wai
. •
I whi
gen
1 If not
I whi
I AM
Fel
ten
ten
thii
side
• of
, .
. .
pra
i pre
1-
i 1 i ' Ril
I. an(
.
. inti
Fri
so
un
wh
clii
di
his
net
In
. of
Tie/
Ni
Ri,
i i . car
i$ Cali
of
Fri
evo
. . ,
• i,l t.I. ~
', +...
‘7%....
..
.