Star.
London, England, 1818-06-08 00:00:00

PARLIAMENTARY PROCEEDINGS.

HOUSE OF LORDS, JUNE 6.
ALM Bill.

A Menage from the House of Commons intimated the wish
Of that House to hold a conference with their Lordships on the
subject of the Alien Bill. Their Lordships having expressed their
intention to send an answer by messengers of their own, the
deputation from the House of Commons retired.
The Marquis of LANSDOWN, the Duke of MOWTROSIt. Lord
Gaze, Lord LIVIRPOOL, Lord ILnmsnate, Lord Mammas,
acid Lord Lantana, were then appointed to attend the confe-
rence; and a message was sent by the Usher of the Black Rod
to the House of Commons, announcing their Lordships inten-
tion to attend the conference in the tainted Chamber.
After the conference the Noble Lords returned to the House,
and the Miequis of Lasranowe reported that the managers of the
Lords had attended the managers of the Commons, and that
Lord Bo:sum, on the part of the managers of the Commons,
bad delivered to them the Alien Bill, and stated at the same
time that the Commons disagreed to an Amendment made by
their Lordships to that Bill. The Commons declined giving
IM-reason for that disagreement, except that they considered
their Lordships' amendment was inexpedient. Upon this Report
halm road by the proper °lacer,
Lard LIVERPOOL moved, that " this House do not insist
ton its Amendment."
The LORD CHANCELLOR having put the question,
Earl' GREY rose, and expressed his surprise at
the manner in wfiich the Report which had just been
read had been received. The Bill in question had
been sent down from that House to the lieuse of
Commons, with a clause which had been introduced,
with an express allegation that it was indispensable
M give the Bill effect, and their Lordships were called
upon, so important was the clause considered, to
dispense with their usual forms in order that it might.
be passed with the greater celerity. Notwithstar.ffing
this proceeding, however, now that the Commons
had thought proper to reject the clause, they were
called upon, without any explanation, to subscribe
to a resolution which militated entirely against their
former opinions. For his own part, he thought the
Bill was much improved by the omission of this
clause, for he could not help coming to the conclu-
don, that it was not only impolitic, but unjust. He
thought, in fact, that every thing which went to ren-
der the Bill inefficient would be productive of public
advantage—(hcar, hear.) But when he recollected
that a majority of that House had agreed to the bill
in its amended form, he considered that the preser-
vation of their dignity, as a branch of the legisla-
ture, demanded some other course than that which
had been taken. The House of Commons had not
condescended to give any reason for their rejection of
their amendment, and yet they were called upon,
without explanation, to abandon it altogether—to
abandon that without which it had been strongly
urged the bill would be totally ineffective. The
Noble Earl then proceeded to comment upon the im-
propriety of coming to this determination in the ab-
sence of those who had supported the, amendment,
and who, to maintain their own consistency, ought
at least to have an .sportunity of explaining the
grounds, upon which they might be inclined to
accede to this new proposition. With these feel-
ings, and with a view that the House should take
the subject deliberately into their consideration, he
begged to move an amendment to the motion tithe
Noble Lord, " That the further consideration of ;his
Report be deferred to Monday next, and that the
Lords be summoned."—The question having been
put upon this amendment,
Lord LIVERPOOL said, that he was not pre-
pared to retract one word of the opinion he had
given upon the importance of this clause. Both in
point of policy and justice he considered it necessary
to the protection of the natural rights of British sub-
jects. For if it were possible by a trick, such as this
clause was meant to guard against, to enable a fo-
reigner to obtain all the rights of a natural-born
subject, there would be an end of all their labours
for a century past for the maintenance of those
rights. There might be different opinions respecting
the policy to be adopted in the admission of foreigners
to the rights of natural-born subjects. Some might
be for excluding them altogether ; others for admit.
ting them under regulations more or less rigid—a
third opinion might be that they should be admitted
without any limitation. He was not now going to
discuss which of these opinions was the most proper
for a country to adopt; for whatever course might
be thought preferable with respect to Aliens, all
would agree that the legislation respecting them ought
to be consistent, and that one law might not to be al-
lowed to counteract all the legislative regulations
adopted on the subject of naturalization, so long as
it was thought fit that these regulations should be
continued. Indeed, when the clause was discussed
by their Lordships, no one objected to it as a pros-
pective measure ; it was only its retrospective opera-
tion that had caused a difference of opinion. He
could scarcely believe any individual existed who
would say that a law should be suffered to remain in
force by which any foreigner, however hostile and
rancorously disposed towards this country, might,
at the expense of 80/. obtain all the rights of a natu-
ral-born subject, without taking the oath of alle-
giance, or submitting to any of tht regulations and
inquiries which the legislature thought proper to
adopt in passing naturalization bills. This extraor-
dinary act was not known until April last. He
would ask their Lordships whether any of them sup-
posed the existence of a measure by which a foreigner
who had purchased stock to the extent of 80/. one
day, might sell it the next to another, and natura-
lize him also, and thus make the rapid process of na-
turalization go on without limitation? He was too
well convinced of the loyalty and patriotism of the
other House of Parliament to suppose, that they
would not apply a remedy to such a state of things.
The reason assigned on the conference that the Com-
mons considered the amendment in the Bill inexpe-
dient, warranted the supposition he had made. This
expression of their sentiments supported the opinion,
that they would have no objection to accomplish the
same object in another way. He had no doubt that
the objection of the Commons did not apply to the
clause substantially, but to its introduction into this
particular bill. He therefore thought that a distinct
measure, having the same object, would be ap-
proved both by their Lordships and elsewhere. On
that ground he had recommended to their Lordships
not to insist upon their amendments.
Lord HOLLAND, were it not for the state of hu-
miliation in which the House was placed, would
have been disposed to consider the whole proceedings
relative to the clause in question rather as a subject
for mirth and pleasantry, than for serious considera-
tion. The whole tendency of the Noble argu-

ment aimed at roving that their Lordships would
have acted most prhposteeeesly had they not adopted
this clause, and that the Commons have done wrong
refusing to agree to it, .and yet he concluded with
posing that it should now be rejected. The words
use expedient, it appeared, had damped his courage,
lad he affects to believe that the Commons, who he
infers have acted very absurdly, will, notwithstand-
ing, adopt what your Lordships are desired to reject.
After boasting that he himself had retracted no cpi-
nioh, he had the singular modesty to ask their Lord-
ships to retract all theirs. He says, " You must now
alter the opinions you have solemnly given on the
subject, because the Commons, who have just given
a proof of their disapprobation of your opinions,
will be sure to take them up as soon as you your-
selves reject them." This was a strange sort of rea-
soning, and full of deep humiliation; but it is in the
criminality more than in the inconsistency of the
proceeding, that the humiliation is to be found. A
gross violation of the rights of property was con-
tained in the clause which the Commons had re-
jected. The Noble Earl had more than once spoken
of the trick and device by which, he asserted, certain
aliens had attempted, since April last, under the
Scotch Act of Parliament, to procure their natu-
ralization: but they had only availed themselves of
an existing law : whereas the Noble Earl, in contra•
diction to all the principles of law and justice, pro-
posed to deprive them of their property and rights.
But let not their Lordships " lay the flattering unc-
tion to their soul," that this was merely au act of the
Scotch Parliament. It was uo such thing, though, as
an Act of the Scotch Parliament recognized by the
Union, it was the law of the United Kingdom. It
originated with the Scotch Parliament, but it was re•
enacted by the British Parliament in the year 1774.
The Noble Lord (Liverpool) said, he would call upon
any person to say, whether he knew of the existence
of this Act before the month of April last? Why
should the Noble Earl ark that question, or why sup-
pose that the Act was unknown? Was it because the
Noble Earl himself was in ignorance of it, that it
should be unknown to every other person?—(kear.)
But if it were true that nobody knew any thing oirl
the Act, that would he a reason, not for adopting the
Noble Earl's motion, but for entering into an inquiry
on that point, previously to a full consideration of
the whole subject. He knew not by what fatality it
happened,•'lsut, fortunately, violence and injustice
generally diteated their own purpose, and in this case
Ministers had most completely defeated theniselves.
He wished not to be understood as accusing their
Lordships of either violence or injustice, but the
whole transaction was of such a nature, that it una-
voidably excited in his mind the, consolatory feeling
he had expressed. It was said, that the clause could
not be looked upon as tending to an infraction of the
rights of property ; that the law being long unknown
and dormant, the repeal of it could produce no in-
jury to individuals. This, however, was all gratui-
tous assumption. It had never been proved that the
law was unknown ; but, adniitting this assertion to
be true, that was not a sufficient reason for the clause
their Lordships had been induced to adopt. Igno-
rance of the law did not protect unfortunate mer for
breaking it, and he did not understand why legisla-
tors, who did not know the law, which it was their
duty to know, should make their ignorance an ex:use
for depriving other men of their rights. The aliens'
who had purchased shares in the Bank of Scotland,
held that property by the same title that their Lord.;
ships held their estates, namely, the sanction of law.
The measure which the Noble Earl had supported
rendered foreigners mere trustees at the will of the
Crown, snd liable to the forfeiture of any land they
may have become possessed of. When the Noble
Earl was formerly urging their Lordships to adopt
the clause, he declared he was quite impatient, under
the existence of a law, the effect of which was, if acted
upon, to give the rights of free-born subjects to any
foreigners, without being compelled to take an oath
of allegiance, or without any obligation to perform
any of the duties of a subject. He was before an-
xious for its repeal, not only prospectively, but retro-
vectively ; and nothing would sateity him short of
the disfranchisement ct all the individuals who had
obtained legal rights under the Scotch Act, since the
28th of April. Now, however, he was more mode-
rate, he was content to mix a little water with his
wine.—(A laugh.)—The retrospective part of the
clause, which he now spoke of as a little matter by
the by, was to be omitted. In fact, the only con-
sistent part of the Noble Earl's conduct was his pre-
cipitation and impatience. He bad been all impa-
tience to get the clause passed, and he was now in
an equal hurry to get it rejected. lf, however, their
Lordships must stand in a white sheet on this occasion,
(a laugh 1, he thought it becoming that they should
go through the work cif repentance with due delibe.
ration and solemnity, and would therefore =I
his Noble Friend's motion, for the farther co
tion of the subiect on Monday.
The Marquis of LANSDOWN said, that upon a
former occasion lie admitted that thwfacility allowed'
to foreigners by this Act of the Scotch Parliament
should not be allowed to exist. He was still of the
sum: opinion ; but he never thought that, in justice,
the repeal of it should be prospective, nor retrospec-
tive. It would he a gtrat injustice, a complete spo-
liation of rights, to deprive foreigners of the advan-
tages they enjoyed under a 3 Act passed for many
years, recognized by the British Parliament, and un-
der which they had acquired property. Foreigners:
became possessed of rights under this Act, in the same
way as all other rights were obtaiiiel—by law. It
was attempted to justify the repeal of this Act upon
the ground that it had fallen into disuse, and was
quite unknown. Such was not the case. The ex-
istence of the law was well known, and though per-1
sons not immediately interested in it might not have
been aware of its existence, it was familiar to ninny,
as well as to those who had acquired property under
it as to otheri. The best mode, in his opinion, would
he to adjourn the consideration of this question to a
further period. By that means they would give time
for the introduction of a new Bill, which might be
carried regularly through all the stages in both
Houses. What had occurred on this occasion was
an addition to the many proofs that the privileges of
the two houses of Parliament tended greatly to pub-
lic utility, though their exercise might occasionally
be attended with some inconvenience.

Lord HARROWBY, (who had entc.red the Home
while Lord Holland was speaking,) supported the
motion of his Noble Friend Wm Larl of Lim pool.)