Star.
London, England, 1819-12-22 00:00:00

the Lord Advocate; but there was the less cause of.
'regret, as the motion, he understood, would not be
opposed. He had nothing to state additional towhat
he had formerly mentioned on the
.subject, except
that the investigation that had been gone into, cor-
roborated all that he had formerly advanced, relative
to the abuses of the system of self-election. The sub-
ject was not connected, except collaterally, with Par-
liamentary Reform. At present, Edinburgh, Aber-
deen, and Inverness, were in a state of disfranchise-
ment; and the question as to the first of the three
might happen collaterally to affect the return of the
Member for that city. At the last election Aberdeen
had .no vote, and Inverness had been in the same si-
tuation. The Noble Lord concluded by moving,
that the Petition to that House from the Royal
Burghs in Scotland, in the last and the former Ses-
sion of Parliament, be referred to a Select Commit-
tee, to report upon the same to the House.
Mr. W. DUNDAS (Member for Edinburgh) said,
that the Noble Lord, not satisfied with the success
of his motion, had grown quite wanton in conse-
quence of that success—(Laughter). With respect to
Edinburgh, one of the Electors had been absent at
the last Election ; but by that circumstance the me-
rits of the Election could not then be at all affected,
as the time for presenting had gone by. On the sub-1
ject of Burgh Reform, he had no objection to the state
of things that had subsisted before the Union.
la3rd-CASTLEREAGH observed, that 'as there
was but one opinion on the subject, there was no oc-
casion to 'argue the question. Gentlemen ou his side
of the House were disposed to co-operate cordially
with the Noble Lord. _

Mr.j. P; GRANT %vas inclined to think that the
Member for= Edinburgh had gotten into a place where
belied no right to be—(Flear, hear).
Mr. FORBES stated, that Aberdeen then paid
four per cent. for all the debt due by the town, while
the Scotch Banks only paid- three. The inquiry ori-
ginated by the Noble Lord had already cost £2OOO.
Lord A. HAMILTON stated the expense to haie
been exactly £looo.—The incition was agreed to. '
CHELSEA PENSIONERS.
Lord NUGENT rose to move, pursuant to notice,
for a Return of the Persons liable to be struck off the
Chelsea Out-pension List, in consequence of the Royal
Proclamation of the 28th of October, distinguishing
those who had enlisted for a limited* period, and
stating the amount of the Pensions to which they
were entitled in consequence of wounds. He applied
to the House in behalf of those men who had come
forward when a new and more- vigorous organize,.
tion of the Army had taken place; and who had con-
tributed largely.to the trophies of the country. By
the last Proclamation, It had been stated, that all
these men, unless they reported themselves within a
certain time, would lose their pensions ; in conse-
quence of which, those who had enlisted for seven
years, and had been entitled to pensions on account
of wounds, would be deprived of this pension. He
would not then enter on the question of the power of
the Crown to deprive of this pension those who had
enlisted for life. But he would contend, that those
men, who, under Mr. Windham's Bill, had enlisted'
for a limited time, aid had been wounded in the ser-
vice, were entitled to a pension, by the words of that
Bill...the rules and regulations of the service, and the
authority of the most eminent men of that day, when
the Bill was enacted. The men who had enlisted for
a limited time, ancreat,,the end of- that time had been
discharged, were no Toner soldiers, nor subject to
the operation of the Mutiny Bill; and, consequently,
could not be recalled to the service. That had never
been attempted in the case of those who had no pen-
sion, and could not, according to the Act, be done in
the case of those who had received a pension in con-
sequence of their wounds. The circumstance had
been stated by Mr. Windham, as the very spirit and
essence of his system. That had also been the opi-
nion of the men' by whom the Bill had been opposed,
among whom were the present Secretary of State
for Foreign Affairs, the President of the Board of
Controul, and the late Mr. Perceval. All these had
opposed the enactment in the Bill, on the subject of
the pension, as tending to limit too much the power
of the Crown. No power was given in this Bill to
the Commissioners of Chelsea Hospital to withdraw
the pension, except in the case of, enlistment for life,
or the period of service not having been completed..
He hoped the motion would not be resisted by ab-
stract opinion's, but by p, denial, if it could be done,
of the facts he had stated.
Lord PALMERSTON thought the House would
agree with him in opinion, that the return moved for
was not expedient to be granted ; and the order from
the War Office would be completely justified by the
laws and regulations of the service. The object of
Mr; Windham had been to add to the inducements
to enter into the service by limiting the period.—
But the Crown had full power to make what arrange-
ments it thought proper, only under certain regula-
tions, giving the soldier a right to a pension. Pre-
vious to the passing of Mr. Windham's Act, a pen-
sion to the soldier flowed entirely from the sponta-
neous bounty of the. Crown; and it was necessary
he should have a recommendation from his Officer,
the want of which was fatal to his claim. Both Mr.
Fox and Mr. Windham thought, that' the necessity
of the recommendation should be done away, and
that had been the object of the Act. The regu-
lations subsequent to the Bill had the same ob-
" dud stated distinctly that the pießion would
taken away in the event of non-epinpliance
with Certain conditions, unless the full _period of
the serviCe had been completed, which was twenty-
one years. The House could not at the time have
agreed to the Bill,. had the view taken of it by the
Noble Lord (Nugent) been correct, as men in the
prime of life would have been entitled to pensions,
and the Countrj would have had no claim to their
&mit service. The expense of the Chelsea and Kit=
mainham pensioners was at the present time net less
than £1,200,000, and that was divided among 75,000
men. It was absurd to' think that these men were
not bound to render their service to their Country
when called upon. Similar Proclamations had issued
from the War Office in the years 1809 and 1813, and
he must certainly think that the question had been
much better discussed then than at the present mo-
Inisnt, when the public mind was so much inflamed.
A message from the Lords signified their Lordships Assent
to the Amendments made in the Misdemeanbur Bill; and that
they had assented to the Seditious Nicetiess with certain
Amendments to which they desired the concurrence of that
House. On the motion' of Lord Carrt.camsosi,the Lords' Amend-.
aunts were ordered to be taken into consideration to-morrow.

Lord AtTHORPE obser;zedi thatt was
from the regulations.A.the service; that thitro—wn
had no right to call for the services of &man who
had completed the period for which he had been en-
listed. In the case of a person ivlio had enlisted fi
the term of seven years, that was to he regarded t.‘i
the period of his service; and in the case of any
doubts, these doubts ought certainly tti be inteiptited
in favour of the soldier.

Mr. LONG. observed; that the soldier wit un-
doubtedly entitled to the. conditions under which 1-. e
had inlisted. But all the perisiorts were conditional
except in the case of those who had completed tte
three periods of service, amounting to 21- years.
There was nothing in the speeCh made at the time by
Mr. Windham, to bear out the opinion cf the Nob
Lord ; no maimed man had been called out, and no
rigour had been employed. The men themselves
had shewn the greatest alacrity, and had endea-
voured to conceal their wounds lest they might Le
accounted unfit for service—( nr ).
• Mr. J. P. GRANT was of opinion that seven years
were the proper period for a man who had ehlisted
for that term of years, and that they could not be
required to Serve the full period of 21 years.
Mr. CALCRAFf thought the House much in.;
debted to his Noble Friend for having brought the
subject forward, that it might be finally settled. The,
periods of service were three—for seven, fourteen, or
twenty-one years. The man who enjoyed a pension
for length of service, was undoubtedly liable to serve
till the twenty-one years had expired. But he was
not satisfied that the class of persons alluded to, who,
having enaged to serve for seven years,.bad been
wounded in that period, were not exempted from
being called on to se -ve again. The motion was
then negatived without a division.

STAMP DUTIES BILL.
Lord CASTLERbAIiti moved, that the Report
on the Newspaper Stamp Duties Bill should be then
received.
Mr. DENMAN stated, that-the House had had no
time to consider the Amendments.
Lord CASTLEREAGH said, that the Amend-
ments were but few in number, and well understood
and the Bill, as amended, would be in the hands of
Members before the third reading.
The Report was then brought up.—Upon the -
question that the Amendments be read a second time,
Mt. PRIMROSE stated, that the Bill presumed a
complete change in the character of the People bf this
country. But the freedom of the Press was the great
safeguard against popular commotions, 'physical
force, and the subversion of the-Constitution. When
there was no free Press, a constant opposition invari-
ably took place between the Government and the
People. Had there been a free Press in the time of
Charles I. there would have been no change of Govern-
ment, and no attempt would have been made against'
public liberty in the time of Charles 11. and of James.
Soon after the Revolution, in 1694, Parliament had
refused to continue the restrictions on the Piess;
though the re-enactment. of these 'restrictions had
been recommended by the Committee on Expiring
That example ought to befollowed at the
present time, when the machine of the Constitution
was enabled to work practically by means of the in.
luence of public opinion over public men. Freedom
of speech should be allowed as to all public transae.;
tions, not even excepting the Tribunals of Justice ;
and there could be no security for the country, nni
less its institutions, and the conduct .of the Judges,
should be subject to a very free Preis. At the' pre-
sent day it was too late, as had been done by the.
Member or Corfe Castle, to look back for precedents
to the times of the Stuarts. If public opinion be
stifled, and the channels be choaked up, by which it
flowed through the country, he should look upon
such a measure as the first step to a Revolution. By
the Bill before the !louse, the Crown might allow
any individual to publish whatever he pleased, with-
otit any -recognizances; as the option of prosecuting
remained with the Attorney General. He thought
the measure should be deferred till after the recess.
Mr. R. MARTIN was sorry to be obliged to state
that Ireland was not so tranquil as had been asserted
by many Gentlemen in that House. He had then a
letter in his hand; no, it was in his pocket—(A laugh)
—mentioning that emissariesfrom this country had
gone over to Ireland for the purpose of disseminating
their principles, and to endeavour to disturb the peace
of the country. He thought such a statement a good
reason for passing the Bills before the House as
speedily as possible. The Honourable Gentleinan,
who had just sat down, had spoken, much in favour
of a free Press. But he was afraid that many peO-
ple would swallow whatever they saw in print; and
even, if they should be told that the Honourably
Member had made a speech but little to the purpose,
they might be disposed to credit it ! (A laugh).—The
'Amendments 'were then agreed to.
Some Clauses were then brought up by the AT.
TORNEI-GENERAL ;. one of which went to fill up the
blank relative to the penalty for neglecting to fur-
nish a copy of any pamphlet to the Commissioner of
Stamps, with the words " one hundred pounds."—
The Clause so amended was made part of the Bill.
The Bill was then ordered to be read a third time
to-morrow.

BLASPHEMOUS LIBEL BILL.
On the motion for the second reading of this, Bill;
Lord EBRINGTON begged the House would
pause, before it added this to the general system of
measures pursued by Ministers. 'lbis he considered
as one of the most daring attacks which had ever
been made on British liberty. The measures had
been adopted without any inquiry, and established
on reports, not wholly unfounded, he admitted, but,
in his opinion, grossly exaggerated. He trusted he
need not say, that he held the publication of blas-
phemous libels in the utmost detestation ; but were
they not counteracted by other means than those in
this Bill ? Let them look to their Bible Societies, theii
new Churches, Chapels, and Meeting-houses, and
then would they say that blasphemy had nrade any
progress in the land ? He contended, that the ardi-
nary laws were quite sufficient to punish offenders
for publishing seditious or blasphemous libels, espe-
cially when they recollected the punishment passed
on the last offender in this way—( Hear, hear).—
They had already passed Bills to prevent Military
Trainink, and for the Seizure of Arms; and they
had all .but pasied a4ll imposing new and unbend
of restrictions on the Press. Surely these were enougFi
He therefore thought that the House would do well
to pansy before it proteeded With this Bill. He then

k

1