Star.
London, England, 1816-05-07 00:00:00

Pic SirrEN-A

tilers of Literpnel. the his of Ely; tist;ftesl*ioftli. of thalith-
kow, Gusto*, Pei; Ciento*, and StWlitt, a additibnal
ikunse Duties.—staid on the tables
A Petition was .resent 4 ham the Merchants fird ockni of
the Port Of Lnitd. -• ha favour of chit Almistte Ha,-bout
Lad on the t..'e
Sir U. BRYUGh brought up his run for the 'V.tsttriug of
Marriages, Det.tlw, nod Butials, id England arid 7 which
cans read a Slit tilde and ordered ti be read a-t!on
Monday neat. •
A Petition was Ors toted from the *Gotten of
Somerset, against th* Dudes on the Impartation Of Forel"'
Woul.—Laid on the Table.
The County Surveyor Bill Committee weapons:rad till Met
day nett.
The Heletcine Election Bill was read a third time and puled.
Mr. PEELS pretence,' a Petition from the County of rer;
praying proteetiort for the agriculture of Ireland, and pu'Selar.
lady for butter: Laid On the Table.
Petitions *Fete ,reser.ted from oteit'Grimsby hid ithilog-
dere, against the i.eatherTat.
Ml. BARCLAN presented a Petition heat thy Tnhibitinte of
Southwark agt:nv tile Gas Light 818 Ordered to He on the •
Table.
Ste it. PAR. 171. i..:. presented u Petition flan the Casielles of
the Cheney and City of Cork; praying fee a thohnial of ill Ode
disabilities. Lad on the Table.
Sir R. HERON purloined dill farthet tonddetalifehi of tbh
Lod Poet BM, With a view to fix on a day at a fatisi*petied.
RAMSGATE HARBOUR.
Mr. BARING presented a Petition fkotti the MOP
Owners of the City of Londoni against the Item
gate Harbour Bill. As a Petition ptlrpotting to COMO
treat the Ship Owners of the City of London, is
favour of the Bill, had been already presented by
an Honourable Member opposite (Mr. Martyat) lee
thought it proper to state, that the oite which he held
in his hand was signed by four hundred and eighty
persons, while the other could not boast more than
forty, who called themselves a Committee of the
Ship Owners, although they had not been delegated •
by that body. They were merely a society of per.
sons who were chiefly employed in • insuring tran-
sports, and even of that small number some we're in.
dnced to sign the former Petition on a false represen.
tation, that the Money necessary for.completing the
harbour was to be raised on the town of Ramsgate.
On discovering chair mistake, some were willing to
"retract their assent, and even the present Petition was
signed by a Oentlentan, whose partner's name was
' Rand to the former, but whose best wishes went
with the present. He concluderd with moving that
the Petition b: read.
Mr. MARRYAT stated, that the meeting where
the petition which he had the honour to present was
prepared, had been ccnvened by public advertisements
at the City of London Tavern, as a meeting of all
the Ship Owners. The Chaitnian, Mr. Buckle, ex-
plained to the melting the difference between the pre-
sent Bill and the former, and the petition was signed
by almost every person in the Z.Cl7.r.
After a few farther observations from air. BARLIG
and Mr. blatti:va.r,- the Petition was read and laid
on the Table.
Mr. MANNING the - moved the Order of the
Day for the s%:-ond rcac,'.ng of the Ramsgate Har-
bour Bill.
Sir EDWARD KNATCHBULL acknowledged
the general utility of the ,Harbour of Ramsgate, and
was aware that it should be maintained. The direc-
tion of the affairs of the harbour had, however, long
been a &vont itc hobby-horse of an Honourable Ba.
ronet opposite (Sir Wm. Curtis), on which he bad
been in the habit of riding with success since the year
1797. That Hon. Baronet had, about that period, stre-
nuously opposed a Bill that had been introdnced,for
regulating the affairs of the harbour, and had termed
the whole transaction a job—(lleer, hear, from Sir
Carti4—but he would leave it to the . House to
determine what designation was most appli.table to
the present—(Hear).—ln theyear 1797, Mr. Smeeton,
an eminent engineer, calculated that about al 7,000
would have been sufficient for completing the neces-
sary works of the harbour; but since that time no Lou
than 01340.000 had been thoughtlessly squandered.
The present Directors of the harbour had appeopei.
ated to themselves, or had at least taken into their
own hands, the estates belonging to. the herbals%
about £lB,OOO a year. The harbour fees, according "
to the last half-yearly returns, alienated to no toss a
than 41000 a year; so that there appeared at
least 021,000 a year, that might be rendered appli-
cable for the completion of the harbour, without
having recourse to Parliament to enable the Directors
to tax the Ship-owners, particularly as by their owl
statement £109,000 would be sufficient. He had
observed, in the proposed ail!, that the ships of
Sandwich were to be freed from the additional duty
and he had even heard that the Directors offered to
I increase the present grant to the town of Sandwich
of £2OO a year to £4OO, if that town did not oppose
the Bill. He concluded by moving, that the Bill be
read that day six months.
Sir W. CURTIS rose to defend the conduct of
the Directors of the harbour. He alluded to what
had fallen from the Hon. Baronet relative to the
former Bill.. which he again designated a job.—" I
(said Sir William) attacked it, I rooted oat that job,
and a good job has taken place."—(Lord laughing.)
,He stated, that the plan on which Mr. Smeeton pro.
ceeded, was essentially wrong, and put the Company
to enormous expense. For instance, he mistook a
chalk-bill for a rock, and it being found unfitfor
building on, all their work upon it was in vain. Some
of the former Directors had been malting good ;?.bs of
it. One of them held from 70 to sigBo,4)oo in his hands •
during all the American war, but he at length died,
thank GOD I—(Much laughing. ).—The Hon. Baronet
opposite Might intlet.d talk of jobs,. but did he' ever
hear of '• any jobs in Lent ? Did he never hear of a
Maidstone aol ?--41-lear. hear.)
Sir XNATCHBULL row to explain.' He
did not say a word about the Maidstone Gaol.
(Hear, hear)—for agreed perfectly with the Ho.
pourable. Baronet on the frponecietyrof the entire
transaction. .
, , .
Mr: BAILING observed. that the Konourat&
Baronet (Sir We. Curtis) armpit bath defend an
Present transaction, if he relied solely on his allusions
to other% which might bear an equally doubtful chi
•