Star.
London, England, 1818-03-05 00:00:00

Lard CASTLEREAGiI stated this courd,,,
cnosideration of the cession of certain colt 1
have engaged to advance two millions towards ti;
foetvesses to be erected for the defence of the Fis
mish fmntier. Estimates of the Intended work, 44
been prepared by the engineers, which had b
proved by the Duke of Welling ton. 'lle koraii4.7
tions received from France were appropriated to feet
works as they came in, and what sholld oval
when they were completed would he dividedelket,
between she two Governments. At present }roe;
had not contributed all she was to pay towArdstlsok
as in the first instance it had been stipulated that
should do this progressively in the course of the fri
years. England and the Government of the Xe 6
lands were each bound to advance sums nat
ing 2,000,000 i. to complete the works.
WARRE referred to an Article of the T.
from which he thought it appeared that E.
was bonndjto advance any sum not excteding`
millions.

Lord CASTLEREAGH asserted, the .40
the country was bound to advance was 2.000,01 k
Mr. WARRE read the Article of the Conses‘
and asked, if under that Treaty this country so
not be called upon for a third million?
The CHANCELLOR ef the EXCHEQUEIIssi
the Article referred to was not very clear, Int tt
object of it was to secure an advance of I,OK
from this country for the fortifications. For theft
sion of Guadaloupe 1,000!. was to be pieta aal
that Treaty; and the words alluded to by the
nourable Gentleman were merely precaurionamit
this ossuary 'hada in no case be cal.el spa
more than 3,000,0001.

Mr. WARRE thought, as the ankle stood,
country was liable to be called upon for 4,00,40%
Lord CASTLEREAGH said not the s:igilastaa,
understanding en this subject had existed betser.a,
two Governments. It.was perfectly understal
this country was not to advance more than 2,00044
on account of the fortresses.

Mr. TIERNEY said, from the Treaty it appen4l
that if the 2,000,0001. should be instAcie.a.

country might be called upon for any sum Lc 5.
ceeding 3,000,00011.--The motion was then ag:ekx
OPP MISSIVE MACH A AVM

Lord LASCELLES presented a Petition harem
min shopkeepers and retail traders of Leeds, sy
were persons of respectability, and who se! 4
much in the habit of complaining of the Lies. 1
appeared that a very severe construction had Ira
put on the law for regulating the duties on srLits;
which pressed very hard qn the Petitioners. Pm
also complained that where they had emplo7ed:3
dren to shut up their windows, to carry out p...-rt 4
or to do any thing connected with their busr s. t
had been attempted to charge them as serum
These things led them to petition for some ahem'
of the law, as at present the Commissioners to r.aa
they had appealed could afford them no redrets.lie
Petition was then read.

Sir JAMES GRAHAM supported the Pei*
and corroborated the statement made by the
Lop.) (Lascelles).
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUI
stated several representations to have been !Man
the Treasury on the manner in which it was attetnpal
to charge travellers and others connected with penal
in business as vervants, and some measure of
was intended. With respect to the atim as
there might be more difficulty, but therapy
would be considered.—The Petition was mitred*
lie on the table.