The Statesman.
London, England, 1823-05-29 00:00:00

THE STATESMAN

that where the eights pf poverty wart coneeded, the rights
of repessennithm skellidigatiow as a nesessary consequeoei.
By thin test he svoulf tryihe case of pui Rdpan Catholics
of Great *Rein. wed tettainly t e thee the peculiar
tituaQou of Iralleeti, at4iat time, reputed Souse attention
the'rights of the people necessary. The Convention of
Dasel4llloll in 17132. and the dread of the influence of the
elation made tt In 17113, Ineumbent upon the
Goverment to conciliate the Roman Catholics. But bad
experience shotrn that tit& concessions made ihem, pro-
•effeeta detrimental to the Protestant ascendancy or
the Constitution? It certainly had not, but on the con-
trary these concessions had proved extremely beneficial
I• that ekes of men for whose use they were Intendel.—
As little reason was there now to diatrast the English
Roman Catholics; why should this House feel a greater
jealousy of that body in 1923. than the Irish Parliament
did of those of Ireland in 1793? The same revs were
not to be entertained of their members, and their dispo-
sitions to loyalty were full as undoubted. Let them then,
imitate the example set them by the Irish Parliament.—
Let them concede that fro. humanity end justice which
the legislators of the sister country agreed to from ne-
cessity au fear.—(Hear.) Only sixteen years after the
first relaxation of the penal code, the Irish 11:aliment
bestowed upon the Irish Catholics the rights of repre-
sentation ; since that, 46 years bad passed, but did a sin-
gte circumstance warrant the supposition that the con-
cession had been ill timed in the confidence abused ?
The principal points in which the English Catholics
were in a worse situation than those of Ireland were two;
namely, that they were unable to vote at election., and
to serve the King in Commissioners of the peace. In
this respect an English bora Catholic was less favoured
by the law, than a foreigner who had been naturalised,
and orb° might acquire the right of election. Ile was
worse than the dissenter. for the Annual Indemnity
Bill relieved him from the Corporation and Test Acts,
whilst the Roman Catholic had no resource but in per-
jury. But though Catholics were excluded from voting
at elections, yet they exercised an undoubted influence at
them. It was a common practice in some counties in
England, that the Members should be put in nomina-
tion by Roman Catholics. The late Lord Beauchamp,
when a Member of this House, and Mr. Lyttletog, his
colleague, were More than once nominated by Catholic
gentlemen of great fortune in Wtwcestershire, though
the former invariably voted against the Cottoned. -Pus.
teasing, then, as they did, the substantial power. be
asked if it would not be better to give to the Catholics
the avowed right of voting? By what means an appeal
would be made to his magnanimity, whilst now he was
labouring under distrust. It aas better to give them the
privilege, than let them enjoy the benefit by sufferance.
The object of this measure was, to put the Catholics of
England on the same footing as those of Ireland. His
Bill, therefore, should be a transcript of the Irish Act
of 1793. But the English Catholics were still in a worse
situation than those of Ireland, inasmuch as there were
many offices here, which were not named in that
Bill. As towards the dissenters they were still in
a much worse situation, for the former could sit
and vote in either House of Parliament. He hoped,
therefore, the House would not shut their ears
against so reasonable a claim. The relief to be obtained
would, by reflection and Implication, benefit the Catholics
•f Ireland, since the interests of the two bodies were closely
connected together. At least the English Catholics bad
never severed their cause from those of Ireland, and he did
not think it was the interest of the Irish Catholics to stsnd
alone.—(llear.) Under all circumstances, it was desirable
to amalgamate all classes, to unite the Protestant and Ca-
tholic together. Dtride et inverts was the maxim of stub-
jiiption, but smite was the motto of true wisdom and peace.
Tne Roman Catholics of England bad Moused under poli-
tical disadvantages for a teutury without rourmaring, and
the ten/ absence of toy danger to be feared from them
made them be forgotten. 'the stream of Parliamentary
concession which had fertilized Ireland, bad entirely passed
by the Catholics of England. Lei at least that notice be
taken of them, which was alluded to by Lord Chancellor
Bowes of Ireland, and repeated by Chief Justice Robinson;
who, in speaking of the Roman Catholics, said, " let it not
be said that by law no such person as a Roman Catholic ex-
ists in Ireland. The effective people of Ireland are cer-
tainly assumed to be Protestants—(food Langhlnr) ; butl
Roman Catholics most still exist, for the purposes of repre-
invasion and penalty for which they are named in the (Penal)l
Statutes." He called upon the House then to recognise the
rights of the British Catholics ; and before any Member
opposed him, he asked him to put his hand to his heart, and
say that, if these restrictions had never been imposed, he
would at this day be the first to originatethem.—(llear.)---
The Noble Lord concluded by moving for leave to bring in
a Bill to regulate certain tests and qualifications to be
taken by Roman Catholics in England.
Mr. S. WORTLEY seconded the motion. On every
ground of policy he thought the House was bound to make
this concession to the English Catholics ; but when he con-
sidered that some of the best blood In England flowed in
their veins, his Noble Friend surely presented a strong case
io their favour. _

The question was then put from the Chair.
Mr. WLTHERIELL admitted, that upon purely ab-
stract grounds, there was a case is favour of the Noble
Lord's motion ; for why should any of his Majesty's sub-
jects be entitled to certain rights in one part of Isis do.
minions, which they could not enjoy in another. Bat he
trusted when the measure came to be examined in detail
he hoped he should be able to show that there were
strong reason; which rendered it expedient that these
disabilities should be continued.

Mr. WILLIAM BANKES would also reserve him-
self until the period when the Bill came under discus.
sion. He thought, however, that as the measure was not
called for by the Catholics themselves, but was merely •
gratuitous project of the Noble Lord, and not likely to
be considered as a boon by those for whose benefit it was
intended, the House should hesitate before they gave
countenance to the proposal. He should say, indeed, that
he entertained no objection to the measure making Ca-
tholics eligible to hold the Commission of the Peace.
Mr. PEEL said, that on the several occasions when he
found it necessary to change his sentiments upon the
great principle of the admissibility of Catholics to of-
fice, he had intimated an opinion favourable to the views
which the Noble Lord now proposed to carry into effect..
He should. therefore, premise that, both -for the sake of
consistency. and to bring this particular case under dis
cussion. he should consent to the minion of the Noble
Lord. With respect to the first of the three branches
of the measure—namely, the elective franchise, he con-
iessed he was willing, after mature deliberation, to al-
low it to the Roman Catholics—(Hear.) In the wri-
tings of Mr. Burke, he thought the distinction was
completely established between the enjoyment of the
elective franchise and admissibility to office. Mr. But ke
unanswerably showed that conferring the first did not,
in principle, bind the Parliament to Concede the other.
He, therefore, under all these circumstances, hail no
diffieulty in avowing his readiness to sanction the Ines-
sure to that extent. lie should here remind the Noble
Lord of a difficulty which would present itself in case
the Catholics of SiVilind were to be embraced by this
measure. The Catholics of Scotland were excluded
from the enjoym-nt of the franchise expressly by the
Act of Union. But, hoWever the case of the Catholics
of that part of the Enpire might. be disposed of,
he felt no hesitation in supporting the concession
of the elective franchise to the Catholics of
Isngland. It did not follow that, because a person,
as some thought, had the right of electing, be ought,
in principle, to have the right of being elected The
use of the Clergy was a full answer to this argument.
Aid if reference was made to the discussion of ISOI. it
would he fount, that one of the reasons against their en-
joyinr, their elective franchise.. tie le.st relied m, was
that of the pos-ibility of their lieing represented in the
House of Convocation. It was further. he thought,
unfair, to argue from the abase of the elective franchise

in Deland, agailitet the expediency of conferring it •on
the eatholirs'elf this country. . Wbatzver infereneel
,could be'drawn from a comparison hetwees the state eif
• the Roman Catholic population in
.each country, be
thought must be in favour of the propriety of making
eoeceuions to those of England. With respect to the
emiend branch of the Noble Lord's Bill, the Magistracy,'
:be was prepared to avow his opinion, that great advan-
tage would follow from admitting Roman Catholic Geo-
tleinen to bold the consualselod of the Peace. With
respect to the third branch. eligibility to office, be must
reserve himself for a future occasion. At the same time
he had no difficulty in stating that be would have no oh.
Ijection to put Catholics is England on the same footing
with those !Mott& provided • be could place
the English, Catholics in the saws situation as the
English Di:misters: The Noble Lord said he would le
able•to place the Catholics on that footing, with respect
to the Annual Indemnity Bill, as the Dissenters, if the
Noble Lord succeeded in doing that; and, if further,
the concurrence of the House to that extent could not
be considered as a new reason for making further con.
c, ssioos to the Catholics of Ireland, he should have no
hesitation in giving his support to the measure.
Mr. He GURNEY supported the measure.
Mr. BANEES said he felt himself bound in fairness
to state how :ar he could agree with the Noble Lord. As
to the enjoyment of the elective franchise by the Roman
Catholics in Ireland, it was a privilege, which in his
opinion, ought not have been granted, and to which be
would. not have consented, and it could not therefore now
prevail with him as an argatnent for granting the same
privilege to the Roman Catholics of England.. He con-
ceived it was against the principles of the British Con.
initiation to admit Roman Catholics to political power.
He was opposed to the repeal of the Test Act upon any
grounds, and in this opinion he was supported by the au-
thority of Mr. Justice Blackstone. With regard to their
being admitted as Magistrates, be thought it extremely
desirable that that privilege should be granted, provide.'
it did net infringe upon the principles to which he had
before adverted. As to qualification for office, be had
po objection that the English Roman Catholic should
be placed in this respect, on the nine footing • s the
Irish Catholic, hot to th• repeal of the Test Act, and
the enjoyment of the elective franchise, he could nut
• agree.
Mr. W. SMITH said that he was glad that nothing
was given to the Catholic which the Dissenter did not
possess, becanse if it were, that would be throwing an ad-
ditional slur and stigma upon the latt-r. He felt equal
pleasure in seeing that the day had at last arrived, when
great, even the strongest prejudices, had given way, and
were ready to make some concession to the English Ro-
man Catholics, a class of men then whom, as far as he
knew them, an i that was not a little, there was none
more honourable or respectable in the country. He
hoped that Parliament would yet go further, and he was
sure, ere long, though perhaps he would not live to see
it, tot satisfied lie was; the period would shortly arrive,
leiter. this House would see the propriety of miinitting
Roman Catholics to seats in Parliament. They had of-
ten Irani the boast of the British Constitution, and with
some justice, because he was ready to admit that it was
the test regulated, and approached nearer to human per-
fection than that of any other country. Bat this was not
titer only boast. They had also often heard vaunted,
thtt we were the most liberal, the most enlightened, and
tit wisest people in the world; but be confessed that he
ins nut one of those oho thought so highly of this
country. In light and knowledge some nations Caine
near us, and others outstripped us. In support of this,
he could not help referring to a speech of a lammted
nobleman, delivered in his place on the 28th of Feb.
1321, in which he sated that almost the only point upon
wbh:h the Congress of Vienna were unanimous, was the
antidote abolition of all religion distinction as quali-
nations for office. This sentiment tilts just, and he de-
plored that the prejudices of England were so strong,
tbat it was the last country to acknowledge its justice.
'Sir J. MACKINTOSH highly applauded the Bill,
which it was the object of his Noble Friend's "notion to
introduce. It was a measure which, with reference both
to the principles efsivil and religious justice, and in con•
fortuity with the equal spirit of constitniimal govern-
ment,
was worthy of the adoption of the British Legis-
lature. It was hulled difficult to understand what rea-
sonable ground of exclusion there could be against the
Roman Catholics of England from those circumscribed
privileges enjoyed by their religious brethren of the
sister country. He denied that the Catholics had been
excluded from voting as forty-shilling freeholders on the
ground of their religious tenets. That exclusion had
been carried into effect against them by an Act of William
and Mary, passed shortly ifter the explosion of the great
assassination plot. Neither could he admit what he had
beard advanced In the course of the debate, that it was a
fundamental point in the British Constitution, that differ-
ence of religion constituted a ground of exclusion. It was
only a reason for exclusion where the Christian religion
was concerned—where the shades of difference laid the
foundation for endless warring. But all who would for-
swear the Roman Catholic religion were admissible to the
benefits of the constitution, whether he were Armenian,
Copht, or Hindoo. He protested, therefore, against any
such false principle being assumed on the present occa-
sion, to serve the purpose of opposition to the Bill of his
Noble Friend. It was a false position, urged too for the
same purpose, that any man who voted for this Bill must
change his opinion on the greater question.—He should,
consider the perseverance of the Government and Par-
liament in an obstioate refusal to assimilate the condi-
tion of the Catholics of the two countries as one of the
pointed forerunners to the downfall of the Monarchy.
Mr. WiTHICRELL and Sir J. MaciturTosa mutually
explained; and after a few observations in reply from
Lord Nuonial, the motion was agreed to without a di-.
vision, and Dr. PHILLIMORI and Mr. BROUG/4•31 were
appointed to frame the Bill.
MALT AND BEER DUTIES.
Mr. MABERLY rose, but, from the noise in the gal-
lery, we were for some time unable to hear him. He
said that the object of his present notion was the appoint-
went of a Select Committee to inquire into the expedien-
cy of imposing on malt the amount of the duty at present
imposed on beer. There were now two distinct duties on
beer ; one 20s. on malt, which made a duty of about 2.d.
a gallon on beer, and on ale. As the law now stood,
the private brewer was subject to this duty only, and was
exempted from the beer duty, which amounted to about
3d. or 3 1.31. the gallon. This was an unjust legislation,
which imposed upon one class, and that the poorer, a du-
ty of sii. or lid. per gallon ; while the elk+ man, oho
brewed his own beer, paid little more than half. He
was anxious for a Committee to inquire upon what prin-
ciple this law was founded,and if it were considered par-
tial and unjust to alter it. But its injustice was not the
only inconvenience which resulted from this inequality
of duty. The expenses of collection was considerable.—
The amount of duty on malt was near three millions, and
the expense of Collecting it was 140,0001., while the ex•
pease of collecting the duty on beer amounted to 280,000/.
iCow this might, lie thought, be nearly saved by trans-
ferring the ditty on beer to malt, and 'making one collec-
tion instead of two, as at present. There were about
26009,000 of bushels of malt annually consumed, of
which the private brewer consumed about seven millions.
The malt distillers consumed 400,000 bushels, and the
vinegar-makers 160,000 ; making altogether 560,000
bustlers. To which, if the quantity consumed by the pri-
vate brewer he ailied, there will is all be about seven
millions and a half bushel. exempt from the beer duty--
To this extent the private brewers had an advantage over
die public brewers, and actually gained two millions of
money, which the poor, who coneased the beer of tit •

public brewer, were obliged to pay. His object was so
relieve the poor from this unjust and unequal dnty, by
imposing an additional duty of 2s. on all malt whether
ronsutned by the public or private brewer. This wouh
lead to an equal and impartial legislation, which, by
making the poor and the rich man bear the duty equally,
would enable the former to have his beer at a cheaper
rate than et prevent. He contended the Public bad a
right to any beer they pleased, provided the same duty
was still paid into the Revenue. He could not but think
that the immure of the Right Hon. Gentleman, obliging
the brewer of table-beer to give up his trade, and forbid-
ding him from getting Int r a new one, unless on new pre.
wises; was a Very great hardship. The Hon. Member
concluded by waving, " That a Select Committee be ap.
pointed to inquire int., the present mode of taxing beer
and scull. separately, end whether it might not he ex-
pe lient to' ollect the same am stint na malt alone "
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he was
perfectly aware that feasible arguments anight be urged for
Committees or Inquiry, but he hoped the House would sou
that it was not expedient to go into any such inquiry in the•
present iostanee. It appeared to him, that the lion. Mem-
ber who introduced the motion, had taken quite en erretie-
uus view of this subject. Wills resrut to the first point—
the expense of collection, he certainly thought that that ex-
pense was not so large as was stated by the Hon. Gentleman.
In the estimates It was set dawn at 29a.00,11. a year, but the
fact was, that all such estimates were made out in arbitrary
manner.—(blear, hear ! from Mr. Hume.) Ile said so, be-
cause the persons who were employed in collecting the duty
on beer, were also employed in collo tin the duty on tea,
glass, heMses, bricks, carts, &c. Those who expected that
this measure would have the effect of causing a saving in
the collection, world find themselves very much mistaken in
the result. If the measure were ado,sted, coil(' it he sup-
posed that the expense of collecting the ditty on malt would
not be considerably increased. lie was qmtesure it would,
fur much greater vigilance would be required than before.
With respect to the 'ogled point—the relief athielt this new
plan was to afford to the poor, he felt persuaded that the
Hon. Gentleman was also in error upon that subject. He
(the Chancellor of the Exchequer) admitted that the rich
laodlord, who brewed his own beer, would, by the triw pion,
be obliged to pay more to the re, done than he did at pre-
sent : hut it was a fallacy in the Hon. Gentleman to suppose
that there were none who brewed at home except the more
wealthy. For his own part he could not dismiss from the
consideration of this subject that many of the minx agri-
culturists who brewed beer did an. not for their ova coa-
sumption, but in part payment of the wages of labour ; and
if this measure were adopted, it would, pro facto, have the
' effect or increasing the cost of pr }dem ion to the prvjudire of
the agriculturist. The Rtgist Hon. Gentleman in the course
of some further observations, said it would he highly Inez-
, pedient to make any alterations at present in the duties on
' beer, as they were an closely connectsd with the duties on
' spirits, which produced a revenue of not less than 9,000,00.1 i,
and 10.0011,00:1.; and more particularly as some new me..
sures were pending, the effect of which remained to be proved,
He would much rather equalize the duty on hoer, au I adopt
.ris a certain extent the proposition of the lion. Member
for Reading (Mr. F. Palmer,) than increase the duty on
malt.

Sly NIALINTOSII maintained that the only question
for the !louse to consider wss, whether the labouring classes
of the communsty could be relieved from an oppressive tax.
without any diminution of the revenue. In his opinion. there
would be a very great saving from the measure prorised by
his lion. Friend (Mr.Maberly),while the advantage it offered
to the labouring classes was obvious.

The CI( OICELLOIt of the EXCHEQLI ER explained.
Mr. lIUME supported the motion. Ile observed that th•
charge of collecting the revenue on beer was perfectly cor-
rect, as stated by his Hon. Friend. Ile contended th it the
measure now proposed would have the ellect of seeing the
amount of the whole estimate of collection is this branch of
the revenue.

Mr. BENOIT (of Wiltshire) thought it would be the
best plan to lay the duty entirely on malt; soul lie thought it
was due to the Agricultural Interest even to lower the duly
OD malt ; then the poor labourer woul I be enabled to brew
Ids owe beer, as was formerly the practice throughout the
country.
Mr. MADERT.Y explained.
Sir J. NEWPORT said, that in the year 1792, a rega:.
lation was introduced in Ireland by which the breweries
were relieved from duties, and the duties were laid on the
malt. The effect was, that of producing beer of 'the best
quality, and caning a very great Increase of the Devi
brewed in Ireland ; from that time the impott-tion of beer
from England had nearly ceased, and the revenue on Malt
had doubled.
Colonel WOOD sold that lithe duty were taken entirely
off the brewery, and laid on malt, it would operate as a
very heavy tax on the farmers of the country, who all
brewed their own beer, and who were obliged to give beer
to their labourers. lo his opision the duty on melt was tee
high, and that was the reason why the copse caption ot it
had decreased. _ • _

•
Mr. WODMIOUSEobserrd. that in the prevent dote of

the country, when public credit was to he supported, it was
impossible to take off duties all at once. lie did not how-
ever ant icipate any great benefit from the plan of the Chan-
ce.lor of the Exchequer; but he could nut support the pre-
sent motion. _ . .

Mr. WESTERN was convinced that some reduction in
the duties either of mall or of beer was absolutely neces-
sary: he thought, however, the best plan would be to take
away the beer duty, and leave the malt duty just as it now
was. There would thus be a free trade relieved from the
Excise, and open to so much competition, that be was con-
fident the consumption of malt would greatly increase.
Mr BYNO said that if the motion was adopted, no de-
seription of persons would be benetitted by it.
Mr. RICARDO supported the motion, as necessary to
equalize the burdens on the different classes of the
perple ; for, by laying the whole duty on malt, a small
burden woulkbe laid on those who were least able to
bear it; and the lower classes, who could not brew their
own beer. would be greatly relieved.
Lord ALTHORP was of opinion that the proposed re-
gulation would cause a considerable increase of burden
to fall on farmers, who generally brewed their own
beer ; and no class of men were so much entitled to relief
as these; therefore he should oppose the motion of his
Hon. Friend.
Mr. Alderman WOOD supported the motion.
Mr. MONCK mentioned that the present Malt Do-
ties pressed more severely on the landholders than any
others. He was desirous, that an inquiry should take
place.
Mr. O. BENNET said, that he could see no reason
why the manufacturers ofthis country should pty a high
rate for their beer, while the gentlemen had it much
less. He was of opinion that the House ought to go into
the inquiry.
Mr. OIKBERLY, in reply, said he had heard no argu-
ment to induce him to supoose that the whole of this
might not be better entertained in the Committee, into
which he was still of opinion the House should go.
The House then divided.—The numbers were
For the Motion 27; Against it 119; Maiority agaiost
it 92.

PCBLIC BREWERY.
On oitr return to the Gallery we loom! Mr. F.
PALMER on his legs. moving. as we understood, for
leave to bring in a Hill to enable the public brewers'
retail beer in less quantities than four and haif gallon..
provided the same be not cunsutned on the premises of
the brewer. The particular argumen's by which the
Hon. Member supported his motion could not be heard
in consequence of the noise caused by the return of
strangers to the gallery.
The CHANCELLOtt of the EXCHEQUER said the
existing laws contained the provisions ohich the Hem
Member's Hill had fur its oojert. The common brow'
bad only to take out the retail brewer's license, and its
might retail in as small quantities as be pleased.
Mr. MONCK supported the motion.
Mr. HERMES said that there were two elutes of
brewers, the rommoa brewer and the retail brewer. TO
former could not retail less than 4i gallons, bet 10
but allowance for mine, &c. while the retail brews

mom

had no such allemence, but might by his license retail
;equalities, however small, and have it consumed on'
the premises. The common brewer might do the seine
by taking out the license of the retail brewer; but if
the Hon. Member's Bill was passed, he could no longer
dv so, as be WKII to be thereby precluded from having it
constsmed on bit premises. 7he rOOlO3Oll brewer would
therefore be in a worse condition by that Bill.
After a few words from Mr, ti. BENNET,
Mr. F. PAI,MER withdrew his motion.
Mr. MARTIN moved fur leave to being in a Bill to
regulate the issue of writs of Capiandlogatum in Ire-.
bed.
The question being pit, the House divided—Ayes, 43
Noes. 93—Majority. 90.
Cern was accordingly given In bring in the Bill.
The House went into a Coe: mitre on the East India Acts,
avid Mr. WYNN obtained leave to bring in a Dill to regu-
late tiseTiade to India.
The 'boor Laws Bill was read the second time, and com-
mitted for Friday se'nuight.
The other Orders of the Day were disposed of, and The
Noise adjourned at one o'clock.

SOCIETY FOR THE ENCOURAGEMENT OF
ARTS, MANUFACTURES, AND CO3IMERCE.
• Yesterday this Society met at the King's Theatre, in
the Haymarket, for the purpose of presenting the Re-
wards avid ged to the respective Candidates, the great
increase of its ntembers rendering it impossible to bold
this anneal meeting in the Society's own honse in the
Adelplii. spacious as it is. The Society has indeed been
compelled to move from place to place for several years;
and notwithstanding the enormous size of this splendid
theatre, such was the desire to witness the distribution.
it was crammed to the.top seat in the gallery, and
many visitors were obliged to ‘• silk the lobbies. the
whole morning.
His Royal Highness the Duke of Sussex in the
Chair.
The President at half past twelve, took the chair;
rased upon the stage, on each side of which sat the
tandidates.
The Secretary (Mr. Atm) read a statement of the
wise and progress of the :•ociety.
His Royal Highness then proceeded to present the dif-
ferent prizes. ,
The first was the Gold Ceres Medal to Lientenant-
Colowl Wildman, of Newatead Abbey, for planting 500
acres with forest trees.
There were shoot 60 successful candidatet, to whom
his Royal Highness presented the premiums. Amongst
them was Mr. P. H. Desvignes. a Greek, who made a
very fine drawing from a bus., and also a drawing of a
Cotinthian capital, and received the Silver Pallet, and
the Silver Isis Medal.
His Royal Highness, in resenting the Greek with
those premiums, congtatolatrd him upon the station he
held amongst men of genius in this country. and stated,
that he would 'here have an opportnuity of sharing the
adosiration in which Englishmen held the Arts of his
native country, as well as of observing the feeling for
the Greeks, which one so powerful through the country
—pond applause.) •
A large silver medal and 30 guineas were presented to
Mr. James Marsh, of Woolwich, for a portable electro-mag-
Wig apparatus.
' Premiums were, among the rest, given to three young
Ladies named Druinmond, and their briother, a boy, for
painting, and to Messrs. Cowley and Winslow, Bucks, for
preparing a large quantity of opium from poppies grown in
Engiand.
A premium had also been adjudged by the Society to C.
Warren, Esq. deceased, for his improvements in the art of
engraving on steel plate.
The B=I(4:TART stated, that Mr. Warren had found out
the art of Softening steel in such a manner as to make it
, supply the place of copper in engraving, and that 6,000 ex •
quiatte impressions were produced by one plate, the last of
which was almost as good as the first. and exhibiting the
very perfection of au tag 's proof.
His Royal Highness presented the Gold Medal to the
brother of the late Mr. Warren, in trust for his Infant
• daughter.
One rattle last candidates to whom a medal was presented,
vas Mr. William Cobbett, of Kensington, for Plat from
English grass.
Before Mr. Cobbett edam:teed to his Royal Highness to
• reeeive.the medal,
The Sacncrany stated, that for three years the Society
bad been endeavouring to find employment for the labouring
poor In the country. Daring the ear. English straw was
stanufectsred to a cohtiderable extent, but since the esta-
blishment of peace, strew hats had been imported from the
Continent in each abundance. that the manufacturers in...Bed-
fordshire, Leicestershire, and the other counties where the
imanufseture was carried on, were obliged to give up the ex-
periment. One hundred end sixty thousand hats were sup-
posed now to be annualty imported, and if something were
not done to creek such an interference with our domestic
araanfacture, the British growth would be wholly useless.
Mr. Cobbett was of opinion that the English grass was as
good for manufacture as the Foreign ; he bleached it by a
simple process, and gave It to be platted by some of the
best Hertfordshire platters, and then sent it to the Society,
who were astonished at the extraordinary beauty and ex-
cellence of the _material, and at once presented him with
the mark of distinction which the President held in his
hand.
The Duke of Sussex, in addressing Mr. Cobbett, said
he had great pleasure in communicating to him the ap-
probation of the Society for the valuable service he had
rendered, by his attention, to this very imporant brbnch
of manufacture. The specimen of plats afforded a great,
gratification to the Society, as the suggestion presented'
mesas of employing great numbers of industrious iodi-
Pideals, who would otherwise have no way of living,
apd the communication by Mr. Cobbett fess the more
ratefol, as it was made upon no confined principle,
hat upon that of serving the community.—(Loud
Mime.)
Yr. Cosnerr begged that his Royal Highness would
Asir him to deviate a little from wliat lie observed was
&Waal practice upon these occasions, and to make aft w
+attentions. He was always of opinion that it was of
the greatest importance to the people of this country,
that the manufactures should be carried on by them.
selves. It was impossible to look round, and not to ob-
serve that thousands of pounds, which ought to be ex-
pended in this country, were sent into foreign countries.
He ass satisfied that if the Ladies and Gentlemen of this
boclety, many of whom were present, would exert them-
selves, there would be very little sale for Leghorn bon
sets, and this would be one way of putting a period to
that despicable cant which was daily dinned into the ears
of the poor, that they should be content with their con-
• ditinn as paupers, and that the grace of God directed
diem to live in poverty, both of food and dress.—ll
(Applause.)
His Hugel Highness having performed all tare duties
SI the situation of President, in the most elegant man-
ner return-et thanks io the romputay fur their attendance
and retired amidst loud applause.
Several of the works of merit were exhibited.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, MAT 2S.

•• • .• • • CALVERT V. LAMES.
This was as action on the case aKainst the defendant,
Proprietor of the Portsmontli mail coach, for the negli-
gent driving of his servant, whereby the plaintiff's leg
was brok..n.
The plaintiff's ease was conducted by Mr. Sohtmoa.
GINERAL and Mr. Wthot, and the defence by Mr. Scan-
LIM and Mr. Cunstoon.
The rase for the plaintiff was this. On the 2tot of May
lest the plaintiff, it ta;lor by 'rade. was an outside tae.
seller by the mail from Portsmouth to London. In the