The Statesman.
London, England, 1813-05-21 00:00:00

strAn

br.
redpro,,

goon as they Mont this, they remonst rated against line a decidetl.ps....
it. - This sum oleo divided only last year by the Can.! theformer, since Ansi
mis.ioners appointed for that purpose ; andlliey de. ! city. lie ao . . .
.4.,. .
dared that the losses of the merchants --(from the 4nd Massed 104 Ai ~.._ t.t.,.
it
Oa ty flib
claims that had boon proved) &motivated to the sum of audited (mew
gated that din Wend 41) the Vniteillst., _,
800,0001. more at that time. H. thought it probs.
hie that the hlinistry, in l gObt, were induced to ac. .form her part' of.iiie Maly 'was no( * ll*.
Cetle to the convention already mentioned from en 'nasals for declaring war, but bee 110100 *lot .
eeoldle no authority for this COuntry to beeqeally
apprehension that a refusal on their part might leid
to a new war with France and with America.—aNetijosE 11"--e' oaths wholehe was fen? c0n046044 that
The lion. Gent. in sup;tort of the claimants, ali;ithe claim of
.the American Loyalists
ou wal well Mat
.7
leged the cases of the Settlers who bad sestabild ; Wished, and insisted thet. the unitiOnglit ets-lie c.
low.es by the cession of the Florides---of the Settlers ! ceded to,. unless the House vies.stilfing tO pert Doi
on the Mosquito shore; who were indemnified en the i self bankrupt both of honour and resotirtge.'•
rea,ion of that country to Spain—of the sufferers . Mr. VVILBERFORCE followed mach-the sails
under the aequestration by the Spanish Govern• train of argument, and quoted the authority of Vat-
meld, in 17943--.-and more especially the case in ' tel to prove, thatthe Goverment was answerable to
which the captors• of a Swedish emir°, had been , individuals for losses occasioned by dechiratiOns of
indemnified by the Government, on thorestoration Way under circumstances like the present mite. llti
of the vessels to the Swedish Government. lie was combated the arguments of the Chaneellet, wiini hr
aware how unplemniit was to press a claim on the his opinion, bad been imposed upon, for the Chan.
!louse, at such a time; bet any relief to be granted - cellor of the Exchequer would ever be foteretist tai
to the claimants wouid be effective only. by . beiug concede what was actually doe, providedit !rat con-
s
eedy. He accordingly submitted 'to thelleue this ' 'Went with his duty to the country. The' present
p
proposition— ..,,, , •.- I was a question of right and qot of policy ; and if the
" That Ilia iartitioners have estalati4ted nieh a ems jai hew : stns of swim demanded was large for the country
a is.euaritattle etoosad•for pArlimarntary Relief." • --
j tfr pay, it was large for the .indivkleals to be de.
The question having been put, . - I pelted of. He referred.to the article •of the Treaty,
The CIUNCELLOR of the EX.CH EB EQU. land tiontended that-the British -Goveretnewt had' not
!hid, thlt the 'lmposition: 0i the Honourable Mover I, none aLl.thet became a great and generous nation.
welt to thie-rthat if the Gieternaisent wU finable to ' The claim seas equitable,.-and although the Teti-
obtain relief• fur the chilliest* freaks foreign power, T flatters alight require much more, their patience-had
the House of Ctiattnons was bound to indemnify the ; been esbetisted, their fa-rhino. teen ruinest,• and
losers. The qiesiion turned on dine points, his. they were willinglo take sly thing that would be
1. Whether the Goversinsent was justified, in con.loffered. He ridiculed the futile remedy of applying
eludiag the Treaty of 1802, without obtaiuing fhtl ;to the American Courts when decemeets were lost,
indemnification for the Claimants; and, 2. Whether, I.w ittseises dead, and hostilitiespeoding. .- . : •
when the Government had so failed, the Parliament I
Lord CASTLEREAGH supported the. .Ametitt.
was bound to make it good. The first branch oithe i inept, because he thought thin to rent theelehns of :
question had been waved by the Eon. Mover • but the. ILeyslikts .ivdold set a dust dangerous lad an.
he should remark, that by the Treaty of ',a, theiwireantatile , precedent. It
.rts not merely justice
claimants were at full liberty to Parsee their daunts ito the Win& hatjuttiCe to poiterity ti that es' to be
in America, as immediately after the Peace of 1784, I considered. Ali Lerd) hip mitered its ileteit into the
_ . .
by which it was stipulated, that no unlawful inspe-.1 several Treaties, arguing that America. had -not (Bt.
diment should be thro*n its die way of subjects of teharged her dity,indlhat until she had set the este-
thither nation baring claims ow -those of the other. 4 pie,. this country could not be expected to census:Besides this, -the specific sum of 80,0001. had been ; He allowed that if the.deinand were just.(whichhe
obtained for oar merchants. This, Indeed; was not i denied) themagnitudis of the Mien could be no reaten
so much as they 'desired; but he had the authority of. for refusing the prayer of the PetitiOners. . . .
the claimants (through the letter of Mr. Glassford,4 ' The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
their agent), for saying, that any sum would be pre- i explained.
(erred by them to an indefinite claim on 'the Ameri- 1 . Mi. WILBERFORCE also explained, during
can Government. To accede to ads claim would which air Eon. Member in one of the ddegallerin
encourage the practice airehdy• trio extensive, '
of; eery pertinaciously interrupted bin with calling mit,'
vesting money in foreign funds, as those who so 1 " Spoke, spoke I." when
vested,their money would be sore of payment .Nont ! The SPEAKER iuformed him that was disorder.;
their own, if not from foreign Governments. As : ly, as the lion. Gentleman had an andeobtted right '
to the case of the Swedish convoy, the vessels had to explain.
been restored to the Swedish Government after they 1 - Mr. FINLAY spoke in favour 'a the motion.
bad, by.condemnation, become the property of the'. He felt forthe situation of doe Claimants,- a very
captors. He contended also, that the case of theygnat number of whom he represeeted • but he felt
settlers on the Mosquito shore, was not parallel,; more for the justice and honour of l'arliament.—
and that the remuneration granted to the losers under Is Upon an attentive consideration of their case he
the sequestration of the Spaniih Government in could conceive none that had more equitable foneda.
1796, was not of right, but from the Rare liberality I tions. . . -
of the Crown. . Ile should, therefore, more the pre- I
••Lord CASTLEREAGH explained. • •
vious question. Mr.M A RRVATT denied the justice of the claims,
Sir T. BARING said, he had come down to the and argued Atria, the mischiefs to which the adthis:
House without any idea on *hat ground this motion . sion of the principle would lead.
could have been opposed ; - and be thought 'that on 1 Mr. LOCKHART briefly replied' whets the House
this occasion the Chancellor of the Igichiettier could . dividedi and the numbers were-- . '
not have viewed the case accurately. He 'accord-' . • Asti ~ ~.,0 -.. Irl
ingiy re-stated the facts which Mr. Lockhart had i . . Noes - , - - too
detailed, and o.7.served, that whenever the claimants I ' • LEATHER TAX.. . •
had been questioned by Lord Grenville as to the . Mr. EFXSOST moved' the second reading of his
amountof the commutation they would accepts their Bill for repea:ling the additional Leather Tat..
minimum was always two millions. The claims, .he ! , The CHANCELLOR of Abe EXCHEQUER in
remarked, were originally five millions, and the : the course of his ohservatious maintaitied, that the
ground On which the vetitiouers now eametorerard, rise in the price of leather and shoes was not the
was, that the public ought not to obtain the adman. ••effect. of the tax, but proceeded from -other causes.
tages they had obtained, at the *espenceorindisiduals. With regard to repealing it; be wished the House to i
The lion. Baronet concluded by- observing, that if consider well the proposition before they coosented,
the claimants were (as the Chancellor of the Exobe.. i to dieduish the revenue of the country. The revenue
quer had 'urged) at liberty still to pursue their debts :, of last year had -not been so productive as the pre. ,
in the Arberican Coertly it was not in this light ; ceding. The total amount, up to April if semi,
that the treaty of 18t2, was viewed by Lord Histes. t 50,800,0001., that of 1812, 61,70040001. There
bury. -, . • - • was no reason for alarm, However, to ther pablie, ads
Mr:
Mr.' W4MITiI said, he navel' rose from the eon.- the deficiency arose from anstell purely- teinpoiarrt
sidemtion of any cause with a stronger conviction of j but the fact might lona twin show how slow tb
its justice, than from that of the Petition of the pre& I should be in givir- wayestrare or even pestle
~
. Might
:but

Fe iiCt
i Or!

sent Claimants. The test of ths.Swedish captors was
(he contended) substantially the same as that bifore
the House, though some technical difference might les
stated by some better jus-publicist than himself.' By
the Convention of 1794, the British Claimants .01
America, and the American Claimants on thiscOuii-
try, were put on the same footing, while, in par.-
solvate of it, the Americiir Claitinuits received the
amount of the whole Brit:4110 dire to them, While
our owur Claimants .fecefied .only 600,001. in lieu
of two railliOns.. lb Wit derSiAtoo36 nVOuld ho-
now to agirlitbiztio:ttita=lifthreis for
the. retie: ••• • • • • • this
country; 4.4..wir0• thai.iskirstaidalt to suffer for
time goalie( the. apseaseisity 4111'64 being indemni-
fied ? Ur Ornittailhat fa the case of the Spanish
Clairnals,„4lfic. no would 'not allow the right of
the Clahessitai *Aids 'was urged by them; but the
remuneratiosof these Claintants, wan brought for,
ward to support the capture of the four Spanish fri:,
gates, one of the-wont acts of Mr. .Pict's admisistrs•
tion. .Adisedrantrige these 44eieseati laboured uo.
der was; that•their case was .auffered to remain un-
heard until it was forgotten, and then the Claimants
(having lost even the support of hope) had to-come
forward, thofgh in reality with a tenfold claim on
public favour, under the most disadvantageous cir-

d
solicitation. -` Oth look admitted
rot , .
laid • on, which would lin more productive'
the .same • time more oppressive to inttividsab time
the one now under .sionsideretion. He had himself
had kin contemplative last .year to,lny OA* on Pri..
Tate Breweries, No shillings a bead for eeery family
that brewed their elm.salt ligeor ; but bow. mach
More severely that Would bear upon the community
than the present., He did not WO .any. thing in the
bulk of the evideece that, had beetklaid before them,.
that constitutedsirosnalfor repealing thetas. The
distress which the HIM Gentleman.had to wiornlif
described, end Ashich *net isers..hed * greet
upon his fee,liater, heascribed to. the general *too If
the trade of this country at proollato and not to aiiy
particular operation of the tas... •
Lord ALTUOR.PE shortly replied to the Chen.
cellor of the Brhequer on the Subject of the evidenee
relating to the steteoftho leather trade.
Mr. GEORGS PHILLIPS, in a nest speeder.
pointed out various Inconveniences resulting from
the' proposed . tax, and the inconsistency 91 some of
the arguments used in its defence. His contended,
that the circumstance of taxing the article by weight
wonki make it fall most heavily on those who sloolsi
bust support it, namely, the poor and 'amnia(
.

tuuutances. •
Mr. B. BATHURST opposed• the motion; on the
ground that the British Government bid ineffectually
done all that was inits poweeto enforce the demand
of the Claimants, who. ere now left to what he ad:
mitted to. he the futile remedy of ipplication to the
Republican Courts of Justice., •
Mr. WILITBREALI keprobsted ha seigy pc) ;pied
terms thermain ground on Whielt the I
Chancpor of
the Exchariter had refused Ms compliance ith the
motion, viz: that. the sum demanded was large: if the
claim were just;k-and these unfortunate Individuals
were depdred of their due, the more enormous the
emounwthemersi flagrant was the- ihjbstice, and
he mare severe the cruelty of contusing to deptire
them of emir -eight. The Honourable Member then

. .
Lord CAS'rLEREA.GII strenuously urged the
House not to relinquish &lax for which no other tee
'had been proposed to be Substituted, and the' prelho
eareoef which, in the increased pike of the article,
we should still have to bear an addition to Met,
the tax *liickehould be substituted for .If.- He e
that the rich paid their proportion of the tax, eveseirs
the article of shoes, from the greater gambit ibttti.
they wore, and that the tax, as it applied to the nes
of leather in saddles, harness, &c. fell exclusilnq
'on the more opulent classes,
Lord MIL-TO:l.l4rd, this wits the only Institut*,
he believed, which had ever occurred in which a,
Chancellor of the Exchequer' had persisted In a tax
&nerd* lease of the House of Commons had been
declared against it: • • '

Oryw a coutpariiiva picture of the conduct of Loed.
Greusliteisad toped Liehtpool upon this subject, glw

Mr. W:SMITII, by a referetice to papers- Pub.
&bawd front the Castest-bouse •abotred that Owes.