House Of Commons, Thursda...
The Times, 1824-04-09T00:00:00

ilir. U. WIIL&IUN brought in a bill for amnending the laws reia. tive to pauper lunatics, which wastead a firet time. Lori STrANLEYpresentedapetition from the inhabitants of lVarrington, praying for the abolition of slavery in the colonies. Dir. CUREN presented a similar pedtion from the inhabitants of a parish in Cumnberland. Dlir. Lt1MBTON presented a petition from the merebants anrI oter inhabitants of thetown ofDarlington, in-favourof the county courts bill. General GASCOYNE presented a petitiio from certain inhabit- ants of Liverpool, agaiastjthe countyxourt bill. He stated that it was his initention, on a future occasion, to move that the coanty of Lancaster,be excepted from the operation of the bilL Sir T. BARING presented a petition from, the inhabitants of Chipping WVycombe, praying for the abolition of slavery in the colonies. DIr. P. MOORE presented several petitions fom the artisais of Hythe, Oidliam and other places, against the combinatioa lawr. Alr. -EltAlCk presented a petition from certain bricklayers oflthe dty of Dubliii against the combination laws. On the motien of Lord ALTIOR1?, the house resolved itself into a committee on the county courts' bill: the house resumed; the re- port was received, and ordered to be taken into further consideration on Monday. Mr. K.. DOUGLAS presented a petition from the farmers in Dumftieshire, praying for the repeal of the taxon shepherds' dog; and another from the Town-ftouncil of Damfries. praying that the housewould inttitutean inquiry into thestate of the salmon-fisheries of Scotland. 'THE PRESS IN INDIA. nlr.LA BIBTON gave notice i-tat on Tues4ay, tbe25th-ofTDIay- he would submit a motion relative to the press of India. Ilr. BENNET. presented a petition from - certain inhabitants of Newton. in Liancaildre, dissenters from the Established Church, against the proposed votb of 5o,000l. for the building of churches. Mr.: G. PHILIPS presented asimilar petition-from the inhabit- ants of Redish. in Lancashire. - - Mr.--POYNTZ-presented a, petiti6n from .140 lanidholders in the neiglbourhoodl Chichester, in Sussex, against the repeal of the d&t6 on.foreign-wool imported into this couDtry. Lord G. CAVENDISH supported the petition. Mr. flUMIE presented petiuons frbm the operative siall weavers of Manchester, and the hemp.dressers of Dundee, against the comn- bination laiws; another from the incorporated trades of Aberdeen, for an extension to them of the small debt,act latcly-passed in Etig, land; a fourth, from the practitioners -ir law, in the borough of Arbroath, igainst thic attormes' tax. Dir. PY,I presented a petitioa from- Leighton-Buzzard, against the window_taX. Onthe Mind IUANCHESTER GAS BILL.. 'On the motion of Mr;.CURTEIS, the stinding order was read, directing that all petitions should be signed by the petitioners, and that the contrarywwasa breach of privilege. He then inpursuance of the notice he had given- moved for tbe pyodaetion of the minutes-of-evi. denceta'ken beforethe Dianchestergas conlmiteee,.which were taken-. before the couiittfee appointed by that house. -Lord STANLEY said he waa unable to gather from the hon. memberwhat was theuiterior object of his motion. He, as chairman ofthe. co4mnittee, could have no objection to the production of 'th - evidlence; but -he thought that some groutd'ought to he laid in the first instance to justify any further intrasion of this tdpic upon the attention ofthahouse. -Mr. BOOTLE W?LBRAAhAM adonitted the necessity of dis- continuing the improper Insertion of signatures'toa petition, althoujh irj populous nianufacturinig districts it -was unavoidable. Still itdid ritit foldiv,:from the irregularity complained-ofl; tbat such x petition wias at-variance with the opiiuon entertaineaby those whose. aiu& were so subscribed., lis -opiniou .-a8,1that vdii2elhbetter. -nodRof' remedying the.ev1comDplained ofmight be-edeisited thean the v retent, ::.Mr: GRENFEI.L comnplaled o thes..pplication of the 'ter " job" to the St, Catherine's ieck, a measure whichi wbas -oon to bc brought under the re-constderationofthehotise. '-.. - - - Mr. HOL1E- SUMtNE;R declared-that he shobldtiote for the; production of these mainua. ' ' .: - - -b C----Mr. *Y.PEi:i, MIr. PE LUAt.K. and Mlr. PniLsPs aevhiedl thet theyshahuld vote -againt t *heir production. : --- l'he question wa,s then p Ut upon MIr. CUR-TEIS'8 motion, wnich was negatived withoattu division. - ' ' ' ' PE:TTY SESSIONS IN IREIoANDs - ips - - Mtr. SPRIsNG -RICE rose to ask laave 'to bring in a bill to 'regu.. late courts of petty sesions in Ireland. -fiHc:observeci that within the last two yeas,3 courts *f petty sesdions- had -been inrrodu'c&l into Ireland to the adi Late5 'of that .countrvj, and to thle credit- of the Inaistrate3 w/ho attendedat themt. Ele did r.ot i3tend by his- present bii tomsnke the holdipg of these sessions imprtive, -but lie aidaintend to give to the mae tratese'rery fae'lity inholding them.One Ofthefiratobjectsofthis bill wou.ldbe toascertain ond fixthe amount Of frees to) -be taken at-thern,by it scheddle which he.'wuld aLtxnex to the bill Itself. Anoth,rof, them wo4sld be to provide at tlie.pLdlli ppne a Court.house- for these sessions- whitch at presnt were hield in the Plivate houses of magisitraites. Rie shiould also wish to pro. sgide a fixed salary for fth clerks to thtese'courts, and to givethenfia- ~isTates who presided in them ajurisdictroon for the recoverv ofsimall fbtr The hon. mem-bcr then moved. for leave to brine in a bill frfacilitating and regulating courts of petty siessions in Ireland for the recover of small1 debts.-Leave granted. selecS.cornICIE then moved for end obtainedI the revival of a slect -raittee upon the local Ltaxation of the city of Dub- Si, everal petitions were referred to thecominitee, and also several ITrelos which it had before made upon this subject. r.U E moved thatahomblesadaress bepresentedto his Ma- Jesty, PraYingtlhat he willbegraciously pleasedi to give directions that there be laid up-on the table of the house an account of the number of s*laves now in the possesion of his Mlajesty's Government in the colonies, stting how many of them are above and how-many ynear fro the lrtf age stating also, thbe expenses incurred in eRac yiea fon ahl slavst hofJn 1815 to the present time, for the mnaiate- eancheOfat or aesw hlad becomne the property of the Crown by esha r. Otherwise.......oti7on granted. Hi- UME then moved a similar address to his Mfajesty for the iiouetiOn.of a return of thienumber of slaves belongiag; to the WVyn- Mflestate in Berbice, which were temsterred to the British commuis- s9ioniers on thel capture of that colony, stating the number of births and deaths which had taken place since that time, 1iatin 'ushng the 'males from the females, stating Also the numbers whic had -been sold in each year, together with the pri ce for which thtey had beeni B0ld, the amount paid for their maintenance, the sum r'eceived for their labour, and the net amount of expense which they had occa-. Sioned either to the colony or to Great; Britain.-Motioni granted. llr. GOULBURIN asked2 and obtained leave to bring in the fol. 'owing bills :-Bill for draining and improving bogs in ireland, bill to amnend thecountk of Cork division act; bill to amend the Dublin civil bill act 4 bill to amend the Dablin police-act. With regard to th Iis fte,h bsre hti a is intention to hazve .it ~nnrd, rferrd toa comitea upstairs, anid then regularly rouht nde th dicusionof he oue as speedily as possible The ATTORNE..GENERAL otainedl leave to bring in a billto men an exendtheact reatig to the British.5Museumn. USURY LAW RPEAL BILL. On the mnotion ofllr. Sergeant ONSLOW, the order of the day Was read for the bouse resolving itself into a- committee on--the asury laws' repeal bill. Onthbequxestonthat the SprAxEn do leave the chair, Mlr. B. COOPER rose to say, that notwithstanding the argu. menultS which had been advancedI in favour of this mneasure on its last discussion, he still retained his opinion that it wvas an unwise anL unnecessary, aTid even a dangerous measture. S'o impressed was he with the danger of the measure proposed by the learned Ser- geant (Onslow), thathe felt it tobe his duty to move as anamend- inenr, "that this bill be committed this day smnmonths. Mr. DAVENPORT observed, that the report of the committee on wichthi bil wa fonde wa a ere skeleton, when com-paredl wit th maniudeandimortnceofthe subject. The question layin snallcopas, ad i mghtbe rouhtbefore the house in aver fewwors. I vJs siply his" Ar we-to give tip the mofey.marct o dveru~rs ndspeulaorsP"The situation of oneclas o me-th Br~shmeroans,whoa were the pride and stay f this coutntry, and the admirationi of Europe-would be alto.. geter altered by this measure. Instead of atteniding to commercial 5fnatlers, they would become dealers in mnoney. Under all the ir.. Cux.ances iif the case, he implored lils 1Ma3esty's MVinisters not to give their aid and sanction to this measiure. Mr. L. FOSTER said, that uinder the existing systemn, which bad cdntinued for three centuries, this country had arrived at its p ressent exalted situation, andI a greater proportion of capital had beens centred here than was ever befrore known. in the historv of any niation. The questioni whiedi chiefly pressed on him was, thie effect 'Whichn the actual operation of this measure would have on a large body of landled proprietors In Ireland, he was convinced the mea- sure would have a most baneful effect. A large majority of the landed proprietors in that country would if the bill were carried, be Placed in a maost hazardous situat-ion. I'ere were many of them W14ose- titles were not of that certain and decided character 'Which, under ordfinarvy circumstances, would induce moniey-. lenders to advance 1dans on them. The most numerous class of ceitors, in Ireland, were judgmient creditors; and, even on coparaiey small estates, there wojuld sometimes be 20, 30, or 40 ceitor of that description. By the law now in forcq, the bor- rower was protected to a certain degree; but if it were repealed, the creditor woOuld have a eight to deal with hiis debtor on any terms he Pleased. Thiere was bardly. a landed proprietor in Ireland who wouhldnot be compelled to pay 9 or 10 per-cent., eithier if he bor- rowed money, or wished to prolong thec timne at which a loan was to be rePaid. As the law now stood, there-,vasbhutlittie temptation for a creditor to file a bill against the person to whom he lent moncy ; but let the present measatre be carried, and the hopie ofeuxtort- ing 9 or .10 per cent. would give rise to constant litigation. WVhen suits were commenced, the only hope of. the' debtor was, that some person would stand in his situation, advance * the 3money to the lender, and take in return an assigunmentof the debt. But norman would do that witlioat seeing the title-deeds of the estate. This would bean intolerable grievance; for ianiany-instances it would be most difficult to make out titles, and frequently it. would lead to very- unpleasant discoveries. The measure would, to a cer- tainty, raise the rate of interest in Ireland, from 6 to 8 or 10 per centt. *What argument, he asked, was there in favour of their adopting this mneasure, which, when once carried, could not be undone ? The learned sergeant initimnated that the bill was niot to be retrospective--.it wras to be merely prespective. The casewould then stanid thus: that estates bad been taken from inlitvi. duals- udler- the existing law, on accoust of .,the possession being vitiated by usury, whilst, according to this bill, transac-; tions. of exactly the samneltind would, in future, be lepalized. The person who, by engaging in, a usurious transaction~ in Mlarch last (the znmrutxie~ was tobe subjected to a penaltv,moust look with envy o n themore fortunate,usurer who -postponedhlis specula- tion until the month of June. If the commercial body in this coun- try,-were anxious to do away with the existing. law, lie should im- plore the supporters Of the 'measure, in mercy to Irelandl, to allow dihe parties interested in that part of the empire to stand by, at least for a time, nod see how-the inew system answered. M1r., ROBERTSONLl was convinced t'hatL, if thnis bill were passed,' it would have the roost. fatal influence on the prosperity of the coun- try. Those who had been the means of bringing this question before the house, had, haecontended; taken avery superficiaI view -of the subject. They had no adequate idea of the probable operation- of the measure w'hich was introdutced. They-had actedatunder a miscon- ception of thep.rincipleslaid down byDr. AdamSmith. Mlr. Ricardo, -whoseopinionalwayscarriedgreatwe~ight,appeared,frm his evidence before the(cOMMittee, not to h~avebadacorrectknowleageof this sub- jeCt.His ev,idence proved that the whole of his experience did nntko much beyond that of theStock Exchange. (Here the hon. member quoted a portioni of Mlr. Ricardo's eviaence, as. supporting his, posi- tion.)' It was said that other commodities were bought and sold and fouodtheirvaIue in the inarket; anid that thmereforeinoneyshouila be dealt with in the same way. (Hlear.) Now money could no0t be bought and sold. It wouldbheabsurd to sayif fourbhales of cot. ton 'were given for 1OO'sovereigns here, and five bales in 11Ianches. ter, that therefore the value- of money was .15 per cent.- less in iaManchester than in London. Twenty shillings -formecd th'e. true measure of asovereign,.-and they could have no otbet. it vas oni this point that the whole argument -failed-in not considering money, as distinct from every othLer commno- -dity. It was said that the usury law war. frameod, to prevent the- lending of money. at an exor6Wtant interest.- This was not the case. So far was it r"o being the case, that wphen the usury law was enacted, the le;nlrlzar money was not conttape. plated by the legislature. When that law was passed, not onewW6rd- was said as to the Tending of modney being the cause wbheichrrndered it necessary. Thelaw, when enacted in Henry V111.'s - timfe, set fortlh, "1that no PersRon or person should take, in payment of.wares, merchandise, or by mortgage of lands, above the rate of. lOl. -per centum by the year." Not asingle word was said about the lending of moaney. The law was, intendedl to remiove a scourge whic bore - morst severely on the country. The custom was,'at. that timne, when persons purchased'-goods at a certain given sum, and were pot able to pay for them afterwards, for the creditor to say1 "You must give ume ithigh rate of interest,o, YOU must go to gaol.' Historythlid.not inform themn what efrect t iis system. had on the coutry; but if it had been continued, the consequences must hiaveI been fatal. That act mnet the approbation of -Sir Thiomas Mlore, the Chancellor of Henry VIIT.,-and he had no d6uht tlatit operated beneficially. The honourable gintlenian then piceded to uni- moadvert on the work of AIr. Jeremy BienPthame . H con- tended that that gentleman had not an adequate knowleage of the subject; and that therefore hts opinion could not have any great weigbtiri thescale. Thiebill now beforethe housqeproceedea-on theory insteadofexroesiencewhich was amost erroneouscourse.Teade exKperienceofthepresent system during -aperiod of threcntrs; and ifthatwerenot sufficient, they 6ufld tumn-their attenint te -countries. Of thishevwas quite sure5thattbela~ideclinterest ofEngland would be placel in the nmost perilous situation, if these laws w4ere repealed. The efFect of this unbrestilcted system on landed proprie- tors was well described by Sir JohniMalcolm in 1hi8 late publication on Central India. He stated that the agriculturists there Paid a set of usurers their debts before the landed Proprietors received tClick rents; Speaking of the cultivation of central India, -Sir J.1 1al- colm observed, " thiat the rich bankers 'were niixed up in the, pe$ty detailis of even the smallest -villages. They found- the - seed? .for the - agriculturist, who was not able to purchase it;- and they made a claim equail to 50 per cent. on agricultural produce." He farther stated, "1that this system of robbery was found by our Goc- vernmenitto be so pernilcious, that they sent out surveyors to correct it. Their-inistructiens were, todircettheir attention most partics.lar-. ly to.the practice of lending out money- at this exorbitant rate,- and- to putaenend to it." Themnischief, in those cases, did not-so uuch' affect the rich capitalist as thelower classes of society., If niupt. Lortnat poo ma waned oney hewas sure to get itg -by pro- m ~n 40 r ~) pe cen. Te cosequncewas, that le soon be~- cli he vcti of is on iprudnce ad was ruined., At pte. sen, tis oul no b th cae, ecasehe was protected,by the ex- Istng aw:IiiChia, he eope wres opressed and aggrieyed -b thepratic w1i~i ~ ii.i cotenedfor; that it wa-stalenKt~ settled byaroyal eccr,tulat tre creditor should notseize on the body'of thedebtor. It xas said "if you lend-nioney,itmust be atyour own risk. The property of the debtor is at your service, but his body you must nottouclo." Letgentlemen look to the state of Rome. Whilst she wias free, during the whole period of her being a republic, in'the daysoflier greatest glory, this was her scourge, this it was thatfl'pt down the energies of her people. They all Imew what lle power of a Dictator was in Rome; and that power was first created by the feuds and dissenslons which wvere consequent on a system of us,ury. The.ascension of the Sacred Milount by the people was occasiored by the evils which originated in a widely-spread system of, usury. How were these cvils met P - Not by restricting the Isstem, but by tlhcintervention of theSenate, who goretiunes cancelad or reduced the debts of the people. The hou- member, after observing that the prowedA repeal of the usury laws would give an additional inflaente to e rfiDnied -interest whicb already-bore too high a sway in Eng. 1ltnd, sat down by dectaring that, he should oppose the bill before Sir HEN ,RY5' ,PARNEiL differed altqgether. from the doctrines oftbiehion. memberii who had fast aspoken. and almost as widely'from those-of thehon- member (Tr. L..,Forster) who-had preceded him. ie thought thie peech, of etiehon. membet for Grampound very-wide of tlhe-aubject in debate, and objected to being sent to India for his practice o0 polidtil economy, when examrples, at least as much to the purpose, might be found nearer home. -With reference, to the hon.jnember forArtiglitstatement about the condition of Irish itE , he could noc but think thit the hon. member was under mis. tske. Tlken generally, be did not believethat the landholders of itelard had any case to fear an investigation of their titles; in fact, witlr respect toagooddeal ofthelanded propertyofthatcountrywhich md acucdtopre'aent possessors out o,f orfeiture,ths4itleusustbebet. tar than the titleg generlly to English landed property, becamuse the tenure was niore recent.- Apart from that paticular questiop', ire-: land wuld be peenuarly ike y to lenefi'tbyI he repeal of tilexist. jogresrit 055 po the interest of money. Capitalists wdtild be indeellto crrythir flunds to the sister kingdom, 'as soon ai they foud tey oul obdina h1gtr~rate- of layniebt- 'for 'thd&' there than t hope, Feling hat al-e lerine of the'effect. of theuu law wa unavorabc. o teircontihanqc, lie (Sir WV. Patn'Ic shhIvote in favour of tebil ifir. CUltvm 'VN -inclineato leit tblawsalosse, asthe country did not call for their kepea1. lHewa-safrnaidth-atthe pro posed alter. etion w6iisld produce an inmmense deal of money-jobbing. : MVr. SYKES was at a loss to understand utponi what principle of reason, policy, or justice, any hon. nmember could sustain the con- tinuatnce of the existing statutes. The hon. member for Grampound had travelled half over thi world; he had gene in search of insta2nces from China to Pereu; .d he hed attacked auethorities, or rather set theni.at nought, whichlhatiheretoforebeen used to attratct considers. tion ; but he ad failedlis convincing him(Mlr.Syke.s)thiat the lawsin ,question were any better than monstrous abuse and monstrous ab- surdity. There were t*o parties in amoney transaction-the bor- rower, and delslendler ; andt what, towards these two li&rdies, was the equal language of the law P 'V,hy it allowed a borrower to say, u1 will lend otut my conimiodity, be it corn, or wine, or cloth, or whatever it may be, at the highest rate which the state of the mar- ket, or my owni management, may afford; but you (the lender) are an usurer, and you shall only gain five per cent. -prefit upon your commodlity ; and if you-dare to -rak-e more, you shall forfeit treble the amnount." If these laws were unjust, however, as afThcted the lender, their impolicy as regarded the borrower was still miore extraordinaryr- Suppose the mnarket, raite of.- interest, for example, to be above the lecral rate, - and a man to come to another to borrow money. WVell! the man -whb hias the moneyis5willing to accommodate; but the lawsa.vahesball take only i er cenit..; andlhe will nottake this, because, in thermarket, his money wiyll fetch mote. Then whiat happens ? Eith~er the bor- row6er must go withoit thiemoneyha wants-.are.~uitto whlichi,in all -probability, tte will retfuse .to be subjected--or he insist plunge into the ruinous systemiof dealingintelse way ofannuity' and pay-twelve or fourtetn per cent. for his money', because the la'w will not allow him to pay six or seven. He' (Mlr. Sykea) requested the hoisseto look at- the state of Holland, France, and Germany. where Ile did not say there were no usury laws at all, but. where, certainly, none exr- isce tht weebprative. In Russia, toeperiod-.dtring the reign of he mprss athrin, te iterst f money, had risen to six er 'ent'- 'his xces wa thoghtan evil, and an .act was pased rstrictng itto fiv. Theimmediate eWect was .;he rse ofthe rte ofinterst toseven ; 'for he who took- '~i ony wen ie ould execeed five safely, demnanded- seven when doig ssujeced imt6-risk. Above all, too, why therate of in- terstsholdbe ixd t five percent..peculiarly, he could not under. Stand. 'He could complrehend thie proposition of an honourable mem- ber of the House 0f Commons in Qucen Elizabeth's time, whlo had thought the taking of interest at all (zhis was in a debate' upon- re- gulRting the interest of nsionev at 10 per cent.) a damnnable heresy, and a criine abhiorrent to Goa and mnan, and one which ought to.be punished in the same wvay as thieft or murder-he could appreciate an oipinion of this sort; bixt 'he, ould not stnderstand an opinion that justfive per cent. was the only fit-and natural value of money. He wouldI nor follow the honourable member for Grampound throughi the general long travel of his speech ; but he couldt not forbear to say one word upon the apprehensions which were entertained of the ino- mied interest. The house was told that thie money holder, if once these ridiculous statutes were repealedl, wouild get the poor rman entirely into his hands, and grind him to powder at his leisure. Then, if the capitalists were. only, prevented from raising mioney above five per cent. by the existence of these leiws, why did thiey not at.the present momnent raise money to five per cent. (whiich the laws permitted tkem- to do) instead of suffering- it to lie dawn at three? Honourable gentlemen, upon principle, ought to he careful hiow they brouFht such charges against thte monied interest. It was to the acquisition and accumulation of capital in. England 'that the nation collectively owed -its strength and prosperity-the people their en- joyep o th cmfrtsan lxuresoflife. The arguments which hadbee ued gaisttherepalof heusury laws had with Lhim (Mr.Syke) abolutly n weiht; ndhewas decidel'dly of opinion, thatthe opiodit ofmone ouht t beleft to find,its ownvl, Mr. OCKH RT dclard tht hehad no initention of attack- ing themosiey.holders ; for, independent of the respect uvlsich he personally enitertained for them, he knew the power wihich they al-. ready possessed, and the still greater power which the bill before the liouse (if it was carried) wouild inveist them with. He was no enemy to general principles, but he always requiired to he shown that the priniciple asserted was a true one. For instance, he requiredl to see something like a.very sound principle in the p esent cae, to feel himself warranted in repealing lawys which, as they stoocda, p'!o. duced not the smallestgrievance. Blesides, in attmieting aniy pri. ciple, he begged to say, he always would admiit withi qualification: for; as the philosopher ofold liad said, "1Give mc a prin- ciple, and I will move the universe ;" so there were disputants to whom- give a principile, and let them carry it far enough and they woulid shakec the whiole constitution of society. TheIo. nourable geptlemnan proceeded ito defenid the references of the boa, member for Grampound to distant countries and to former tiines; for they went to.prove fairly,that various nations, at various periods, l,ad discovered the 'nuschiefs growing out of usury, anid beent compelle.dto enact laws against lit. He repeated that helhad noin- tention.of olfending the capitalists; but the sure consequence of per- m-itiing usury w,as the aeccumulation of meney in the liands of a few; and it was impossible not to see, under such circumstances, that the worst use was ik-ely' to be made of 'it. The wliole of England was in favour-of the laws now sought to be repealed. Every act, from the time of Henry VIII. downwards,whsch repealed any former act upon the subject as not sufficiently restrictive, set forth, in terms, that it weas passe~d 1$ecauserestraintsupon usury were found to he beneficial. One thing-gratified hiim, however-chat was to observe that this bill had not been taken. up as a cabinet memasTe-no minister had nuder- taken tCd espouse thecause of it as a minister-it appeared as if they were disposed;as with theCatholic questioms,to leave every*gentlemsn to vote as he imiglit.be pleased upon it. M5r. II'HILIPS reniarked upon the preposterous hostility to the supporters shlown, by the opponents, becauise the argumients of the fornier party, were su pse by the 1attertitbe drawn from tise science of political econompy. ?hose who opposedi the bill did inuainly on the grund that the existeuceof the present laws was favourableto the landed interest. He would'supposefor argument's sakethat it wa~ so-. what reason would-tlsat form for the continuance of thie laws? Why should the laws particularly favour the landed interest ? WVas it notas ustandpoltictha th ineretsof the;tevautry; of the far- mer, ad ariultsralaburrs,sholdbe consulted.' Then, upon ther on sowig, hy.notfixa lgalmaximunz, for the rents of. lan, ad or he ,rce f podce,togthr with a anininzman for the wags o agicuturl lbou? Bt t was a mistake to assume thatthelaw wee bnelcia tothelanded interest. Let the aose look to the tenour'of the evidence before thiecommittee. M1r. Sugden, whose experience in conveyancing was very ronsidlerable, said, that while snoney-was at from 6 to 8 per cent. during the war, the landedI interest seldom faled to pay between 10 and 14 'per cent. inannuitese. T,Ihe Kolicitorof the Bankgave the same kind of testi- mony ; so did SirSamnuel Romilly, thais whose opinion Ahere could be nothing more decisive. Tuie land-agents muse bh. admitted to be toleraibly good witnesses in this question. M-Vr. Wakefield, aman of extensive practice, confirmed that opinion by many particuIar cases. In one ease -a-gentleman wa"nted to barrow money on a fee-zimple, withoatiineumbrances, of tlse valuie of 200,0001.-it was not eveni en.. tailed-and he could niot raise any at 5 per cent. The sarri6 witness re- nmarkeel,that'he hadhardlyever knowna alanded proprietorto raisemo. ney upon 'annuity without nearly ruining his estate. The merchants and bank-ers concurred in the same sentiment; in short, the proof was all one-way, that the lanided intere8t-were injuredhby tlse exist. ing laws. ' . sir. ATTWOOD w.'iuld not undertake to say that the abolition of the usury laws would be favourable to the landed interest,' consi- dering the'land-owners in the character of - borrowers. Hle was, on .the contrary, -cqnvinced that in' that' character tliey, Were favoured 'during thI-reater part of the late -%sar by the existing latws. It was not enouglwh Jo show, that, in'. -sAme cases the lawv 'was ea- ad; th& qis'stioa' was' as to' the extenat of that evasion. The law. -was - evaXe&imdoubtedly; -hut not withouit. a degrcee of rI'sk 'and responsibility, to-whlich tcu lenders-.would go WIthI considerable liesitation ;and reluctance. Great. numbhers would alvo-id usurious travsisctionessOjdlyon account ofthmediscredit which the law attached 'to them.,; and certainly thosei transactions had( gone hut to an incon. 'siderabile extenL. Mr. Prestn, ~oteeof,the most experienceed aid in- telligent witmessts.before the-committee, said, that though much money*as raisedilat ansu.i-ntyieer-eseton land, there wasno great sum -laild out at-usurious inerst ereciconed the latterat theproportion of one niilllon; while the money raised 'at aninuity interest was seven mWilins.. Holi believed that other individuals had to borrow at 10- per cent. while the landed -interest raised monLey at' five Pef, cent. uposs no- better Security. But so' far. from'' the- ad. -vanltage- to -the' lianded initerest ' being a reason for continuing the law, -he thouight -it the Strongest argunient' which--could be, urged -difr the repeal.- The a4rgumenut thus proposed involved a great question of justsce. The error lay in aupposing'that an ad- vantage to ihelanded, interest-~was an adlvantage to-the country. 'Whern the landed interest gained, some other irnterest-snust have lot to thesaMre'extent.- On what grounds of- jusitice' should - the legislature-heecahled on to. initerfere against the lender on 'behalf of' the borrower-why, were 'the laws to -confe7ra'-benefit on one' party.at- thbexpense. of another? The:--parties were--entitled to- equal protection - 'from- -the. laws. - Then'-. it- was said that ta ~-'existing laws enabled Governmnent to borrow, money, in their exigetsieis' at a lower ratethan- they otherwise could, ancd by thiat means thgn aiional debt,was in a degree kept down. , But wha%t' -princ.Ple of ifistice -was this,-to forceaiown else natural rateof inter.. 'cst netely'-with a-'-iewto0facilitatingtlie loantsof Gov'eram-ent? Or lipwere a.principle Of iustice, why not force down tse'prices of all -commodities for which Government' had need? It wai*-ell nough teo, apeal to the.Awisdomxof our ancestors...our anecestors, were att any rate, consistenit with tliemaselves. In the laws of pre..rftption and purveyanice,the designi was ortlv to eznable the Crown to purcnase what ,was wantetat its ow-n rote. There could be no-questioui now that 'Wlose 'la*s were 'injurious to the -couhtry at large ;. bqt there' *as, 'at any' rate an equally uiniuestionable benefit to - the--Crown, iandthe-inmislsief only want afat as the bulk of 'the commodities- plitlsaed y te Crwn.Wheeas tokeep down' the Tateoinr. esttoeabl th Goernentto orrw,was not onlyversigh inteestof-temoey he Gi'emeawantedto borrow; but the in- terseof vey the mn'smoeyin hecoutr.'The hon mems- her or ramound ha reerre toautorites;butat the timet to common rate for accommodating individuals was at 4 per cent., anct the authority which tle honourable gentleman quoted proposed to fixthe maximum at5percent. Thereasons proposedin tlatinstance did not include any thing to show the necessity for reducing the rate of interest ; but they expressly tended to prevent the few bar- gains whibhUlf.ight take place, between ignorance and extravagaice oxe! one side aid avarice.and fraud on the other-to prevent loans to speculators andr spendthrifs, and to arrange the making of them to the industrious and prudent. - The main ground of argument for the abolition of- the laws. was, that they were totaUy unten4able;, that they could snot -be applied at aU to the afrairs of conimerce: bere they were generaUy and secMrelyevaded; 'tbey weredaily andihourly set at deliance.. It was absolutely necessary to the existence of com- merce,thattlheysliooldbe setatdefSance. 'They could not existin the general practice of comnieFce. - They forbid thelender tiking any ad- vantageb;ontdtheinterestofSpercnt., andthis witbout allowing3nsY reference to'the time.and "probability of -repayment, or to the consi- deration -of whether or. not, perr cent. was the' market rate of inter- est, or above:tle mirketrate or below it. - Now the nature of loans in commerce was predsetly this_tlhe money capitalist would only adiance his money at something beyond the tuarket rate of interest. If he could not have some advantage, why-sheuld he lend his mo- ney? It -would be' ' better for. him to- witldraw it,' be. cause-le, could obtain 'the nmarket Tate of intereat-without ap- plying his own labour and anxiety to the transaction. and without snurring any risk. .To suppose the law could control b'argains of thiskin initheCtradingworldwasimspossible. Heputit to anylawyer who hearhinm; to say whether or not sudtu practices eiisted, and if ;the law could'in any w,a,ysuce'ed ininflictingthe penalties. The very extravagance of the penalties defeaed-th&e- design of the law. Heotodd put a ease which really happened: an honourable member how present could bear witness to it. in a iuus transaction it Wi4 discovered that the lender had taken 251.'beyond the interet which the law allowed. The sum lent was 31,tlUtl. the -borrower would have parsued the lenderfer usufry, the pernaltie-would have been tri- ple thd'amourit, not6f th-Qisurious interest of25t1 butof the.princi- palmoney, that is toay - 3001. Te lender escaped tifs atrocous aruinandl havock, with whlich'his-'whole'propertY-4*is threatened, by- burning his~ own books. Was thata situationl to lsavethe 'ights aiid- property of aniy man id ? Why could not the laws be enforce,d P Because juries' would: not lend themselvei to such cru'elties; h1e.. cause respectable merchanits wouldleot bepartles in the spoiling and waste of their nieighbouir's property-they would not lend their- agencies to the execution of laws of such atrocity. They could not be executed ;.necessity and distress would lead men to do much against-their own creditors; but, generally speaking, they would not induce a man to add this weight of infamy-to'his distress andre.. cessitv. Tt was in vain to vaunt the wWiido of our ancestors in def'ending. thes4e laws. Our ancestors were wise enough to act ac.. cording to the circumstances which surrouLnded them ; but when these laws had their origin, there wgs no such thing as commerce ex- isting; there were onfly s-wo parties in maincy. trunsaesions-..the lauded interest and the -lenders of money: commercial transactions had no existenice. The borrowers made the laws-, there mere no money -capitalists, or commercial mnen of the -least weight in the legislature. They madte the laws entirely tb- their own advsntage: perlhapt they would have paid no' interest- at all, if they could hale. extracted the money frorm the- pockets of the Jews- withbat giving promise or seeurity for the return. They made laws according totheir own circumstanees. PaFrliaiment should imitate their wisdom, by making lawf to suit circumsttances as they sto6d now. Those laws wvere conformfable to theI timnes of their enactment : they were not applicable to the chalnge in the spirit of commerce and the present situation of the world. I Mlr. J. SZIiITH confessed that hie hadl never heard-the argume~nts on the; sideof the repeal so well put as-by his hon. friend themerinber- for Callington. He was-firmnly convinced, howvever, -that the existing laws were injurious to the landled initerest, liewould niot trvel vwith the honouirable. rnember for Grampounfl into central Asia: but this he wol a,that practically speakingf, there were no-usury laws idi the comimercial state of Europe.' In Hollid there was nothing lik-e the slavery which he dreaded of the delitor under the creditor. -Th'ere -was no count-ryin whicli there was so miuch indlustry, frugality, and good conduct for the bulk of the population, and so little mIsery, vice,land povert-y; and yet there were no usury laws. lie was afraid, however, that by going further he might wealcefi the effie6t of the observations of hiis hon. friend the mremnber for Callington, and he would content h-imself with congratuilating the supporters of the bill ,on the addition which their side of the argument had: thus acquired. Air. Alderman HEVGAT!E said, that the proposed mneasure was frauight with difriculties, and so munch had e"en been-admit-ted by the hon. memiber. whio vere most favourable to it;:`Even such of them as had-concluded that it ought to beadoptedb, hd-not-denied these diflicelties. For his own part, he felt convinced they were so great an.dso numerous, thatthiey couldtnotbe got over, it-was ne. cessar,-rin contemplating this bill, to -look at the state of the national debt, iand the manner in whichi it had been contracted--at the exist. iug mortgages- oni land-a2t famnils--ent-alls, ands-other-settlements of 4property. XVitriotnt taking such a'ilew of'the sutbject, it-would be im- possible to treat it wisely and justly; and it would be shtort-sighted in the extreme tu discuss it iipon mere abstract grounds. He knew that in these times, whien miany gentlemien thought, and he believed they thouiglitconscientiously, thiattlhey hadsuNedecertain discoveries whichi had never betore been dreamed of~ it- was an ar-- duons undertakinig to advocate the- provisions-of any ancienit ilaw. WVhen those discoveries were hacked, as in the present iiistance they were, by the influence of His M1ajesty's mInisiters;, the task- became still more arduouis, and the arguments he had so offer in support of it would, perhaps, have little iveight. Still, however, he felt it at. cessary to exbress his conviction, that it the piesent nmoment it wvould be inexpedient to alter the existing reguflations. No mail could enjoy the land of which he was the owner without obeying such requisitions as the state chiose to impose unon him. Hie was coinpelledto contribute to the support of the poor,-to themaintenance of highways, and called tupon for other contributions. WhVy, then, bad not the state a right to say to the owner of money, "you shall receive no mnore than a certain rate of interest, to he fix-ed by s-he-authiority of th-e legislation?" As to the question of policy wmiehic had been urged by an hon. member, he (Alddieygate) had to observe, that it ha~ been hield in all states to he better th at the rate of interest shiould rather' be -low thian- high, and that is- should be fixed. He had no: dloubt that but for the usury- laws the national dlebt would have been mnuch larger; and although it was very eas,y in a time of profoundpeace to say it would matter little to the country if that-debt were much larger, , he should like to ask hiow peDple would like to pay hialf as miuch more taxes than they did at present? Hle was ready to admit that:he thought the penaltiesisitlcted under theusury laws ouglht niever to hiave existed, anid ought not to con- tinute; and hie would pledge. himself (if no gentleman better able to .discharge such an unidertakifig should- do it) to bring in a bill for moderating those penalties,-and proportion3ing them, not tothemeg- nitude of the sum lent, bus- to thie circumstance under which it was len, i wichalne onistd he rie. The hon. member con- ciued y eclrin hs itenio tosuport the amendment. Mr. WILSN stted,thatthe iewhe had formerly-taken of this subjct rmaied uchaged,andhe aso hould support the amend- Mr. JOHIN MIARTIN suggested, that the obijectionaof the hon. alderman to the penalties might-be better uirged In a comnmittee than in the shape hie proposed. He therefore thought 'the hon. alderman was pledged to vote for the coinuliittee, in wchich too, the objections of other hon. members might-be obviated. - -SirJ.WROTTESLEYdeprecatoK the repealofthe existing laws, on:the ground that--such'a meaiure wouldl henceforth prevent the settinig aside of many in uriuai bontracts.. Mr. Sergeant ONSL,O explained, -and denied that any of the arguent whch hd ben sed in'support of the bill had been re- fused bv the observations of those who were opposed to it-. Mir. (CALCRAFT felt called upon'to deny the latter assertiosa. lie admitted thaat in a theocretic point of view he was not prepared to combat the bill of the learned ae ean't; but-if it skould be sad s-has- the very-miaterial objectiori-iihi bad-been brought against it on behalf ottheoDwners of landild property- iad -ken refuted, he (Mlr. Caleraft) would maintain ttWe ontrary The spech - -of the -hon. member for Callington (Mlr. Attvwod) to the talent ani ingenuity -of whbicht he was not insen'sible, applied-to the commescial initerests. If thie existing laws did affect those interests to the extent that hon. miember hid descrhibFd themn, he-ullr.- Calcraft) was willingi that- so far they should be repealed. (Hear.) But for the -landed interest he denied that is-' had been in anyi way shown - that it -would not be affected by such a measure. Ile,- believed is- would have the effect of: settifig persons whbo, held-- in. ceimbrancees upon landed -property to- watch the opportunities at which they could raise -the rate- ofinterest upon the persona who wrere indebtedi to s-hem. 'In all-countries, and at all times, is- -had been found necessary- to impose restraint upon the-passion of availc'e, which almost uiniversally 'prevadiled ; and is- had always been fort-he adv'antage of the country where that--psin, a ec nefrd wth.- He denied the assertion -that there were no usury laws. in Holland or France; the worst effects bad been found to ensue in- the latter-niation in consequiehce of freting sthe Tate of interest, and hie law had very soon been altered. - -b enclusi.n,it was his firmn convics-ioriithat in the present satLe of the country it:would behigh,ly injutrious to change the present-laws.-- The house then divided and the numbera were-~ - For theau,nemdmen4, 681 Agairst it; 741 Majority, 16. Upon our return to s-he, galcry,~we-fbund the house-in% committee oni the bll. : - ---- -- -- - Air. Sergeant ONSLOWgpopoe to -raake the- operation of the bill commence injamoary, -18.- -2--- --- MLr. CALCRAFT,objecked to -this propo.ition. - ThLis, the only blank-in the bill, the learned sergeant wished to fll -up with a dav only nine months-hence, at-which- day all-the inoney-tran5actions, in the countrywereto be overct ind pt-t on -a diff'erent footinig. Even those most in favouir.of the measure.thought a longtr- 'period was necessairy.- - Tke Chancellor of the Exchequer proposed-to allow two years and-a-half on - s-ie 'silk bill - ind- he trusted the-samne tiLue at leastiwouldbe allowed to this. Algny-persons believed, froni what h'ad dropped in other places, tha't this measure ntdveb wouhl'pass the le'gislature;-aRd ifis-.no.* wastepass,tliey should as-least have an opportunity of expressing their -dissent. -Me entreated the learnied lsergeant-to consider this'point,.and dleclared if tbahason.-gent. 'woulti' not propose a longer period, he (Mlr. Calcraft) would -move t-fi at th saine time be allowedl as hacl been grantedl to the silk -bill. (hear.) Mr.-Sergeant ONSLOW spolie in so low a tone otf.4bice as-to be nearly- inaudible. We-uaderstvbod him to propose.ill6operaddi6aof the bill, to ormmrnceat Januarv, 1825. (Cries of 's-1No, no.") - , AlIr.' ROBERTSON spokeagaalnit the principle6f&thbill.'V ` 3Mr.LOCKI{ART implored the house -to- conslde, :tbat by- re.; pealing- -ails-he laws relajing to "the -interest of money, they were taking, away- froni the-por the,protection wliclshSlier law. aff'orded thehm against the extortion of pawnbrokerit. At present, tbat- class of money ,lenders were restiihned fromn taking abovi a c6rtain rate"of interest ; if aUl the usury -laws' were repQaed; - tiey - might extort what interest they pleaseal. - Dia thei learnedl sergeant cbnteniplate this result frombhis- meaiure? If e did not, is was -an.-addi6a reason for postponing it.i'. - Mir. Sergeant-'ON~SLOW'imip'ed ~ba hi' esr w6uld leave 'the piwnbroke'rs' act unitiuched.t6 - at -cal Mr. DAVENPORT consideretd that this bill1 if it were madfe a lair, wouild ruin tlsalandedinsteiesi of the countr'- As is- was pa- tronizesby ministers, lie t-russ-edtsliat theywou, rekeal thextatap, dutids~bh irnoitgages, which; nasbonh as this bill -cAine into b,llia.. s-ion, -would-lie-shiuffed, like eatdc,4'roui onehaud-inso anotler- - -Afteracoaveisst-on.in.wliicliAlr.-J. SserTU, M5r. W. IVHIT- zxoax,'Al1Ir. Aldermnan I Hxx.GAft ,- Mr. LiESL1IEFoRST5_ii, and., Ai~r. T.-WiLSOX joineOl I - ~ - - - Sir JOHNIVROTTYSLEkifimove as.- an. ainerdment, thit, thieblank .in.the clause should be filled up by the -words "January 1, 1826," insteadl of" Janutiry I,1825." He hioved. this atmen 4 ineistonL thi's ground,- thiat'the. bill was but little known ln the country,- and that, it was likely they miighit receive orders fruift- 'their constituents' to repealI it in the interval- between the presenit Atinseand thef-time of its coming int oprtio. -The gallery was then cleare fors division. Whiulatwewer6e x-- eludd, wumidrstodtha- es-moton aB de -for fthech.sirman to- reprsprgres,an ak lav t si aai..The numbers were- - Fo~ the motip, '67-Ag int;it 611 Majiority, 4~ We erenfomedtha-'~ J.itor-axsr~x henwithdrew his lion,whenther smeaed~ - -on th oriinalqu.s. The couimmitee,,we were informed-divided,Ia second timle uponl telieuestion batharie cliairmian report prbgress;. anid' ask leave.to sit again whaen- there appeared-. - --- Ayes . S Noes .61 1 Majority 4 - The nusste thn- ivided upo,nthis queas-soo,hat thecelizairnaa do leavez-tie chsLir,-wlienatheie-appeiared- - :- - - -- Ayes, -. 72 Noe-s.. -. .69AIMCaRy 13 - When :we,were re.admitied -into-tlie plsy efudta h CIzIws,-.tsw had brought is-p the repcfs o thler comittee.'tatth M Ar. HOLU1E SUMINERt was upon his legs, and puts-Incau- tion to,0bs,pqalkir, which relat-ed;as ir Miwe could ptenth tenour of htis observations fedni thdt'piirt of them wihw er,t what hadpassged in the committs-e.-He wisghed- tko-hse's was consistent with. the rula bftb-ehousiefortbhe:irmnfa ol inittee of thi'4h6le hoizee'after ha: bad received iarnin os- port. prgress arid ask leave to alt.again, to r&emna4in heR ~ rn put th e-corqn3ii4ee,tp the nieessitv otexpresing itssopnnaacn timne as to slid irolpriesy of thi hoiise'resumiagbcfore 6fs-echr. TheS,P-EAK,R- replied,s-liat tbeinstirsfeionWiof o iteoit Chairman to relsort-Ip=org and ask leave to sit again,warurl a declaratoon of its resolution to proceed no further krthttiewh the busisesswbhch: is-then had utnder discussion. "Te Chanirman was-therefore'-houn4dto-remain-in-tbe chair till the.questrotn.vas -put and carried "~That I do now leave the-chair."I- The tirst'guestion,- n amely',- C" That the Vhairrnan,edo -regoirt d'grs --dl le'ave to sit again," iti?ght be.lpat Iii order to riju anupea4kicu-so so clse;andin he ntevales-eeothe ceerying of that quesition andtheposings-le scon-qmeat6n,"Ths-I do now leave the clhair," he i~ltbsi~srueei o rpor ~oshehouse -any disiausbgidce or ex- s-rocdnars,purrnc whelamigt hvehappenid whilst the house wasan- eiuuitee.Hetnclvd tatthe 1sairma0iofsh. corn. mitteehad beei perfectly in order in not leaving the chairtill hehad been authorized to do so by the vote of the committee. Mr. HOLME SUMIN3R1confesed that his opinion liadbeenrthe other wiv-'; but h'ebowedligly toeautbit f the f chair. The SPEAKER then asked lr. Sekgeiat Onslow what day he woaldcftx.forthe reconninittal of the bill. Mr., Sergeant ONSLOW replied, Tuesday next. On the question that the house do again resolve itself into a com- mitted on this bill on Tuesday next, - Mir. LITTLETON said that he vwould give the house another opportunity of expressing its opinion on this impolitic bill. He would move as an amendment, that thea wortds Tuesday next" be [struck out of the motion, and that the words " thisday six months" be inserted in their stead. I The house then divided upon this amendment, when there ap- peared-~ For it . . 671 Againstit 63 1 Majority 4. . The bill is in consequence lost. SUGAR BOUNTIES ACTS. On themotion of the CHANCELLORo 'the EXCHEQUER, *he house resolved itself into a7committccon these acts. In the committee, the right hnonourable gentlematt modved;'hatit is expedient to continue the sugar bounties; and in consequence of. some questions put to him by Alr. BRIGrT,$ said that he- intended atpresent to continue them for one year. a conversation of some length took place upon the subject, be. tween .Mr. WnIT11ORE, lr. BRIGrT, Mllr. HusErz and Alr. Husxissoyr, in which it was sgreed to take the discussion on the principle of this resolation at some future period, after the bill founded upon it was brought before'the house. . The resolution was thencafried. The Chairiman left the chairn andtliliottseresumed.- Repor. to.morrow-(this day). RUll DUTIES. The CHANCELLOR of tlfe EXCHEQUER moved the order of the day fer the house resolving itself into- committee of the wrhole house on the Rum Dadies Act. Mtr. GORDON objecteidtotheibriniging.forwardof so imporlant a measure at so late an hour of the niglht. (It was then near half- past twelve.) Thc CHANCELLOR of the EXCHvEQUER observed, that the hon. ivrember and all those who were interested in the measure would cl'ave abundant opportunities for the diseussion of the altera- tions he meant to propose in the rum duties. It would be natural enough for gentlemen to refuse geing into the committee at that hour, if he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) meant to propose an increaseof the duties; but it was rather extraordinary to objectwhlen his intention was to propose that a reeluction of the duties shlould take place. llMr.VV. SMIT was desirous to know how it was intended the duties should stand. He 6sould be very sorry, however, if they were to be placed on the footing the right hon. gentleiitan had stated on a former occasion- . ar. I.IUSgISSON said the measure would be oneof relief,to a certain extent, with respect to the duties on r-unn; and, as various opportunides of discussiagin twoold occur hereafter, he could see no reason for postponing the comnittee at present. Alderman WOOD observel, that the great body of the traders in rum were anxious to know When the reduction of the duty would take place ; 'therefore he ioped the right hon. gentleman would be allowed to lo0caee). Ir. BRIGHT said, unless the question were discussed, it was impossible for thi detders to know what would be done. It was iiecessary that the discussidn of the question and the decision of that houxe should be knoWn, before the dealer could be acquainted with the situation in which he was placed. It was therefore iimportant that a day xhould be fixed for the consideration of the question. The $PZ&KEst then left the chair, and the house resolred itself into a commiuttee. The CIIANCELLORoftheEXCI1EQUER, in addressing the coalmittee, observed that the resolution which he *ras akout to move was in cnfermity with the statement on rise subject of dhe ruin du- ties whici he had made a fce7 days ago. The resolution was di- vided into two parts-one part related to Great Britain, the other to Ireland. It was necessary to make this distinction, as in one country the duty was coirected by the excise-in tbe other by the customs. The resolution he meant to propose was, that the customs duty of Is. lAd. per gaUon on everv gallon of sin- gle rum inported into Irelaud fronm the West Inaia colonies, and the duty of 2s. 2d. per gallon on every gallocs of rum, above proof, ss iLmported, should ceese and determine. Witbhiegard to the time at wbicli the reduction should cominenice, he meant to propose that it should be from and after the passingof the act. Gentlemen must be aware tbat in a resolution of this kind, it Was impossible to touch on the question of time; that question,could only be raised in the committee on the bill. The'resolution Ihiving been put by the Chetirman, Mtr. BRou., DEN, a desultory conversation took place, on the propriety of post- poning the resolution, for the present, and taking it at an early hour on some future evening, when the proposition might be.th'roughly debated, in which Mlr. GonDoy, 1r. BItrGuT, AIr. AV. Ssrrn, Mr. HrsuDm,, Ir. F. LEiviS, the Cw.YCELLOnRof the EXcHEx- QcUER, and Mllr. H usissaoY took part. The resolution was ulti- antely agreed to; the house resumed ; report to-morrow. BEER DUTIES. The report of the comnmittee cn the beer duties act was agreed to, aod a bill ordered to be brought in conformablv therewith. The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and at HALF- PAST oNE the house adjourned. HOUSE OF COMAONS. THURSDAY. APRIL 8.