House Of Lords, Monday, M...
The Times, 1824-06-01T00:00:00

t rersO-n trom tile E;xcise presented a return of the oaths taken by, fficers of that department, pursuant to an order of the house, .made nn the motion of the Marquis of Lansdown. Lordl ELLENBOROU6GH presented a petition from certain in- habitants of Islington, azainst the Islington improvemrent bill. The Duke of LEINSTElt and the Earl of K}NGSTON presented petitions from certain Freemasons in Ireland, against the operation of the secret societies act. The BLhoo of LIMIERICK presented a petition Irois the Pro- testant inhabitants of a pa.t of Ireland, aainst secretsocieties. The Earl of SHAFrESRURY brought ap the report of the committee appointed to search for precedents relative to the bills for the restoration of honours...,rTlereport was laid on the table, and ordered to be printed. Two petitions against negro slavery were presented bv Lord SUJFFIELD, from places in Norfolk, and one of the same description by the MIarquis of LANSBOVCNe from WVhitby. The Miarquis of LANSDO\\TN presented a petition fronm Ross, in! Herefordthite, and one fromn Calne, in siltshire, in favour of a bill for the recovery of small debts. JOINT STOCK COMPANIES. The Earl of LAUDERDALE rose to postpone the consideration of the resolutions he intended to move, for the purpose of making some verbal amendments, the most material of which was renderedl necessary by mistakes in the printing. The noble lord then moved some variation in the words ofthe rasolutions as printed. The .Marquis of LANSDOWN wished that lIreland should be altogether excluded from the oneration of the resolutions which his noble friend had brouight forvward, and shouldl therefore take the present opportunity ofsayinga few words on the view he took of the subject. as he mighit not happen to be present when the question came on again. *Vhile he had no objection to the principle of his noble friend's proposition, the object of which was to afflord additional security to the public in commercial transactions, yet lie wished him to consider, whether it would not be advisable not to ex- tend the standing order to Ireland. The state of that country was very different from this with respect to the employment of capital; and however much he might be inclined to admi- nister checks with respect to Speculations lhere, he could not think that tsey were at all necessary there. From the evidence which had been given before their lordships' committees, they most be aware that capital formed the great want of [reland. There existet in that country abundant means of employ ing capital; but individuals will- ing to enbaik in commercial and manufacturing establishments were not easily found. Now, it appeared to him, that the best thing their lordships could do, was to encourage the transmission of capital; ans that, in order to obtain that end, it would be proper to leave individuals who formed companies in that country liable only to.theamount of the sums they subscribed. It was not possi- ble thatL many indivitduals could be prevailed upon to enter into speculations which required the transmission, of their ca- pital to another country if they were in the very outset to be required to pay up four-ftths ot' their subscription, thus exposing themselves to the loss of Interest and alt other risks. He appre- hended that great inconvenience would arise from applying the reso- lutionsto Irish companies Thatapplication might, perhaps, put down undertaking. alrev comrmenced and would doubtless tend to pre- vent Enr'fisil capitalists from-embarking in speculations in -I-eland. It wouidb be for their lordships, in considering the standing order pro- pc>ed by his noble friend, to say what degree of risk tilev thought capitalists would he wiRing to tun with respect to speculations in in Ireland; but he trusted they would not make it so Ggreat as aU at once to prevent the current of capital from flowing -towards that country.-- The Earl of LAUDERDALE assured his noble friend that he had greatly mmistaken hlis intetion if he supposed 'that he wished to prevent tne cmp!oyment.of British capital in-lreland. Godt forbid that he should do any t hing to discourage the transmission of capital to a country in which it could be beneficially employed. But the effect ofhis resolutions was the recerse of that which the noble Alar- quts attributed to them. Instead of keeping capital from Ireland these re.olutions would secure its applicaiion when any speculation was undertaken. His object was, that those persons whoannounced themselv"asadventurers in any undertaking should actually put down the qreater pait of the capital they subscribed. This was necessary for the security of'the public. I heir lordships had heard of companies putting forth schemes, acconling to whichl their capital v/as to be one million, while in reality the sum put down' 'did niot exceed 50,000h. Thus, not niore than one twertieth of the capital was paid up. It was to guard against such practices as this that his resolutions were framed. The Marquis of LANSDOXVN explained. that his objection lid not go the length of saying that no order wbatever should be mia(le with respect to bills creating companies in Ireland; but he thought that speculators in that country should not be conmpelled to make deposits to the same extent as in England. Ho wished the delposit not to be made so large as to discourage persons from transmitting money to Irelanil. it present twvo mining companies were establish.- ing; now-could it be supposed that persons forinng a2company withl a capital of one mi!lion, would at once risk so great a proportion as four-Ufftls on an uncertain scheme? In a case of such a specula- tion, founded on the existence of mines, what man- of understanding could be expected. to put down fo ir-fifths of his capitil, without its being ascertained whether two-fifths, or even one-fiftb, would ever be wanted? The Earl of LAUDERDALE reminded the noble earl that, - asccrding to the resolutions, the capital subscribed might be vested in the funds of this country, or in Exchequer bills. The proprie- tors wnuld, therefore derive profit from it, thoxugh it saould not be wanted for the speculation of the conmpany. The resolutions, as lie had already said, had no tendency to prevent capital from going to Ireland; he therefore could not consent to make the alteratbn his noble friend had suggested. The amendments were then made, and lVednesday was men-, tioned as the day on which they might probably be nioved, but no order to that effect tvas made. CATHOLIC PETITIONS. Earl GREY rose to present the petition agreed to by a nunierous neeting of Roman Catholics, beld in the city of Dublin in Febtuary last. The petitioners complained of varieus evils, for the redress of which they applied to Parliament, and hoped to obtain that justice which it was in theirl ordsbips' power w.give. Heshould endeavour to describe to their lordships the principal complaints and pravers of the petitioners, though perhaps not precisely in the order io which they appeared in the petitiOn. They stated that theUtiiun, imsteasi of having realized, had disappointed all the hopes held oat at the time it wsas effccte l; that instead of producing any benefit to Ireland, all the xisting evils thlen felt by the country hail been greatly aggravated by that measure. By the Union, a great proportion of the owyners of the soil had been withdrawn from Ireland, and thopeople were thus de- prived of the presenee of their natural protcctors. The petitioners also complained of the atate of the church establishment, and prayed for a reform in its temporalities. The grievance was not confined merely to the manner in which tithes were collected, bat extended to the general system of the establishment; for thev complained that 7.8tks of the population, such being the proportion in which the peti- tioners Lstimatecl the number of the Catholics, should contribute to a church from which they received no advantage whatever, bat en the contrary were exposedl to insult and injury frotn the conduct of many of its members. The petitioners alsocomplained of tlieadmi- Stistratfon of justice. The superior coasrts, they admitted, werepUTe~ but tey ojectd tothe mimerin wich urors wvere tselected,an to the ndue inluence xercise in loal jurisdictions; ad theystaed,.tha in eesionsbeteenCatholi'cs and persons of he ppoiteunty,e.h'deison as uretobe' inst the formner. Thenet cmpain rlae4 o he ororaios f=Fead, whichi the pettiner sate t becostiutd i amanner whilch was to them productive of great oppression and injustice. The psetitioners com-: Plained that they were excluded fromn those corporationsb the in- nluence of that body whichi thek called the Orange, or predominant Facdion ; and that in cases o?'complaint instituted against magis- trates theyvobtaiined no redres.s. In confirmation of what they stateda or. this stibjjec the referred to the repots dra u by Sergeants I Lfory ad Foyd for whic thev hoped theair lirdships would call. The grievance of whichi the pet,ttioners finallv coimplained, and which might besaid to involve everyother,was that state of the lawv by whiich the Catholicsof Ireland were excludedI from the privilegesoifthe British constitution.. In stating the grievances he had described, ,he peitoers expressed their opinion that it would be in vainfor the hose to expect any, thing like peace and tranquillity in Ireland-any removal of the parLy differences by whtch thazt country was distract- ed-unless their lordshi-ns entered into a revisioni and reformi of the church temporalities-.4rought abouit a better administration of jus- tice, b~y regulating the selection of'juries-disfrnnchiised the corpora- tions trom which -all Catholics were excluded-.and granited what was called Dttholic emancipation, or the removal of those dlisquali- fications W hich dteprived Romnan Catholics of those privileges which, in common with other Britishi subjects, they were entitled to enjoy. For these four objects the petitioners prayed. Beforelhe determined on presenting the petition, he felt itto behisdtittyto asc4ertain that it contained nothing dlisrespectf'ul to their lordships' house ; and be- yoncldthat, he conceived it was not the business of any member of the houise, in the first instance, Ito inquire ; for, accrding to hiis view, the presentinyg a petition wras an act purely mi- nisterial, whichi no nioble lrd could be excused for not per- forming on account of any difference of opinion as to the matter, whichi tije petitiow inight contain. It was not for any noble lord toI take upoin hiniself to deny petitioners access to that house, aisd to de- prive thlemn, asi far aLs he could, of' tise opportunity of stating their com'plaints in thle fuillest isnanner, anod seeKing such redress as they migdet thinik fit to pray for. tHe had said this mLuch, because there were in the present petition, statements and prayers with mnany Part's of which he could not agree. lie had theretorc left to the per- sons from whom hie received the petition, after staiting to themn bhi opinion, to say, whether they would choose to mnake him the me- diuni for presenting it. The answer returned was, that they still wishedt lie wouldl present it, and give it his support as far as he coaild ;and it was in consequence of that request that he had now the honourofaddiressiag their lordaships. Wlithrespect to themain object of the Petition-the removal of those disabilities and disqualifications by whichi the Roman Catholics were excluded from a full participation in the advantages of the Britishi Constitution, by which they were .degra(tledandin(isulte-d, and whichi,as the petitioners truly stated,were leithrer reniotelyor directly connected with all thetvilswiTich afflicted I Ireland-it cert!fnly lizid his fullest concurrence. Retaining a-s he did, the opinion he had on all former occasions expressed, with re- spect to those disquallifirations, and clherishing the hope that the day, couldnot be far distanfewhen their lordships would he disposed to con- ient to the removal of so julst a comnplaint, he should, whenever that qtiestieti camne to be 'Iliscussed, support, it with the same zeal as hereto- tore. With the other prayers of' the petition he certainly couild not agree; aniti he could not help considering it a suibject of tmuch regret that they should appear in it. lHe said this, because he was convinced of the necessitv of granting the prayer for that great object ; and in proportion as his conviction of the necessity of thiat measure was strong, so was he in the same degree sorry that any thing calculated to embarrass the question respecting it should be introduced. It wss, therefore, wvith much regret ithat lie had seen in the petition miany statements wvithi wvhich he could concur. One of those statements, lie could confi- dently state, was totally unfounded, it was that in which it was stated to be reported, that the faction, of *hich the petitioners coi-n- plained, had the countenance and support of an illustrious person. age (the Duke of York). Thiis, it was statedl, the petitioners did not themselves believe, and he wisltedi it haid not atppearedl in their pe- tition. He was sincer~ly conv-iticed, that however tnuch that ilhtis- triouis person miglht differ in opinion with the petitioners, however sttongly he might feel the necessity of resisting their claims, the nam- tural benevolence of his heart (htear) wvould tuiake it his wish to ex- tend to all persons the beniefits of the British constitution, and that it was only a paramount sense of duty which couild ever induce him to op pose a prayer for sucls an object. This uiuch their lordships WOUldS excuse hiim for saying in jusuice to that illustrious person, and to the opiniorL entertamnea by hiimsielf as to this petition. Withi regard to th~e extraneous topics to which, he hiad alluded, he consi- dered those by wvhom they were irntroduced to have been very ill advisedl. He in pa;ticuhar disapproved of the sweeping manner in which the petitioners spoke of disfranchisement of corporationsa, and the reform of the tetnporalities of the churchi. Differing froml for- mer petitions so Tiuch as this did, it was not possible to reftrain from laniientiug that suich a dthiference sioiuld be exhibited; but, hiowever imuch thiat miight bo a mnatter of regret, it ouight to be none of'surprise; for it was the effect of disappointment and i-rritation, produced by a long-continuedI system of misgovernment, both Livil andl religioujs, in Ice!and. By this, system of misgovernmientt, parties had been keptin conflict with each oilier througnout every quarter of that part of the united kingdom. Those who were lately taught to en- courge ahopethattheicompaint woud be listenedl to, were dis- appintd ad oerwelmd wth espir.This was to be expected fro th istailiy nd lucuaingnatreof the measures of the Go- vernent fo he as onvncedClit te evils of Ireland were miuch aggrvatd b th prsen Stte f te amin istration. The distress- ed ad dstrcte stte n wichthecoutryhadso long existed, must doubtle.is have been the effect ofapermanentytein. The soil was rich and fertile, but thiose who laboure it were in poverty. That a people vossessing warni hearts, hiigh f'eelings, aiid every quality ca- pableot rendering them greatand prosperous, should be reducedl to the state in which thepeopleof Ireland now were, without any fault on the part of Government, was a propositioti so contrary to every acknowledged principle of politics, that he could not for a nsoment give it credit. The sitetation of Ireland must therefore be the effect of a long series -of years of maisgovemment ; buit the evils arisingfcomrthat general msisgovernment were, as he had said, greatly aggravated by the present state-of the adniinist'ation, Their lord- shiips knew that there was a division in else cabinect which could not fail to produce most mischievous fretits. One of the consequences of this, division was;, tuat by one party the hopes of the Catholics were excited-by the other, the feats of the rrotestants were alaruieri. The hostile parties in the coutitr wer broughit into the field. The one was-encouraged to advance demands which the othier teas taught to resist. Thus, wbile disappointment and despair were experieniced ore the otto hand, an insulting triuniph was exhibited on the other ; so that Ireland wvai never before in such a state as that ins which it wag atpresentplaced. Hletherefore felt meat anxious for theremoval of tie great cause of that state of thinigs, and would be happy if, by an,veffort of his, he could assist in the accomplishment of that object. Wisth at sincere wish that a favouirable opportunity, would scoon arise for directing their lorctships' attention to the mai,n object of the petition, he should content himself with moving tilat it be. read, intending afterwardis to usove that it be laid on the table, wvithout at present proposing any further proceeding. One thing more before he sat dowvnhe wished toobserve. Hiehoped that feoin nothing which he had said his object wouldhe iniscon- cciv-ed5 and that he wouldI be supposed to be sitandling- up there as the apologist of intemperance of language or conduct in any party. Wihen he entered tlse house, a petioi'n p resented by a right reverend pre- late against secret associations andL intensperate prvceedings on the part of the Catholics was co.mplained of. Hfe begged to be under- stood that intemperance, either in language or conduct, would never finyd en advoicate in himn .fid that any proiceedings which hadl a ten- dency to endanger the peitLe of the country he would never hesitate to'eondemn, witht wbateverXparty they might originate. If, however, any allowahnee was to be m4d ~'iu this respect, that allowvaned surely ought to be in favour of those who felE themselves to be greatly in- jured and oppressed, and- vhose great sensibility of the injtury of whichf they comiplainerd might retider it more difficult for them to re- strii hei felins. twaash hal sid,not his intention to fouzid at resnt ny lteiormedureon hispeati.on, which he moved The lerkprocede to ead he ptiton, whiich was discover ed,ins thecouse f he eadng,~obe iviedinto two parts, each on a distict ad unonneted pece f pacbmtst -This circustancee gave. rse to some conversationi. TeErofLAUDERDALE Ob- servd-, hat ad n notce ben tkenof asstils a division of parts, thepettio miht tav ben lid'n esetable buit as the house was apprsedof s, try oul notfestas usto whatit seas to be done. It woul-heconrs~y t th orersandp rctice -of the house to receive the last part was addr, ssed tnobody. ta sthpeiontod Earl, GREY,isicomplinc with the opinioa of the house, with- drew thepetitio!% - The ll,arquis of LANSDOWIN presetiteda,petition from the Catholics of the city, andI county of i he city of Limerick, praying for the renmoval of disabilities.-This petition had not the objection to wliicii the formier was liable,, and it was laid on the table. Lord HOLLAND presenteda ptition, wvith a similar prayer, fromthe omanCathlicsof New oss, in the county of' Airxford, whlich was read, and ordered to lie on the table. IRISH -REVENUE OFFICERS. The Eatrl of LIVERPOOL said, he had noiw- to bring before their lordahips a bill to dispense with certain oaths taken by the excise officers of Ireland. He toDok the liberty of sayin; that some menamire of this kind was ilidispe~nsably necessary, as artsing out of Ithe measure to which the noble marquis (the Mlarquis of Lansdotn) Ihail' alluded on) a former siiiht, as for the welfare andageneral good order of the coutiery, Ind6pendently of that circumstance, it hand been his ob),ect to frame his ineaeure as little litable to objection as p. ssible. r'he bill would apply en all officers of the revenue, ex- cepin ony heCommissioners of the General Board, idsbd would fethmfon the obligation of taking any oaths, except- the oath of:aflegiance anti tie oati of office.- The Mlarquis~of LANSDOWN said lie merely rose-io express his satisfaction at elhe measuire proposed by the noble, -cirl..- It was thauntoubedy rope niel ofdoig tatwhich had before-been 11 ;thouh atthe ame ime e could not but request oreshis t oberv, tat ne f te bills which he hiadhbrought in fe esenngsago ha fr oe prtof its object to legalize the servce o theoffie ofEarlMarsal,towich no objection was madeb any noble Lordt, anti the ote tar of the bill went to do tht whih as ss on ob nipnal eesr,adt Lordl KIiNG thought his noble friend was a little premature in expressing his satisfaction ; for though the bill was brought in, it was not yet .passed. The opposidon was no longer from that siele of the house, but oiie part of the Treasury bench was in oppo- sition to the other. Surelyhis noble friend was awateof the anatchy and confusion which reigtied in the camp, where even the household troops tse very Svitzers, were not to be depended on. As lie (Lord King) was friendly to this measure, he entreated the noble earl dpo- site not in its futuTe stages to send any of those little notes (so often sent when divisions were expreted) to his own friends-those little notes "False as they are fair, "Don't send them there." (A laugh.) The bill was then read a first time. Lord CALTHORPE presented a petition from the inhabitants of. Birtninghain, praying the house to persevere in their judicious and moderate measures (but with a due regard t) the interests of all parties) to place the negro population of the Wrest Indies and Ame. rica in tle same situation with respect to civil rights as the inhabi- tants of this country.-Tlhe petition was read, and ordered to lie on tie table. WELCHI JUDICATURE. Lord CAWDOR, after some prefatory observations oti the past history and present state of the administration of justice in Wales, concluded by moving that the houseshould resolve itself into a com- mittee to consider of three resolutions which he proposed to sub- mit; thesubstanceofwhich were, that chiefly from the limited au- thority of the judges in W.ales the courts werd quite unequal to the administration of justice, and that justice could not be fairly ad- ministered there withiosst such addition to the nmmber of English judges as would enable them to make their circuits in Wales. The LORD CHANCELLOR said, he could not conceive that the administration ofjustice in Wales was so bad as it was reported, or they were the least litigiousily disposed of any of his Mlajesty's subject1fOr withinthe!bst 4) years there 'hd only been5cases of equitv, and no apaltothathouse. It wIs.not, therefore, out of any disrespect to tbe noble lord (C4wdor) that he must withlold his assent to the motion. -R The MXlarquis of l.ANSDOWDN thought the commiiee absolute- ly necessary, not onyasregarding the impr3vement of the admi. mstTatUOa of justie in Wales, but also with a view to a similar ef- fect in England, which the addition to the- number of judges (as- proposed by his noble friend)2was calculated to effect, by enabling Fhem to (1Oliver the gaolsmore frequentlythan at present. Tbe Mlarquis of'BUTE supported the motion. The question vas then put; and the house divided- Contenr, 6 I Not Content, 141 JAlajority against the motion, 8. The Earlof SIHAFTESBURY gave notice (on the part of a no. ble lord whose name we could not hear) of the second reading of the Irish uthes bill on Friday next. Adjourned a aq uarter to nineo'clock. HIOUSE OF LORDS, MONDAY. MAY 31.