House Of Commons, Thursda...
The Times, 1824-04-02T00:00:00

MIr. BUCHANAN presented a petition from the notarel pbl!ic. of Dumbarton praying for the rpeal of the tax on notaries public. Mr. LIND1AY presented a. similar petition fiomt the notaries public of Perth Forfar, and Cupar. Mr. IAW I,>:Y resented apetition from the inhabitants of Nun. eaton, praying for the repeal of the window-ax. Sir C. PAGET presented a petition from the licensed victuallers of the town of Camnarvon, against excise licences. AMr. BRIGriT presented a similar petition from the licensed vie- tuatters of Islingzton. Air. T. COUiTENoAY presented a petition from Totness, pray- ing for the repeal of the duty on coals.carried coastwise; and another from the same place, against the exportation of long wool. Mr. GORDON presented a petition from the Society of Adyo- cates of Aberdeen, praying-for the repeal of the tax on attornies. Mr. R. MARTrN prcsented a petition from the inhabitants of the parish of St. James, praying the house to adopt measures for preventing cruelty to domestic and other animnals. On rhe motion of S3r T. LETHBRIDGE, there was ordered to be laid before the house, a retura of the number of vespels which cleared out of the western ports of Great Ilritain, in the years 1811, and 1823, with the tonnage of each, and the number of ves- sels and tonnage from each pore. Similar returns were also ordered from Ireland, ar,d several other parts of the United Kingdom. Petitions against the combination'laws were presented from the iourneymenboot and shoe makera of Bath, from the astisans of Rochdale, and from Daniel Pettyson of Coventry, by Alr. PETER M1oorta. Mlr. S. RICE presented a Petition from the General Association of the county of ripperasy, for ameliorating the condition of the lower classes, praying (we.believe) against the repeal of the bounties on coarse'Irish linens. 'The same honourable member presented a petiton from the inhabitants of St. .Mary's patish, Dublin, against local taxatiop. Lord BINNING presented a petition from the nataries publicof Haddington, praying for a. repeal of the duties on licences topractice as ublic notarses. Lord F. OSBORNE presented petitions from Melburne and Linton against Negro slavety. Sir GEORGE HIIL brought in a bill for regulating the office of county treasurer in Ireland, which was read a first time, and ordered to be read asecond timeon Monday,and to be printed. He also brought in a bill for the better preventing the stealing of records in Ireland: it was read a first time, and ordered to be read a se- cond time on AMonday. Petitions were presented by Sir T. ACLAND, from UIfracombe, Biddeford, Oakhampton, and other parts of Devonshire, complain- ing of the severity of the duties on sea-borne coals. Sir G. HILL brought up the report of the Irish 4 per cents. bill, which was agreed to, and the bill ordered to be read a third dme to. morrow. ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF THE ISLE OF MIAN. IMlr. CUR WEN rose to submit the motionofwhich he hadgiven notice on this subject. He began by assuring the house, that he had no personal objection to the genueman who filled the office of Attorney-General of the Isle of Mlan: his sole desire in making the motion was4 that equal justice might be done to all the inhabit- ants of that island. The hon. gent. then proeeeded 'to state the grounds of his motion. He began by remarking. that in the opinions of those best acquainted with the concerns of the island, it was con- sidered to be of iinportance that the Attorney.General of the Isle of Mlan should be an English barrister, and one not slightly acquainted with the practice in the English courts of jnstice. This would be admitted to be the more necessary, when the fact was as he should mention, that the governor or ueputv-governor of the island presided in the Court of Chancery there-a situation which certainly must be painful to the feelings of a military officer whose education was not likely to fit him for such a task. It was therefore necessary than an officer so circumstanced should at least have able assistants. It was true that the present Attorney-General of the Island was an English barrister, and one of considerable experience and knowledge of the law; but it was also known that his duties were for the greater part performed by another, anJ that he himself very seldom nmade his appearance on the island. The honourable member then went into a vanety of details,to show the inconveniences which resulted to the inhabitants of Marn, from the continual absence of such an officer as the Attorney-General, and from having his duties, in many instances most importanit, perfortmed by another. The Attomey.General, or his deputy, were the only persons in the island who could prosectite a criminal; and the leaving such a duty to an- other, witl a very small salary tor its performance, was, he thought, very unwise arid inconvenient. He would admit that the salary paid to the Attorney.General was too small, but he would rather see 1,0001. a year paid to some genteman who would reside in the asland and attend personally to the duties of his office. The hon. ienubrr, after further observations on the inconvenience of the pre- tent practice, concluded by moving "Thatan humble address be pre- 'ented to his Diajesty, praying that he might be gradonsly pleased o give directions that there be laid before the house a copy of a me- . uoria7 from the House of Keys, in the Isle of Man, concerning the c the patent of tliepresent Attorne'.ctenera5-s appusFnttr - l Mfr. PEETL said he was rathr susuprised at the course which the-] hon. member pursued on this occasion. He bad caled for some pa. pers, and, without knowing they miglht not be produced he entered into a discussion of the whole question to which they relerred. He was disposed to grant the infomiation required by the hon. member, and would theretore have thought it unnecessary to take up the time of the house on the subject at present, had not the premature dis- cussion of the hon. member made it necessary for him to say a few words upon the propriety of' having the Attorney-General of the island an English barrister; but the having one at the expense to the island which the hon. member suggested, might be a question in the consideration of which that expense would be a mostim- portent matter. The present Attorney-General of the island was Mr. Clark, a gentleman eminently qualified for the duities of the offize and who, from being Recorder of Liverpool had as mucb acquaintance with the practirce of the criminal law as almost any other judge in England. Mr. Clark was ap- pointed to the office because he was Recorder of Liverpool, and be- :ause his frequent attendasce at sessions there would give him op. portunities of passing over to the Isle of Alan whenever thepublie service required his presecre there. He accepted the situation on ondition that he should be ready to attend its duties in person whenever the public servicerequired it; or if he could not so at- tend, that he would then give the situation up. It was true that the laties were for the greater part performed by another, who received for such service 1001. a year, out of the 5001. a.year which was the salary; but it was not the fact that Mlr. Clark never attended on the island. In the course of the last year, he went over to the island three times. The first time was on a trial for murder (a crlme which was of very rare occurrence there), and prosecuted the criminal to conviction. Another case, wheni his pre- sence was required, was on an inquiry which he (Mr. Peel) had thought it proper to have instituted into the conduct of one of the Judges of the island, who had been accused of gross malversation in tbe discharge of the duties of his office. The result of that inveSti- gation was, that he (Mr. Peel) had felt it to be his daty to recom- mend thie removal of that Judge from his office, and he was removed aceordingly. On that occasion, as well as on all others in whicb the interestw of the island were concerned, he had received the most able assistance from Mr. Clark, who was at aU times wlling to devote his eminent talents and valuable time to the personal dis- charge of the duties of his office when the public service required it. Under these circumstances, he did not see why the island should be called upon to pay 1,OOOL a year out of its small revenues, when it at preserFt had its interests so pell attended to for, 001. He would not say what he might do if the situation werevacant, but certainly a1s long as Alr. Clark chose to hold It, he did not think the interests of the islasnd*iould be benefitted by a change. rI. fiUME: said that his honourable friend had not intended to blame the Government for the system at present adopted; but he thought that-the conditions on which Mmr. Clark got his appointment should be fufSlled by that gentleman, as long as he chose to hold the office.- One of those conditions was, that the Attorney-General should reside on the island, and he was in coniscuence to have an additioxs of 200L a-year to the 3001. a-year enjoyed by his predeces- sor, making his salary 500L a-year, as it was it preSent; but not- withstanding that he received the salary, he did not Teside on the island.': AMr. PEEI,asked the hon. member for Aberdeen, how It was possible thattesidence in the Isle of Mlan could be madeaninais- pensable conditioin of Mr. ClaTk's holding the situation of Atto?ney.y General, when it was notorious that he had duties to fill at .Liver. poolas Recorder ? General GASCOYNB said, tbat before MIr. Clark held the of- fice of Attorney-General for the Isle of M4Van, it had always been considered a sineenre, The salayy had, however, been recently in- greased, in order to obtain'the occasional residence of that officer, wi ch had been recommended 1y Lord Sidmoath. Now, MIr. Clark, grom yseiding in Lancashire, was at no great distance from the Isle of Mast, and was alwvays willing to repair $i.ither, whenever he thought his presence would be advantageous. Mr. H{JBKXSSON felt it to be amost unnecsiary fgr [him to say a wor& ioua thlis subject, after the satisfactory ex cp!ntiQnu. which hie right h'Oln. friepO had given of the manner in which Ali. Clark had erbormned tbe functions of his office. ..e thought that it wsawelthat the Atto.ey-YGeneral did not residemi the island; for if he did, it would be almCgt.f impOssible for him to ayoid being implicated in soaic of the party dWRercnkces whtclp prevailed among its inhabitants. AfLera short reply from Mr.CURWBN, the motion was agee.40. Dir. HUMi moved for a*return f the evtablishmerjtof Jhe dJreaik- water at Plymouth, specifyingthel number of perons employed there, the salary paid to each person, apd te various inmldentc l ex- Pauses 5eirGg XRtono objection to the motion. He pouldl not, however, allow it to pass without observing, that the Wo F,9 be concludedl ata coat of nearly 200,000L less than had been orip- nally expected Sir I. COFFIN spoke in favour of the utility of this work, ani' of the economy with which it had been constructed. The bay of Plymonth, frm being a very unlsaLe anchorage, had now become a rere mill-pond. If the l3reakwatcthad cost half as much as the national debt amounted to, he should not havy gnsdged the expense of it. (Lold laughter.) The mothon waos then agreed to. DVUTY! QN LE(}AcIEs UNDER ?100. Mr. Hl1jMt sid, t'h'at he had-a-motiOnii t-o mk,rltn to a portion of the revenue which, thouigh itwas only smallin aouInt, was productive of: ver great trouble and vexation. The portion of revenue to which heMaluded was. derived from the legacy. duty on p o.petty usmler 1001. He was of opi6ilon that the whole systins of legacy duities stood in need of resisien and modlfica.don;. At any rate,, .if it were to be continued it ought to be niade to press as lightly as possible onesn possessed. of ofl-y' small -preoprty. - 'By a retuirn which ha benlid upon .the table within.the lamt flhw: days, he found, tha hn Lte whole amuounit of Ilietatalisi-dutiegi on. pro-. bates, ali ittttiii, and testamientary istlentures. wSSat aout 1.800,OOLtapato'it hich aros ri tls6 leka~y-duistea o- stuns unel~.waviytriflu~ing' eed, *-i etelsowobd I I I r r ? 7 0 1 I I :,I .i I ;I .i i2 Li mot a2ei4A. into the SUWeCtsraWaoft{e* e in Seo3l.tsd. Hcehsdin his hiindazbilj.fom ~lplich it App lreel that to obtain'administrat(oN to & 1iprtyof 1061. in pesoepf 14!. hid' .bein wafre4.1This wa t i tx 6to pex cent.; on thn *1.lehI the adinifistttorarwho stood in teh relation ofnepbewto ptr..c sont ti*hotni ediniiisters4 had -to receily Iaanoiher instan 41. 14s.' d. had been id, to obtain administration to b6.: Thbuth thc inionyvAience of hlie@ ecy ditiei xwas trongly fet in Enlatd, it was still more stronguyfelt in Scotland, where those *bo colifofed them bad'evenz one-tohrassto'insist thit'the,woollennightcap in which a ~n'n Eiddieil siguld be jndluded in the schedule of his etTeeh. Met was'salisfed thitf the ChlinceeUor ef the Excbequer, when hewsmade icq axinted with the details of this subject, -ouldAo his utinst to relieYe the-vexition which this system OCCss1Oned..He w.bild secst'one mode of rdelftotberight hon. gent.,,whih he. thoughit h t Ki adopteda ithotoccasioningany diminution in the revenue.He bed lltie -dutthat if'the right bon.gei5t.would cease t allo*tlie discount4hich -wA now granted upon stamps for Probites and,-silministrations xsbpve 10L0, he miFht coyer the de- fidiener; which wold be traed by zemittig the duties on proerto under lQOI;' TheA dscotit dloI upon Sthe stamp, to which -he haid allided wat''ruch -too great: he had in'his hands set veral proctor'ss bills, lioi whichh it' appeaied that sums'*f .90L. were.sometinies llowed as-discount upon probate stamps. Whilst le was upon this subject, he could not help call- ipg tbe right hon. gentleman's attention to..- huadsbipwhichhi thoghtOutto iseledas peelil aspossible. If a maii died,. leavinag poperttto thoe aniount o?0l,#)0.7 and debts so the amonne ofSf501., hissaxecutora were oblsgrdZlo pay' the rtamip duty, not upon the 501; of wrhich he was iesll~y iossosed, but upon thc 1,0001.; whicha in his custody at the tne Of his decease. It was true that under such circumsutances this.duty w as afterwards returned, If ap. plication were m de for it to the proper quartcr; but hf e understood that the application was seldom made, in consequence of trouble with which it was attended. After some further remnerl;s on the grievances to which the poorer classes were subjcted by the enaction of legacyduties,theh oourablernemberconcluded by moving "That there be Latd on the table of te:ho usea return of the tota revenue received oa stamp duties of probates, administrations, and tetsa. mnentarv indentures,- of pronertt under 100l., for the year eliding Jan. 5,1824, distingutshlmg-the anount received in England, Scot. land and lIreland." The CHANCELLfOt of the EZCHEQUI:R had not any ob- jection to the modon. As to thp other points to which the honour- able member for Aberdeen had" alluded int hIs spoeech, he did not know that he could give him any answer, or at least any answer that the honousable gentleman would' consider satis- factory. He had lately looked with some attention at the ,subject of stamps, and particularly at thatpart of it which involved the legacy duties. He htd not, 'however, been yet able to sadsf'y himself as to what he codld and ought to do by wiy of relief. He admitted that the tnttcri to which the hon, menmber bad alluded deserved his (the Chancellor of the Exchequer's) most serious atten- tion; but in saying so, he bheged not to be understood as holding out any expectations either one way or the other. After the state- ment-which he had recently mnadeto thehouse respecting the finances of the country, it could not be expected that he should willingly con- sent to any material diminutionoftherevenue; at the same time it was no less his wish than hisduty to give the community every re- lief in his power upon those minor matters which, without dimi- nishing the revenue, were likelv to render the raising of it less se- vere]y feltby the ublic. Lord BINNING called the attenion of the house to one point which thehon. member for Aberdeen seeined not to have noticed- hemeant the propriety of imposing the legacy duty upon charitable donations post Tfencmt. Ir. LOCKHART complined of the expense to which the friends of persons dying with bona 7otabQia in the orovince of Can- terbury were unnecessarily put They were either bbliged to come I up to l ondon to take out a probate, or else were obliged to thke a commission in the country, both ofwhich measures were attended with considerable expense. Todiminish this expense as much as possible, he sugges? that the Archbishop of Canterbury should ap- point commissioners to issue these tommissions in the chief town of every county in England, Dr. HUIE observed, that his intention was, at an early Dperiod, to move for a copy of the fees pxyable on'the procuration of probates, &e- andL the authority under which they were demanded. W he motion was then agreed'to. Mlr. HUDME postponed, sine die, his motion for the productioa of a correspondence rei4ve to slate-quarries in Wales. BUR.LS IN IRELAND BILL. Mr. PEEL moved the third reading of the above bill. -Mr. HUMIB said, he had received a communication, caUing on I Lim to request the postponement of this measure iuntil its contents l were knowin in lrelandAJni af&wdays hddelapsedsinceitwasbrought snto the house and it had since been hurriedlorward,belbre itsobject as known to dite peopleof Ireland. Under thesecircuimstances he'ask. id whether it would ant be better to postpone the third reazing for I right or ten days, till the opinion of the people of Ireland respecting i te was ascertained.' M Mr. PEL said, as it was a. subject which had already created nuch angry dlspute, and, if not settled, was calculated to produce much more, he deemed it aivisable to proceed with the bill. 4tinre.. sent, one party in Ireland alleed, thatanother was doing that whicb vas contrary to law, and as this bil would prevent all further doubt E in the subject, it was proper to avoid unnecessary delay I The bill was then read a third time, and ded l COALS DUTIES ATTS. Sir A1.W.RIDLEY begged leave, beforehemoved.thatthehouse rsolveitselfinto acommittecon thecoalsdutiesact,topresentapetition I rom the coal.owners oftheNorthof England,prayingthatan equal I neasure of taxatiori should be dealt out to them, and to those per- i ens coonected with inland col.works.-The petition was laid on the | able. The hon. Bart. then moved the order of the day, for the house I esolving itself into a comnittee of the whole house, to consider of he coals acts. In the comittec, the honourable baronet observed, hat the petition which he had just presented from the coal-owners if the North, ebraced the. priciple which he felt it his duty to| he comnittee, for asbori t time, while helaid dswn the grounmls on 1 vhich the yroposition he intended to conclude with was foubd. I d. His object was that the alterations proposed to be I nade by the Chancellor of the Exchequer in the coal dutiesI hould be re.considered, before they were ultimately carried nto effect. Those alterations would, he was convinced, consi- lerably injure the coal-trade of London, if not of the country at arge, and wereI as it apppeared to him, founded on an absurd Ld unjustprincipleoftaxattion. He was sure that no one whol ieard the right hon. gentleman, when he detailed to the house the i inancial gitUatio o7f the country, or who had Tead the speech l vhich he miAde on that occasion, could feel other sensstions than v hsse of pleasure, at the recognition of the priniples of free trade By which that speech was distingdished-principlea which were I hen generally approved of and asserlted: but in proportion I Ps he fet plessed at that exposition, did he afterwaxds 4 'eel dissatisfied, when he found thlAt the right honourable gentle- nan had so soon forgotten *the principles of equal taxation, md adopted a paitial and unfair system of taxation with I espect to two commodities of the same kind. When the right hon. Cent., at the period to which helai already alluded,expressed his in- ention of malcingan alteration iii the duty on rum, he observed, that ' he meant to propose such areduction of the permanent duty on 'Un as as would rlieve it fromn cne peculiar difficulty under which it low laboured. No one would thinkz it right or possible to reduce the luty lower tban levy wit' the duty pa idupon British spirits. There- iore he meant to take off at first ts. I d. a gallon duty upon rum, which would make the dutyg Drthat artide anI British spirits nomi. ially the same." Here was a principle of fair and just taxation laid lown in one instance; and he could not conceive why, in legislating in another, beatadtiought fit to deviate from that princple. Why, ipstead ofpursir-ngthis sgstemof equality, he had chosen to exempt rom ntaxatton' eAiecies pf soal, while he placed a harsb and un- iust hnpott oh sindthbv, -hecould not conceive. It was his duty to legilate for thegeneraslinterest. The agricultural interestand the dis- tilling- interest werc affected by the alteration in the duty on rum. The right hon. gentleran on this point observed, that "he knew that there were difrences in the mode of levying the two duties, which would prevent the proposed reduction from bringing the com- modities precisely to the same point ; but those who were affected, as to property in the question, would recollect that the British spirits werehrble to the duty on malt; and, taking all the circtm- stances into consideration, the two interests he thought, would ap- pear to be very equitably balanced. He did not know wbat effect tne measure might have upon the dealing in rum, but ke believed that it was sound in priniple; and his object should always be to abide by a sound princple,-even although it did not, at first sight, promise the most of practcal convenience and benefit." Now, if the principle were sound and good one, he should be glad to know why the right hon. gent. had in another case acted on a very differ- ent prindipe ? He should be glad to know why one body of per- sons dealing in a necesiry f life, should be favoured nore tban anotheroccupied in the self-swne trade? Was it for the benefit of the'constimer? Ifitvas, the righthon. gent. must carry theprin- ciple farther. lie ,r1iust repeT, at once, if it were possible, the entire duty ODs cesls ..Theceoaunmer would then indeed be consider- ably benefited, and no perty would have, just cease for coin- plaipt. Let the right -hongurable gentleman, in legislating on this question, not confind himself to one party. Let him considernot only thesituationofthe inland coal trade, but thestate, Iaso of th'e eal trade in the north. It must be known to'all,that the iorte'rn'owers had coals of various descriptions, niany of them of an inferior quLity, and which fetched an inferior price-just as was the case of inlan co3ls--but they paid on those inferior coals pre- cisely the same duty as was levied on the best that came to market. Now, if- the right bon. gentleman meant to bring into cdnipetition with a good atticle a commodity of inferior quality, there certainly ought to be an equal Portion of tax taken off, so as to reduce the two articles to soething like a level. The right hohourable gen- tleman had ebserved that the interests which had grown up uti- der the existing cpal system were such as to prevent him from PrOWsing a planr by which, on this point. an act of gene- ralreleft an ofst?etjustice to the. whiole icountry, might bel effrcted. Hie had, hoeveri, yet to learn what those interests were.. Tfhe general interesteof the public surely were not to be sacrificed to any pariulcar vinterest; 5nd,when bespoke of patticular inter- ets, lie insist have recoplected that they had only sprung up un- der the present duties. ir the eourseof'a century. Themubject of the introduction of inlind cools liad always attracted- the attention of the nortbern 6oal-owteea; aid' they bad constntlY resisted any zttempt to bring those coaU ipto6thc xdar)et, b the, operation of iny uiasiiie that would act's ai-protecting duty. To prove that Goveimmneht hal always vewed .v4th a favursable eye the coal co"sting" trade," the . hbn. baignet- read in extrict fromi the letter of a gentfnaii inti-isitly acquiinted Yith'the subject, in which, and after aeveral prefatory pbservations,' he declared giat 'f tie deal owners had be:n tlftghl4 that Government would never cease to pratect the, goastin iradt. 2 Be-also cited a lelter from Air. W%4fl tp bte secretary of the coal tradc, in which that gen tleman s -'ts4d th4t Atathinp should be apoited, and daties, equal to. ihe conting.daties, ],eici 0 inlant. coal. hiiadcirly showed the existence o0f feeling on the pVt of the Government that the northern owners ivee ikUy to be inured by,tbe introdtietton of inl landcoals,except unde-'cernrtegixlitions. .Tlie rghj bop. gentle, nian-hd-poklen of the rseless- unmeaning, And preposter,ousre- stfiction onlthe hnportation of Wnlind'coal, vwhich oper.ted 4 a pro hiitison. e geed ith tle righthon.gentlIniat, thit .t 1iA operate ," prohbiciti6n, adld it .niight, he conceived, be remwed at the prsnt ,pownint ans equivalent relief being grnted tothe northern owners, 3[n 1805, as a psotection to the stO-bore- coal, it was found necessarytocharge u duty of.lO. 2d. a ton on cols of a dertain qu4lity, broughtby the anal, .which wasaequalto the duty. of 9s. 4d. achaldron paid ..n seabornec cals, On that occasion. a mnuute was, writtetiby a 4Oht 4o eislcmin then a the Treasury, .the reolltrctionof ~ec,hwoul,,d.perlps, induce him tole3 d the nor- thern o*ners altsnd,'iasteidot ovetturiug..tbat which he,hadhi m. self assisted to buildt. T Iniht minu'te, dated the&th of Aptil, 805, theright bozourable ithtleman observed, " That the.sale of co4s brou3lt DJlci? untinCu nu.rfBccstjet *4.jalOUsY of those wlObiot5ltS4r b *gil-gM ~ srse~ his eassideu hop, th. sh o~~ ntli. huerl " toi itei"'ftwith so~Tabea -wHe-h*' certan lanoire whic alor&,misathive -bad the erect of ovinmr,p5 ey uiOfkiour able to a high1y-respictable. clavo Ie., fie_~ijidrliit; however, bring himself to believe-thit sukl Wau the intention of the tnghtlion. gentleiman. The rlkhtlibr.-gentlemln, lad-declared-tbat hi~ woUdderemit 3s. 4d. pr chaldron on coals brought -to the Londoni market. Now, befove:lso proceeded farther hi might' be allowed to i*,tat eliate himselfhiumiibbjciWoh whatsoever to ihis reductioo)of duty.' On;theeojilteaay)Ie4wshidtbedthratoreahould be taken off g- peoDple of London. , s~? seriesWd1uiirja p*ea mfeitirctnihanig,,bank1f ibdl tradersof. ihe ity f odn who *eyeLdesirocus that hOieiZl - 4A$htiold be =e.ae,'og hepr po$e of: iiurovi the rh NIis.Teegthn eeeLnb takiOs.U45. roo the dut y oiaabeaeb1 n b nke rd0cb largear Ce6ditction in the duttypy eoniln al ddin fact, introduce a systeffi of njust easi ultaxatin eas he treatecl with marked diffirncre the'same cothimoditycongfm dsfferenvt,art-,of the same coumtry~; Thesight ho.geteaha coflenvstated, that "this would pitt an end t h oe'hc persorns connected with this trade now pmsessed., i commo ihl monopolists._.,sbat of raiing'the. price Of coals boyond their value by seinting the supply-..thus ittending to their own interest, instead of the.wantsoy the consumners." Ths.wasapoisntrespcigteo. "tde, which appeared to be understod Itwasi,httee Was a regulation amongst the coal.owestlmttequttyo coals sent to L-ondon. Now he beggede .6e~ o h.omm. tee, and he would, if necessary, proe th ata h ar of -the haut, tat herewasno egultio beweenthecoa-Owners, Allth rgultinsthy eteEdint hd orther bjctto make plie by Shildsand ewcstlewer taen fromn 58 colire te property o 50prritr.Tygaeepymn,fo,nJri. merit, to nolesta10,0peon.Te rephitdbyee duties from carrying ol notefrinmre.Acnieal quantity of coals wa rmtevynaueotetad,null wasted. If they conidinrdcsmlcositoheodo mar- ket (and they w~ould anwer every bitaswlaslre,iwod be a very great advantg to theta; but whl h agecaa o en- tirely preferred in Lodon. small coal cudntb ruh n and they were not allowed to export it. Th onyrglto hch the owners had with respect to the liondomaktws that the quantity assignable to the metropolis shiou ei eti propr tions, And at certain times; but nothing wasee xse to limit the qantit whih it ightbe found expedcttosn t h on- ion market. The coal-owers were a littletofr north to be so blid t teirintret.- Those who were acquainted with the col- liery usines psustknow,that the expeinse of the owner mnusti in many respects, be tes same whetber the quantity of coal he raised ,was great or small. Thereibre it-Vasclear, that the more he shipped- n London, the greater must be hi, profit. TPo-prove that the sup.. ply. ofecoals for the London market was not so limaited as to mhnasce the price, eyen supposing, for argumaent'a sake, that uch a regulation exristed as that 'which -had been alluded to, le would call the attention of the lhouse to a document which he I eid in his hand. For mnany yeats the price charged by, the coal- wners was. not raised. . At lengtea rise of from 2s. to 4s. toDk iLnce. But it must be observed, fat the charge which was made in lie London imarket depended on the coil dlutiev, over which the' :oa ower ha noortro.. e eldinhis hand an accunit of the lumer f sipsat arkt fr eerydaydurinig the year 1823, and appare frm tat ocuenttha thre erebutfive days in the rhol yer wen he ntir suplyof oal inthe market was irouht u. Tere ere on he irstdayof echnonth, the fol.. Ships. Ships. January . . 250 July . 2 February , . 104 August - . 126 March . . 250 September . . 156 A il ~~126 October.9 June . 44 December . 569 EIere it appeared thAt there was, in some instances, a sup.- uly of 250 ships unsold in the mWarket. The legislature had bought,proper, for the asecurity of the consumer, to appoint certain iflicerst d7euomimated meters, whose duty it was to see that the coals ,Pere properlv delivered ; ut it very often happened, that for want if meters the ships could not deliver their cargoes. To prove this I1ct, the hon. hart, read an aecount, from which it appeared, that at [ifferent periods in the ~year 1823 there were from 10 to 265 shipsI vaiting for, meters. Having statecl thus much in defence of thte n?al-owners, he shiould mierely state that the object which he had in 'iew, in the resolutions which he was about to propose, was to put he two trades on an equality, as lie supposed the right hon. gent. hadI ntended. He-wished to leave untoucheda wholesomneand just pririci ile, that of equatlity of taxation, so far ais regarded two dealers in the amie commodity. The hon. bart. conel%ded by reading the resolu. ions:-" 1st, That the presentduties on coals, culm, and cinders, arriedl coastwise, or by inland nayigation, from any port or place, toI ;ny place in thie county of MViddlesex or Hlertford, sliall cease andI leterraine, and that the followinq duties shall be bereafter paid hereon, viz.--on coals culm, and cinders, in case such are usually old by we!ght, 4s. fid. per chaldron; and in case such coals, ulm, and cinders, arecusually sold by measiure, 6s. per ton. That 1I coals, culm, and 'cinders, navigated by the Grand Junction or !z:ddington Canal, coming near the stone, or post, at Grove-bank; 'r if by the Thiames, coming up to the City-stone, shall pay, if Lsually sold by weight, 3t per chadron ; end if by measure, 4s. d. per toni: second, that, -next year, a further reduction of duty to he amount of 2s. shall tak-e place, and third, that it is expedieq bat the said duties be' totally but gradually, repealed. The first iesolution h&v'-in -Len moved, Mfr. LITRTETON said~, if he thought that any benefit could1 ossibly arise from the hon. baronet's recommendation, he would I aethe verylInst man to Object to it,When the dutycon coals carried orsie y6ysfhi~dzver~g a\ahvanfag&civert2sogC*lzis hwere carIco y land;sandit should be observed, that at that Period the conveyance y canal was extremely lmited. Trhe sea was an open navigation; afforded advantagas notpossessed by any other mode of conveyance, nd therefore duties were imposed on that species of ca-n~e -In 805, when the Grand Junction Canal was finished, it wasldeemed 'rpr to place a heavy duty on coals carried through that channel. [Mls e lsoked uipon as a ggeat injustice. If it were intended to ,lace a taX On inland coals, why was it confined to only p art of the sln rd~whilst every other portion of it was snffered to remnain riadtraded ~ hr ere h;undreds of p laces where inland coal camae in ompetition with the sea-horne coal. Here only it was excluded.- f th eright honourable gentleman did not repeal the tax in this so- itary instance, the Owners of inland coal had a much greater rig'ht o comiplain of injustice than the northern coal-owners. This tax n inland coal was impoedlin 1805. At that period the Grand function Company had nearly comnpltdheruetaig Te torthern coal-owners, afraid that inland coal would he brought to . heir market by that canal, represented that a clause which re..I reni-ed the siniportation of such coal, should be introduce, under the risak of protecting the revenue. Those gentlenmen. not content with ireventing inland coal fromi comning into the Ljondon market, as the ea-coal did, induced the insertion of a provisioin in the bill, which ,ave to their coals a monopoly, not merely of the London market, iut of the country for seventeen mniles round it. 'The ho- ioniable baronet liad neglected to state 'the price of' each sort )f coals. 'No doubt, he depended on the principle (hear, hear); 3ut thescale of price was necessary for the elucidation of the ques- ion. His (AIr. Littleton's) object was to shoW the house the cost fa certain quantity of inland coals at Paddington, the cost of a cer, aim quantity of sea-borne coal in the pool, and then to prove that lie freight, charges, and King's duty, were far heavier on the inland than on the sea-borne coal. The freight and other small charges on Stewart or Wall's-end coals as compa-red with the prime cost, was is 11 to 17 ; and on -StafflorMsire coals, as 294 to 18. The amoaint )MfKing's duty andl other ttrlling charges oil Nfewcatle coals, was as 13 to 17 ; on inland coals, including the London duty, it was as 19 to 18.. So that on both thes heads, of charges, as compajed with the primie cost, the inlandI coals were taxed infinitely more :han the sea coals. The chiarge for tonnage on the inland zoals was also worthy of notice. On a quantity of coals, whicht zot 181., the tonnage charge would be 301. or 311., being 163 per ccrit, ois the prime cost of the article. NO person teed be surprived at the smnall quantity of inland coal intro. luced to the London mark-et from the Yea 1807 to the year 1815. During that period, only 50,000 tons- were navigatted be- yond the stone in L-ord' Clarendou's Parkc. in 1814, 181,5,. ind 1816, there were 4,359 tons of inland cokl brought to the London market, In 182-1, 1,3510 tons ; in 1922, 912 tOns ; in 1823, 156 tons. Some apprehiensions were entertained that the facilities effordeelby the GIranid Junction Canlal would operate most prejudi. cially against the northern coal-owners, by admlitting the iinporta, ion Ofaae I uantity of inIapd coal to the London market: .blat Li woldeakwhethri,on the contmrar, thatworkbhad not been sore advantageous to them thaxt tanyotlier-body of rten? Theyvhad' eLn opuortunitg of sendinw their coa lafruumAh-ThamelAiO,the-tate.. rior bj that channel, instead Of being -compelled to use wag~on. carriage, which was far more expensive? They had 5hus ani exclu- sive monopoly through a countr extending from 25 to 30 miles. The hon. baronet's constituents sOd therefore, usit rmuch better situa- tion than hi s (M1r. Litttleton,is) did. It oughC not to be biverloo~e4 that the northern coal-owners'had and probably alwayi wolid have, an unvarying demand 'for &icr coals fer domestic pur- poses--a mnatter of no amsino importanr. Th oloprietr of' the north~ even undpr the ehicunistances of whic te complarined, would' have an overpowering Advantag over thie inland proprietors, anti one Whi0ii the latter would never, pro- baily;be able to strmnount. With the duty reduced, asit wasto be, or even reduced still farther, the inland coals coud never cme in any great quantity into the market of -London ; nor did the inlandt, rie,tors main thait, in the long riAm, they could resist the gpa. redction of the duty oni coals from the north. He (Mir. Lit- tieton),for himself, spokewitbout the smafllest personal interest; and so far wras differently circmsatanced from bon. mnembers on the other' side, who would be likely to addres the committee upon the iub- ject. He should certainly sit down by opposing the PTOPOsitiOnt of the lion. hart. (Sir -L W. Ridley) The CHlIANCELJLOR of the JiECHEQUER -felt himself bound, in justice to the hon. baronet opposite; and his friends, ti say a few words in explanation of the remark attributed tp him on a lbrmer evening. The words qiotvd aaainst him, as to "- ion14 poly, weiec6rrect, but the pnrit of them had been a littlCinmi. ta4een. They had been used, he believed, with referehpce to wS6e part dfs petition, complaining of combination, presented by one of ibe hon. members fok the city of London_certainly, without any intention of casdinga slurupon individqls. 3ec4se,- in fact, ifthe. legis]ature had given the nerthern coha-owners a practtial monopoly no one couldhiaxb e terem for availing ihemnelves of it: all he said as- this&_that if tlie hbad by law the practical power of a mono, poly might it not be fit to alter the state of the. law, .Whether they: acttally made nusa of that vower or not? Witb respect o the redtuctio'n which he lcad proposecl in t$e duty ppn inland coal, he was deirosu, in fact, only to- rectify a kind of misst;Ue tbat bad beeP committed. The existuag law resticted the importation. of inland coal into London to annutlly 50,00 tons. It appeared, therefore, that the law thdqtrht that, with safety to the northern inferests, 50,000 tons ghi actually be admJitted t but the dutfwhich this coal paid prevea450,00D tons .of a tnth, part of 50,i00 tont, from beinrisents Fo thht;in fict it-i'sde the feeolution as to thc quantity Vkich bmiglit tome altogetier nugatoij, id im.. ppsed aliardslip which, it'*U evident the legilatre had iot in. teaded. The honourable baronet'(Sir i?I.-W. Ridiey) said that the reason the inlandwol could- not beir:a high duty ;ass, its infeaor htlys andthxtbif thedutyowan to be lowered upon.it therefore. it nthe inferiorsea- coal: wii6hi pidte It sarne ducs at present as the deareste?t at masket. Bisetherewvere reasons, independent of;its quality why the inland coil couald.not beasr highduty-.tbe he.avy tonnage *hich it. p aid, for initance, to- th canal- coppamiies~ charg aros rwhh tpe sPrthrn qoal was -SLcO fi trab of ee city ttgulations. WRQ?'T~L~Y wa sosyyto see at oppositi on W th-O~er~eeU~ o ~ ~el~~~'j ~in fAv'our of the inleto- coal, because mot p~rsons Intereted intat pro_ anchte Atpruesenty to e hiueolseteetedtOih cmoale. to faiprlyimittd-forsuheaqatt seujo.l2 veWsrY uightofth forl cralndseraic purposes.turely, wof ter come anyoh Lkeiood on rkt co builito wasfaig to he cal owilers ot'sth 'enrthfo the 3die ay tzeoef rth wacogiveeery fhaciity tohCuidnlanet colOwners,Ptamong Idiu fomtemodngofhwrein Amesle coinbujator tI Safli 6rdshbe. fproly aiettr ede zfi.rUe beinpreved sch oll hec ELorher Owtrwoutelad oal, neran cicm tances woul pmeetothe tafordonmrket bet ite poasfir onth of'owde, -bs w el afoteaargethe he1.~ ionteier, thn-atkits.ol' av powr, pt eranpit G AT OTof cmdingat tere AothPresnt ochownvr,. ksaled no advantep Over the inlsad proprietors,- exce t the advan. 1_ewhch'theyJ ad receivea from nature They hay the best o ici tosel, ad tle he%est'i~sll1herequired _ 0onewih ,Theyrasked for tigduties to beimposed upon hthers, hey only wished to be relieved from unreasnable duties whichi "ere imposed upon themselves . Now honoramble gentlemen take& )f he antiquity Of those duties--.why certainy, they had lasteda treat deal too lOng: but woald any one evenaergu'ethat the~.haa eer 3een imposed upon anY thing like a principle ot' trade, or wihK eany- Ather view thani that Ofextracting revenue fromna commodity Which ff5s supposed to be well caculated to afford it ? WVas the house aware. .hat the averae p ice of oasls was 13s. a chaldton at Newcastle~ iloie were ashgha 16s., btst somo were low,- so thait 13s. was a ugh average ;and tat these coals paid a dluty of more than 1s. ld- schadro? Herepate, that the sea-coals wanted no advantage or- )roect00 thy olywanted to be left to themselves. fie dei4 so imiaton s tthquanti' of Staffordshire coal broughtto1r Ion et he rstrctio betaken oflf:, but then, if the sea-coal couldi io lue r hantheinlndcoal to Berkshire or Oxfordshire, why so. nuc t~beter or he oDnsmler, and the inland coal owner ought 2ot to corntlain And he said More--let the duties which now )ressrd untairlY UPon the northern proprietors be taken off; and -hey would realize the apprehension of the inland owners-.they wouild supply those iacm. WEear, hear- and laughter.) The pro- )osition that the inland coal was entitledto pay a less 'duty in Len.. ton thar the mea ooal, because it camWe to town boy a meore chargeable .oad, and there were more ex peases in bringing it, was one of the nost extraordinary to which he tMr. Stuart WVort.ley) had rver listened. 'Upop exactly the sam prnipe a a itb aid upon Kent or Essex wheat, to bat'ance the additiOna costs whichs attended wheat coming from Yorkshire. This certainy was Ihlittlc pposed to the doctrines of free trade ; but if the course was. oDbe Uk'rl w,ith regard to one artidle, he ho taitwuld be aken with respect to another; and that the Esex wheat would be ,harged with a duty- for the benefit of Yorkeshire. But in fact, he mew What had led the Chancellor of the Exchequer to t6 in easure- n favour of the inland coa Owners; the right honourrble gentleman, iad been misled bya cry of monopoly in the north, where thev iropreitors certainly had a monopoly, for they had an atticle. e7hich could never b;e driven out of the market. ft could not be sut. )osed that the cool proprietors of the north were afraid of the right ion Chncelorof he xchquer's measure at preuet; but th'y vere afracid, and fairly so, of the prinaciple on whic's it proceeded.. rhe measure, at this mloment, coul do thse sea-coal ownera nD hurt; )ut circumstances might arise under whichi it would do them hurL Lt prcsent take the proposed duty off, and the inland.coals wouldL ,ot come; but the duty was taken off to cover the greater expense o the inland coal, of carriage. Suppose a war, or the - rumioutr war, whicb doubled the freight and insuirance of the sea-coal, and a what situation would those who dealt in it stand then ? The horn. nemnber thena conmrented upon the usefulness, at lease, of protecting he stea-coal trade, on accont of the nursery which it formed for 'Cr seamen. Mr. W. COTJRTENAY wished that a tax so full of extreme! iardulup and simpolicy, raised upon one of the essential artic-les of' ife, could be entirely dlone off'. He eZ(patiated upon the bcenefxts rhich a total repeal of it would convey to the western counlies, vhecre all enterprisec in manufacture was3 chec'ked at present by the veight ol these unequal duties. He could not determnine w,hether or lot he lanof rducionproposed byI his right hon. friend was the iee whch oud pssilybe adopted with a view to a gradual and Colonl WOO saidthat the arimn a LAIICWImarur. .1ne aeewas,-enrz cr u,t o,i rei u hing,be ny sch uestion; there was no competition, there could be ion, btwen he woclasses of coals, so gret were the natural advan- ages o one ide s piroofs of the truth of this assertion, the conm. nitehd only to take notice as to what was the effbet of the, cons- otiio aIight as it was, which ahlradY existed. -The northeret nal wilc came into the ports of London asicended the Tbames, harged wiith all these extraordinary anti unequal duities, ashigh he stone at Statues ~ they went ort to Windsor, and'even ta fr a l!eading where they met the inland coals~, charged with ua, duty hategr'. Now let the committee observe the result of [hWs con.. lict~ The inland coeals could not keep the mnarkets into which the iorthern coala entered, eharged wvith tbie\ heavy duties, and the .xtraordinary expenise of freight incurred in asceniding the rhamet"; but they were pushed back into their own domicile, vbere alone they could gt endkee ai;y steadyrate of consumption. Chi bhon.. memnber for %Exeter sp-oke very feelingly in f4vousrof a tood fire, which was doubtless a very comfortable thing: but was iot plenty of light alsot a rery comfortable thing ? Foi his part, if Iw7er, a matter of choice with him-fire or light-he could not he. sitate a mnoment in preferring light to fire. He would, therefore, prefer the repeal of thL window-tax, to the repeal of the coal-auties. it was difficult to manage questions of this lund with the Chancel- lor of the Exchequer. fie well recollectedl the hon. member 'Ir Surrey saying,, on a former occasion, with respct to the coal- juties, that hebadasubstituteto propose in his pocket, buthewoulcl not take it outt, for fea that the Clhancellorof the Exchequer should Rot only retain the tax, but add the substitute to it. In all proba- bility that substitute was aL duty at the pites fnouth; and if so, he advisedeai aides to join in expressing their content at the remiission Df. aRny PArt of the duty: for, assuredly, nothing could- be so de- trimental to the interests of coal-owners,, whether in Staffordshire or Northeoalberland, thau the duty at. the pit's mnouth. Therefore. though he would have preferred the repeal of some tax of more ge; aiera and impartial operation, the abolition of which Would hv been more consonant with the principles of free trade, hae advised the romrmittee to rest contenteat rathier than put the question in danger by pritssldg his r ht lion- friend too far, or ITOU wouldi have given the preference to'the repea o eith4rlths window or malit duty. He could not complimient either the juAtice tir policy of this repeal. It had appeared to him to be as objectionable to proceed byr favour in the repeal of taxes as in their imnpbitioa. The ri1ght hoa. gent, seemed in this afahir to have acted asif ihe .da surplus revenue of 100,O0OLwithwhich he actuallydid, not know'irhat to do. It as Very true - that this was- rgnlya very unequal tax b ut how long had it continued ? omreta 10vuyear$.' Lethbins add thatcapitalhad accmmodated itself in the mneantimte t,othe tax, and that capital would produce as muchi in the w,estern coupties as it would in the northern at this or anY ot l4 time. If the Cluanc~Olor pf the Exkchequer was able to remit oi*1 of the puiblictax-tes, Loodon and its neighbourhood tcol;~ihave MO morenrght to the repealthsinsthe rest tconry s:i tebo n teaded fw the wesnteDncunties in -remitting the jt; ofyn swa-borne coaL be jitist 1loolCat it w-ith suspicion:i watinte~e as a trap to c. tch'the *orchy gcfitleimen who were con ected with those counties A4kV' t1hiW~ai ba- ~ aho ,_undoirbtcA4lr it imust be z-degi abl~ thing- for~ rignht hionouroble gentleman.' For thoughi those coun.. ties were. not TZging witht coals and iron, they were abundantly flowing wit1h members of Parliament. The-population of Cornwall which was little. more thpu 200,000, returned more members -than YorLkiL IUcAster, with as many-minllons of -people. But why ahud h ouse -proceed in the repeal of taxes by~praeiofat. tude and lqnnstude, instead of the great principles o justice,policy, and reetrae? Terewermanyerygrivous taxes of general and Imprtalop~atonwhih adbee lrdon the last 0years; let them be irs reeaed,sai le nt te tghtho. gent. persist, contrary et6 tha prperpricipe o reg~lin rstof all remnitting a tax, the aboitin o whch as ssuedl inened for the relief of the di- rec pyer, nd asi~o a aUcaculse 'for tho ger".R benefit of~ commerc-e, - Ail~r. N. CALVERT obnjected.- to the strange prokosition of the noble lord -tha4ltuaue ataxof- moat nnjust inipoustion hadleonti- isaed fbr 'A6ng time, it was riot, tlerefore,a lessproper subject for repeal. 'pecr the r ~ ftecoad duties to that of th~%~ mainirng. wiridow- tax, whi.eh was paid chiefly by the lich;an hoped to ate thAe coal duticasentirely done away.- Irlr..TREMAYNE su Pported the resolutions. Sir T. Ii~ BltIVG pressed for the repeal of'theManlt or window tuin pefrenicato the-duty on coals.. - .f49 L14$TOconfessed that he Wada deeper inte're'st in the qetotlsn.& vo the hon. gentlemtnwvho- had preceded him Wa jJhe.'dU-is!swion e ommittee would theifi-ef6eexcuseilimifh i 14: addeda lww~st the statementt. 'which hod ahybaeci;q made. HUe i4ul) ofiliiinsseglf entirely'to a,refutation, by i'ats, if the charges aadiagalswiit bimsarid the-othair fnortherfi-pri6prietors of coals by the Chancellort of the-Exchequer, 'which kad been rtpeated since by an bon. baronet near him.: In the first place, he positivelv- deniefl tiat-there 'was any combination in tht north to)-limit the u. ply of.coillsin.the-Londlon market. -Thesol0efl'ect6f-any regula. tions adopte by the owners of the collieries,was -tbatof iniundng a. regiTr:and, conistant supply - oDf- the article to-7ine.London market: itt all Aesispiti of the year. Another fact whticb. he 'would aver was, that- - at every- market-day in Lotdbii, there were- more ships offered than wire purchased. As. ito mronopoly, there w.s none..4hey neverwantted axty-teyneverasktedforits the existenceof iX*#A.as-odioutotbetm asitt.o)ltiabe t6my: entlmn in the houme - The dutieshbad not been imoed'fer tttu'advintiig but to-befi~fit- tse Government. - - The Go6vernmen't a w perftictly. welcome to abolish an I ooyhi&hh uilt-be supposed o-exist. All bet-ic nd lla f1~o prorietrs skeeas-tcosietlti vth Stafor, arwck. o Wesh oas, sea~ lea-at~a~djlr ify ket,if he Gvermen sholdsill eessiiprohibi6t-injthfrtiin,. taklgthir srpls prduc to orcg~ psit.jzmAVrset a quantity,. of *ab e tal, tQ on e.ouirth .mo dcisupply o9. tbI .I O;dtQn DIa. t-A that^Eis O O g l9s^sr4 0 tasdon,were Ie~tsin Xiejiottth,, iind,rotted lttt encrth ecatse they wrere not of a qjtlitv KsEc!ently.good.t6 btarthf highdf. dlis of coals bomne c6isrt;ier vihile the d'itttes oa .ex'. 1,ti- g ther; abtrad were fully e9ual to 4 prohbistion- If t4'e o. vfienet would do away this gneyance& thiere tmigsft l)&-110200 tonrage of ebippcum with an adequate number rf seanoen, cor4tnu- al,emplOyed on th s newbranch of comtnerce. : ir T. ACLAND and i;tr. NEWMAN supported the plan oF the Chincedlor of the Exchequer, hoping that it would lead to the entire rep of the coal duties. Ant JINEV said there were tw Yoints to which Ie. hoed.the 1tit-tion E'theright hon.gentleman -would be directed,. 'he-first a3threlfiaportanec of thepoal,tradeds a nurser y.or sea n, en,aur3 one Of the chief tources of. the strength et.th, British navy., Tbhdtherwas. the advantages exnerieneed b'thc 'rs ot Londou. f*omi thelqyantTty of baUast whic6 was takecihom .the& bed of .the 4cr fhrtn cise of the colliers-on their honicward..voyas. H ta d: thIrat care would be .takWrl that notMiigjnc'tft.- opsration Of.rbe poposed resolutiond sbould affect either of thisi import3n SIJNER.tbought the coal td? hada ft`'eieNlefad trusted that the Chancellor of hde iPxcbiqiiouettld,. whenever theopportunity should occur, extend it-as far as posible bevotd Whata now ed. r'. Alaertman IIRWGES said the hon. baronet, (Sir T..Ieth- brde) had beenmistakn in Kupposing that tbe.posedteductien *.tedtir ;as considered by then cty ht Lou on -asiatri ng mitter. The reason which had induced them. td wisj, tbat some Part'of the London port duty 'should lbe retained,'a-rSs6lfiorn their ilsh to etbellish and improve thdcity by widening. streets and tusth2g trners, to which puposes the sums raised by Those duties wte applied. Allderman WO?OD begged it might be understoaod tbat the re. dltction Inthe duty was an advantage to the public, and not con- finetd,as had been stated by the hon. -member for Somerset3hire, to tbe coal OnDers. It had alreadv had an effect on the bargains, and, there cotld be no doubt the, public would be benefited ;o the whole arteOt t of the 3s. 4d. Sir M. W. RIDLEY replied, and recapitulated the thrcepoints of the resommtions wbich he proposed to move. Ifte? a 'few words from Lord MI LTON, strastgers were ordered to w-thdraw. The house then divided, and the tbree motions were IegPtived. We understood the numbers tbe, on the first motion- Ayes, M1 I Noes, 83 1 Mlajority against the-motion, 32. Or the second, Ayes, 54 Noes,80 I MLajorityag2instthe motion, 26 On the third, Ayes, o Noes. 731 Majority against the motion, 13. GAMIE LAWS.. On btr return to the gallervy, the order ofthe day for the recom. mnlttal'otthe game laws amgndment bill was read. Thahouse hav. ing resoljed itself into a committee, ir. S. WORTLEY moved the clause, reserving to certain per. sons the--ight of sporting over ]and demiseil. SirJ. WROTTESLEY obiectedto the retrospective operation of the tt patdaewhich encte, -Thai wbere in any eXlstink denmise, the ownrs have not recerved the right of entering u,oon pbe land so demised for the purpose of sporting, every such de- rnise shall be construed to have reserved to the owners such rigit, &" tlehad rio objection to the principle being applied in future, aid for this purpose he moved as an amendment that the clause should stand "c Where, in anyfuture demise, the owner siuall not have res-erved &c." 1~r. S. W6RTLEY was willing to give- up the wbole of that TJof thc clause which contained the passage ebjected to by the hon baronet, and be would rather do-so thin admit the proposed alteration. Colonel DAVIES tbought, that if the law worked weTI at present, it would work just as well, should the proposed amendment be adopted. Mr. LOCKHART thought it would he better to leave out the clause altogether, than to adopt the amendment, for whenever they endeavoured to interfere with past contracts, the committee might be sure they were doiag mischief. Mr. JAMES thought it would be better to leave the clause out altogetler. By a preceding clause, permitting the sale of game, the farmer would have an interest in the preservation of the game. He (31r. James) should therefore take an opportunity of moving, by way of anmendnrent, (after the amendment before the house should have been disposed of), that the present clause be omitted alto- gether. Sir J. SEBRIGHT donbted whether, among the common far. sners' leases, there was more than one 'jut of a hundred in- whicbkthe game was not already expressly reserved to the landlord.- Farmers, thereforc, could not be injured by the clause; butAthe case would be very dHifirent to those who had taken land, not for the purposes of fan~ning, butof sporting. A:fter afew wards from Colonel DAvIEs, Mir. S. MVOJLTLEY, and Mr. AIILDMAY, in opposition to the amendment, M r. J. MARTIN said, the clausei asofamost unjust rnature. Mfr. JONES excpressed his concurrence with th- honourable member for Tewkesbury in thinking this a most unjust clause; and he would rather lwse the bill altogether than pasu it with such a clause in it. It seemed unaccountable, why the hon. member for Yorkshire should imagine that tenants, who had never had any mis. understanding hitherto in respect of game with their landlord, shoilde now go to him a-nd say-" As you have passed an Act of Parlia- rment, I wll, for the first tiime do you an ill-natured act ;" for that wau the scope of the hon. gentleman's argutnent, in favoulr of his Clause. 'Ur. MONCK considered thc clause to be most injust and objec- tionable. Mr. JONES again expressed his conviction that the clause 'would authorize most unwatrantable invasions on the rights of property. hIr. J. MIARTIN delivered an oion to the-same-effect,; and the gallery was cleared for a division ;, when the numbers were- For the amendment proQsed by Sir J. WaoR0TvXrE Y.-. Ayes, 41 l Noes, 33 1 MIajority in favour of the amendment, 8. On outr re-admission we found the house ened in a discussion - -Y;u ? owncrs or urres ortadla antt pwafds 5nvite and ailow parties to sport upon it- AMr. LOCKHART expressed his belief-thatit was altogether unnrcessary. if the land was enclosed, nobody could prevent par- ties so Permitted from sporting. The question of qualificgisn ml ht very well come before another comnmiteet-a colmittec pf tupply because there would be a dutv to be fixed Mr. S. WORTLEY woulil allowv the clause was uniecestary, if the hon. gentleman whohadlastspokenhad correctlystated thelaw. gir J. SHELLEY would propose 100 acres instead of 50, as the ahount of property that should give sech a right to owners, if his hon_ frend (.Mr. Wortley) ineant really to persist in the clause as at tfr. HEAT COTE considered the clause to be fraukht with a good deal of possible hardship. It would withhold the permission in question from ov ners of 49 acres, for example. SirJ. SEBRIGHT's first object was to give to everv individual in this kingdom, whether his property was large orsmall, the right of sporting over it. If a.man wished to preserve rats-whowever absurd his wiih,bhe (Sir J. Sebright) could see nio reason why he should bc prevented trom indulging in it. He therefore opposed. the clause alto ether. Mr. RIBLEY COLBORNE was by n,o means friendlyto the clause.. Colonel DAVIES, at a future stage of the bill,-mealnt to move, as an amendmnent, that ownviers of small properties should not be al- lowed to get snares on them, to catch the game whiich might belQug to a large and neighbouring estate. Lord MILTON was averse to the mneasure of making game pro. pery, and- thought that it was beset with a thousand difficulties; euthe muse protet against the arstocratical propositien of his honl. friend (Colonael Davies), which would go to prevent '.the owner of one acre of cabbage-garden, for example, fromi sinarinir hares aud- rabbits, which he might justly consider as'ver inttha royed his produce.. RTELYrhnhetoe i Sit JOUN WROTTESILBY thought that game certificates on the usual prindple, to be granted to the parties cporting by permis- tion., would obvtate many of the difficulties apprehended from this Claume nr. T. COURTENAY.thouoht the bill rendered it necessar for theparty giving the perinissson to spolt to take out his cettifi- cate also. After some observations from Lord Joamw ToW2sirENZ ), Ar.r fACDOhtl5kD, Sir J. SHELLEY, and Mr. StiAsuT WoltTLrY, a few verbal amendments were agreed to i but the clause, as afend- ed,_was wbolly negatived without a division. zur J. vIU1'XESLEY objected to the amnount of the penalty (51,) on p&rons found trespassing. He thought that lOs. or 20s. wKild be suffident. Mr. S. WORTLEY said thepenaltywas not to be tore than 51., but it Wa in the discretion of the iMagistrate to inflict only the penalty o,f 20. The clause was then agreed to. MrIT. MONCK strongly objected to the clause which authorized theapprehension of perSons who renained afternotice,afld continued to Pur.sue game. He never could consent that mere trespassers snould be treated as felons. He would not objeet to thepeRalty of 101. which attached to the next clause, or even a heavier penalty. Sir J. SEBRIGHT was favourable to the clause. Mr. LOGEHART thought the most dangerous and destructive sort of poachers would not be touched by this clause-natnely, those who went and wired gane in the dy time; for, according to the words of the clause, if they went off when warned, (which of course they would), then they could not be touched. mr. S. lWORTLEY said that the omission was not undesigned. lf the person quitted on notice given, he thought the owner orocctpier migbt be left to his remedy by information1 if ha knew the preron of the frespasser. Mr.l1IONCK repeated his objections to thelause as being unne- cesazarily severe. Lord ALTHORP said a few words iir favour of it. The ques. tioni was then put, and the clause was carried. Sosre other dautses were then agreed to without observation, after which theisohse resumed, the Cbairman reported progress, and'ob. tanne';tavcto sit again on Monday. t !?oher orders of the day were then disposed of, and the hotuse adjo274 at a QUAXTER TO ONE O'CLOCK. HOUSE OF COADIONS. TuRAsDAY, A?IL L:.*